Re: Open Challenges to All Science Bigots!
From: Mike Collins (mike&heather_at_acornwellmount.freeserve.co.uk)
Date: 10/02/04
- Next message: N-H-P: "Re: Open Challenges to All Science Bigots!"
- Previous message: Steve Harris sbharris_at_ROMAN9.netcom.com: "Re: Open Challenges to All Science Bigots!"
- Maybe in reply to: Bill Clinton: "Re: Open Challenges to All Science Bigots!"
- Next in thread: N-H-P: "Re: Open Challenges to All Science Bigots!"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Sun, 3 Oct 2004 00:10:52 +0100
N-H-P wrote:
> There exists a fundamental incompatibility between the free will
> concept of the human psyche assumed by classical Western morality and
> the determinism demanded by science. The basic issue remains
> inescapable. If our actions are not up to us, then we have no moral
> responsibility for them.
Rubbish!
The fundamental flaw of the scientific
> worldview is, thus, its failure to explain how free will must be
> subject to causality and, yet, remain free.
Read up on quantum mechanics. In the quantum world the observer is all.
The classical Western
> worldview of morality, values, and virtues says that humans are
> different from other animals precisely because man can rise above his
> base and carnal desires with his free will.
>
Superstitious claptrap.
> Science says that individuals should blame everything on their
> biology, molecules, genetics, and their use of prescription
> medication.
Science says no such thing. Blame is not a part of science.
So, where is man's Free Will?
>
> My first challenge is for any science person is to rationally explain
> how the scientific worldview can account for FREE WILL, which just so
> happens to have been the basis of the Western system of Justice in
> America for the last 200 years.
Free will is not the basis of justice.
Please explain how free will must be
> subject to causality and, yet, remain free without making a public
> fool out of yourself.
The free will which you used in the past has determined your current
situation. You now have the free will to make choices which will affect your
future. Once you have made those choices they are part of your past and
can't be changed.
The facts are that no rational explanation can
> be provided by the scientific worldview.
Only the scientific worldview can rationally explain facts.
Ergo, the scientific
> worldview is fundamentally defective.
>
No the wordview of those who prefer superstition to knowledge is
fundamentally defective.
> Prior to and during the 19th century, the human psyche was a direct
> reference to the existence of the soul.
Again rubbish. There have been many other pre-scientific attempts to explain
this.
Today, it primarily means the
> mind, or mental faculty, of a person; directly due to the corrupting
> influence of the scientific worldview upon Western society.
>
> Science goes way beyond attacking alternative medicine. It ultimately
> places a direct attack upon the Christian faith and its belief in the
> physical existence of the soul. Determinists suggests that our health
> is merely a choice between scientific biomedicine and anti-science
> alternative medicine. I am arguing, however, that the real choice is
> between scientific determinism and classical Western morality, values,
> and virtues.
>
> My next challenge for any science person is to rationally explain how
> the scientific worldview does not directly attack all Judeo-Christian
> religious beliefs, especially but not limited to beliefs in the
> physical existence of the human soul (both before and after death), or
> at least 50 percent of the population of the United States who hold to
> these religious, and last but not least the Republican political party
> which openly claims that America was founded upon the Christian Faith
> and its belief in the physical existence of the human soul.
The US was founded as a secular, state with freedom of belief.
The facts
> are, no simple rational explanation can be provided. Ergo, the
> scientific worldview is fundamentally defective.
Dream on!
Your genetics and other events in the past have determined your present and
affected your free will. For instance you are not free to choose to be
donkey because you don't have the genes. However much you Bray, eat hay and
generally act like one you will still be human.
As for free will either it exists or it doesn't.
If it exists it would be madness to pretend it didn't. (A view by the way
most often held by those Christian sects which choose to believe in an elect
chosen by God for salvation.)
If there is no free will I will behave as if I possess it anyway. There is
no way to tell the illusion of free will from the real thing and worrying
about it is as useless as speculation on the numbers of angels who can dance
on the head of a pin.
-- Mike Collins UK Mike&heather-at-oakwellmount-dot-freeserve-dot-co-dot-uk
- Next message: N-H-P: "Re: Open Challenges to All Science Bigots!"
- Previous message: Steve Harris sbharris_at_ROMAN9.netcom.com: "Re: Open Challenges to All Science Bigots!"
- Maybe in reply to: Bill Clinton: "Re: Open Challenges to All Science Bigots!"
- Next in thread: N-H-P: "Re: Open Challenges to All Science Bigots!"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
