Free Will: Egnor shows neurological proof (Introduction)

by David Turell , Tuesday, November 24, 2020, 14:46 (1460 days ago) @ dhw

DAVID: I have answered. The bold is your strange limitation on the theory. The soul creates its immaterial thoughts by using brain neuron networks.

dhw: You have not answered. I keep asking you what the soul uses the brain FOR, other than gathering information and implementing its thoughts. And all you can do is repeat that the soul uses the brain.

We do not differ on that point. But in my form of dualism the key point is the soul MUST use the functioning brain to think in life, and can separate and think on its own only in true death or a transiently with non-functioning brain in NDE's. Yes or no?

DAVID: You totally misunderstand [Egnor's]his import. If a brain is in charge of abstract thought, seizures should produce abstract thought and never does. Soul is required for abstract thought.

dhw: Why on earth should a malfunctioning brain produce abstract thought? Your materialist will tell you that the malfunction is what PREVENTS it from producing abstract thought! Yes indeed, the dualist’s soul produces abstract thought. But when the brain has a seizure, apparently the soul does NOT produce abstract thought. Why not, if it is the soul and not the brain that does the thinking? But how many patients have recovered and told you and Egnor all about the abstract thoughts they had during the seizure?

The answer to your question is never. If the brain is the primary source of all thought (materialism) Egnor's point is a seizure should be able to produce such thought and never does. Seizures can produce all sorts of sensory experiences. I had a patient who smelled the ocean!

dhw: (referring to my own characteristic as a “worrier”): I don’t call it a problem. I am using it as an illustration of the DETERMINIST case, that behind every decision we make, there are causes over which we have no control. […]

DAVID: Note the bold. I think I am free from all those causes, because I can analyze them away. That is freedom. No self introspection, no freedom!!!

dhw: You can only analyse those causes you are aware of, and the determinist will argue that we are not even aware of most of the causes. You may indeed “think” you are free (most of us do) but he says you are not. I really can’t understand why you refuse to recognize that there are two different approaches to the subject: 1) we are NOT free from all the causes beyond our control (= no free will); 2) freedom from those causes is irrelevant: what counts is the individuality of the “me” who takes “my” decisions: nobody else takes them for me and I am free from all constraints other than those of the situation and my own limitations (= I have free will). What is your objection to this argument?

DAVID: I still don't accept 1) as valid for me. I accept it as a vapid argument. I have analyzed away troubling background issues, with an analyst and on my own.

dhw: We are not talking about “troubling issues”! We are talking about the causes that influence our decisions. It may not have escaped your notice that some people are more intelligent than others, and some people have better health than others, and sometimes musicians are born to musicians, and mathematicians to mathematicians, and people born into poverty have fewer opportunities in life than richer people etc. These are all factors which may influence people’s decisions but which they cannot control. Hence the determinist argument that we are not “free” from the chain of cause and effect. I have already explained the converse argument which supports the concept of free will, and I remain puzzled by your objection to the proposal that our conclusion depends on our understanding of what the will is supposed to be free from.

You are certainly correct that we are born with certain special abilities that influence them to choose a career path. But there is still free will choice to accept that ability or to do something else. We are free to choose that specific ability or not as we pursue our way in life. That is how I view free will. Your thought implies people are bound to follow only what they may have been given. And unfortunately some never get the opportunity.