Umm, was all dat spacing necessary?

musKeeto: Umm, was all dat spacing necessary?

I'm using a phone funny enough..it aint spaced over here...

Consciousness and brains from Big Bang and evolution. Interesting.

Mr anony:
An aeroplane flying on autopilot is not really engaging in a conscious exercise wouldn't you agree?

It isn't which is precisely my point. The brain produces imaginations without YOUR conscious effort.

Mr anony:
All the examples you have given, none of them takes away anything from the point I'm making. A faulty piano will sound bad but this wouldn't mean that the pianist is faulty rather it is the tool that is faulty. Recently I've had the opportunity to work with people suffering from dementia and you only have to spend time with them to see that they are consciously struggling to hold their minds together some even shedding tears in frustration.
When your will is trying to force yourself to remember and the memory is just not there or you are trying really hard to string a coherent sentence together but babble keeps coming out, this should be evidence for you that this is someone struggling with an unresponsive tool and not a consciousness that speaks in babble.
If your brain merely generated your consciousness, you wouldn't even know that a memory was lost you'll just function without it because your brain simply won't have the memory.

It does take away from your posit that consciousness is not fully contingent on the brain. If damage to the brain affects consciousness, regardless of whether the person CONSCIOUSLY wants or not want it, then mind is contingent on brain. I've worked with my Dad for 4 years now and he suffers partial stroke so I relate with the bolded but you have to see that this shows that human minds are affected by the physical world on which they are contingent. In particular Google Recticular activating system and frontal lobe: it is a well-documented that damages to these parts remove consciousness especially in RAS. That is the YOU that observes itself in stroke, amnesia, schizophrenia etc. As to your condition of brains functioning without memories, that's precisely what occurs, they are incidents you forget and your brain functions well without such memories. You really won't know you have a memory. For example: when my Dad's stroke started he had problems with his short-term memory without his knowing, It was glaring to us but he didn't know eg he sent my brother to get him water he brought it then minutes after he is asking my brother where his water is. To be fair, he did know of some where he had problems recalling what he wanted to say and simply couldn't recall it, his brain continued to function as you say.

Mr anony:
Of all the mental illnesses I know of, I don't know of any one that takes away a conscious will while leaving everything else intact such that the person now functions like a robot. This strongly suggests that the mind IS NOT contingent on the brain rather the immaterial mind uses the brain as a tool/machine.

Coma takes away the conscious will and I've told you the brain structure that mediates coma. In fact, coma is the robot state because you can percieve that brain activity is going on in the cortexes eg if you open a coma patient's eyes his brain recieves the visual input, there is no irritation or emotion from the body and so the body passively responds like non-living things to the physical world, self-awareness is gone. What you want is a conscious person unaware of his consciousness which like the square circle is an absurdity. How would a person know, feel and want without knowing it is happening to self ?

Mr anony:
This is where you are wrong I'm afraid.

1. The fact that the brain runs certain background functions(such as controlling the respiratory system for instance) is not proof that the brain is doing them by will anymore than your car for instance burning fuel in the background while you turn the steering is not proof that your car is willing itself to burn fuel. You should be careful not to use the term "will" too loosely.

2. The second part is exactly what we are discussing i.e whether it is the brain that generates the conscious self or the conscious self controls the brains activities. You have conceded here that the conscious self wills the brain to act in this instance.

You have anonynized your way out of the very question asked-

-Show an example of consciousness working outside the brain.

You are yet to show any example.




However, let us dissect your claims

Mr anony:
This is where you are wrong I'm afraid.

1. The fact that the brain runs certain background functions(such as controlling the respiratory system for instance) is not proof that the brain is doing them by will anymore than your car for instance burning fuel in the background while you turn the steering is not proof that your car is willing itself to burn fuel. You should be careful not to use the term "will" too loosely.

Even more Anonyism. Do you have a false analogy machine that produces irrelevant analogies when you have been debunked?

a) Who told you that breathing (controlling the respiratory system) as controlled by the brain is a background function?
b) You call breathing every single second of your life a "background function"?
c) Do you will yourself to control your respiratory system? Do you consciously filter out extraneous gases when breathing? Do you organise the routes of your oxygen carrying blood cells?

d) The false analogy. The car does not burn fuel unless you put fuel and start the engine. Your brain will continue to cordinate the digestive system, the respiratory system etc whether you eat/breathe or not.

Take the digestive system, if even you dont eat, your body will start to eat itself. The brain works with or without ones consciousness.

You are a serial liar and sophist, Anony.

Mr anony:
This is where you are wrong I'm afraid.

2. The second part is exactly what we are discussing i.e whether it is the brain that generates the conscious self or the conscious self controls the brains activities. You have conceded here that the conscious self wills the brain to act in this instance.

It is not a second part. It is a second level.

As for the bold, it is not "either or"...........it is both! You have two levels of consciousness

1) Where the brain as an organ controls the person
2) Where the conscious person controls his body+brain (due to the brain producing the mind through neurons and chemical stuff)

^^^Abeg no add logicboyism join. Breathing is a backround brain function carried out by the autonomic nervous system. There are basic for survival and are sensibly not under human control. Imagine having to remember to breathe. Terrible.

Uyi Iredia: ^^^Abeg no add logicboyism join. Breathing is a backround brain function carried out by the autonomic nervous system. There are basic for survival and are sensibly not under human control. Imagine having to remember to breathe. Terrible.

What is a background function? Is that something we learnt in biology? Please define it with references.

