Ourcellves? (Identity)

by romansh , Thursday, April 10, 2014, 02:55 (3879 days ago) @ dhw

I have failed miserably in my attempt to explain what I see as a logical fallacy in the materialist argument that we consist only of our cells (and their interactions), and that since our cells are not of our making, we cannot have free will. My point is that in that case, the cells and their interactions ARE ourselves, and so their decisions are OUR decisions ... cells and self being indivisible.-No DHW, if I may; where you have failed is not in your explanation of what you see as a logical fallacy but how you framed the logical proof.-It starts with "our cells".
It fails on two counts ... 1) it begs the question of are they ours in any meaningful way. A good portion of mine come potatoes, roast lamb, and assorted fruit and veges. So framing the question as in this way it is not terribly surprising. and 2) when dealing with Cantorian sets if they are in some way self referential the proof is on dodgey ground.
 
> Forget the poetry for a moment, and please explain in clear prose what you think the "much more" consists of. After all, a reflection is just an image, but like yourself and others I am trying to find out what more "we" might be that cannot be subsumed under the activity of our cells. It may be that this will be a more fruitful line of thought than my pursuit of what I see as a logical fallacy in the above materialist argument.-Much more = the universe.