Free Will: Egnor shows neurological proof (Introduction)

by David Turell , Wednesday, December 09, 2020, 15:52 (1233 days ago) @ dhw

DAVID: You don't realize it but you've answered yourself. In seizures the brain is sick and the soul can't do anything!!! When it is over the person/soul can realize what just happened. Seizures remove consciousness!! That is where the soul resides.

dhw: But that is the whole point! In seizures the brain is sick and the person can’t “think”. Why can’t the person think if the soul is the IMMATERIAL, CONSCIOUS, THINKING part of himself/herself?

Same starting point from a materialistic viewpoint. I'm strictly using dualism in which the soul can only think if the brain is working!!! Both are required>

DAVID: During seizure the brain is functional, with muscle movement, breathing, etc. Why isn't thought present? It never is. Consciousness is inoperative.

dhw: According to you, consciousness is a product of the soul, not the brain.

No, both are required. The soul when totally engaged with the functioning brain makes consciousness

DAVID: All backward as usual. A soul cannot be normal if the brain is abnormal. My immaterial self has an immaterial soul and an immaterial consciousness, and I myself, use my brain to think. I am trapped with it.

dhw: Thinking, according to dualists, does not “come from” the brain!

Very limited definition of dualism. The soul is required to use brain circuits to think.

But if “normal thinking can only come from a normal brain”, as you say, then abnormal thinking comes from an abnormal brain, and that is why we cannot “blame” the psychopath. Seizures mean no free will, and a soul has no part to play, because it is the brain that does the thinking.

Seizures mean no consciousness, a brain state required for producing thought by the soul, and briefly no free will.

xxxxx

Free will: continuity of self

QUOTE: "So even though our bodies are almost entirely changed, both in appearance and composition from what they were decades ago, we feel the same and recognize images of ourselves almost instantly. That’s a good argument for the existence of a self that goes beyond mere matter". (DAVID’s bold)

DAVID: The 'self' is immaterial and is with us all during life. I view it the same as the soul.

dhw: […] Organic life has feelings and forms of consciousness that inorganic objects (we assume) do not have, but to my knowledge, the ONLY evidence we have of a self that goes beyond mere matter is psychic experiences (which in my view are to be taken seriously bb- I remain agnostic). But even then, if the self does NOT live on after death, it is obvious that there is no such thing as an immaterial self that “goes beyond” mere matter. Matter then has to be the generator of life, consciousness and self.

DAVID: All of this denies the evidence in NDE's. You are are same guy who had malaria and found a wife.

dhw: I have specifically stated that I am NOT denying the evidence of psychic experiences (now bolded), among which I would include NDEs. I have no idea what my wife has to do with it, but I am pleased to see that you have not made any attempt to defend the hollow argument offered by the article.

I have bolded the 'if' thought to make my point more clear. NDE's give direct evidence the soul does 'live on'.