Logicboy03:


What is a background function? Is that something we learnt in biology? Please define it with references.

more like Uyi's discovery published on nairaland.

Logicboy03:


What is a background function? Is that something we learnt in biology? Please define it with references.

Someone is making sense. What's the meaning of 'What is a background function?' ? Did you learn it in school ? Please define it with references.

^^^ lol

we know when ~Anony and Uyi Iredia have been stumped......they start to ask foolish questions.....Anonyism

ooman:

more like Uyi's discovery published on nairaland.

^^^I'm pretty sure a legal icon such as yourself sees the inanity in the question you asked. You have problems with comprehension if you think I should explain to you the meaning of 'background function'. Kindly return to kindergaten.

Uyi Iredia: ^^^I'm pretty sure a legal icon such as yourself sees the inanity in the question you asked. You have problems with comprehension if you think I should explain to you the meaning of 'background function'. Kindly return to kindergaten.

lol...Deepsight is the lawyer not me

What is this failed comparison between the brain and the piano?. . .While the brain can do this on its own the piano can not, so anony's analogy fails completely. . .The brain is the YOU and YOU can not do anything without it. . .Consciousness is a function of the brain without which there will be no consciousnesses in the first place. . . .Anony;s should provide evidence of consciousness existing outside the brain for people to take him seriously else he remains a joker that doesn't know what he is saying. . .

mazaje: What is this failed comparison between the brain and the piano?. . .While the brain can do this on its own the piano can not, so anony's analogy fails completely. . .The brain is the YOU and YOU can not do anything without it. . .Consciousness is a function of the brain without which there will be no consciousnesses in the first place. . . .[size=18pt]Anony;s should provide evidence of consciousness existing outside the brain for people to take him seriously self he remains a joker that doesn't know what he is saying[/size]. . .

Anony....this is the 4th person telling you....

Logicboy03:


Anony....this is the 4th person telling you....

Am done arguing with sophist like anony that can't provide a SINGLE evidence, they keep pushing everything into the realm of the unknown. . .Consciousness is a function of the brain. . .Below is a BBC documentary on consciousness. . .It even talks about brain cells generating images on their own when electric current is passed through them. . .Yet we have anony and his friend spewing nonsense. . .Try to compare the brain and a piano. . .While the piano requires a person to play with its strings, in the human the brain is the person. . .


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sNc52LmHgUs

Logicboy03:


lol...Deepsight is the lawyer not me

LIAR ! From the atheism monument thread:

Logicboy03:
You clearly didnt study law. I did.

1) Laws are not just literal- they are also based on precedence, subject to interpretation and practicality

u wan craze join ?

mazaje:

Am done arguing with sophist like anony that can't provide a SINGLE evidence, they keep pushing everything into the realm of the unknown. . .Consciousness is a function of the brain. . .Below is a BBC documentary on consciousness. . .It even talks about brain cells generating images on their own when electric current is passed through them. . .Yet we have anony and his friend spewing nonsense. . .Try to compare the brain and a piano. . .While the piano requires a person to play with its strings, in the human the brain is the person. . .


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sNc52LmHgUs

Also on the news today:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/07/130730101744.htm

In this rare case, a man's brain injury causes him to taste and feel colors, written words and music.
This occurance makes obvious the following:

1. The so-called intangibles are tangibles after all. They only seem intangible due to sensory perceptions and adaptations.

2. Our Reality is not as real as we think it really is.

3. Our impressions, feelings, moods, tastes, etc are products of biochemical reactions or quantum mechanical processes in the brain.

4. So far, there appears to be nothing external, extraneous or divine that is the source of, or is complementary to the functioning of the brain, other than the evolutionary pressures and adaptations that slowly and carefully molded this complex machine over aeons of time.

Most importantly, as I pointed out earlier, there has been concerted efforst over time to create a wide wedge between what are known as physical or material attributes, and, what are known as non-material or spiritual attributes of the human brain.

With rapid advancements in the fields of neurology and other related sciences, these lines of demarcation are rapidly converging to offer us a clear picture of reality.
There appear to be either a chemical, electrical or a quantum mechanical interface between the physical and no-physical aspects of reality.


I repeat:
Things that are hitherto referred to as belonging in the realms of "the spiritual" are most likely unknown or little understood biochemical, electromagnetic or quantum mechanical processes.

And I also boldly assert that in the near or distant future, these processes will be better understood, and the term "spiritual" would cease to be in our common vocabulary.

plaetton:



Also on the news today:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/07/130730101744.htm

In this rare case, a man's brain injury causes him to taste and feel colors, written words and music.
This occurance makes obvious the following:

1. The so-called intangibles are tangibles after all. They only seem intangible due to sensory perceptions and adaptations.

2. Our Reality is not as real as we think it really is.

3. Our impressions, feelings, moods, tastes, etc are products of biochemical reactions or quantum mechanical processes in the brain.

4. So far, there appears to be nothing external, extraneous or divine that is the source of, or is complementary to the functioning of the brain, other than the evolutionary pressures and adaptations that slowly and carefully molded this complex machine over aeons of time.

Most importantly, as I pointed out earlier, there has been concerted efforst over time to create a wide wedge between what are known as physical or material attributes, and, what are known as non-material or spiritual attributes of the human brain.

With rapid advancements in the fields of neurology and other related sciences, these lines of demarcation are rapidly converging to offer us a clear picture of reality.
There appear to be either a chemical, electrical or a quantum mechanical interface between the physical and no-physical aspects of reality.


I repeat:
Things that are hitherto referred to as belonging in the realms of "the spiritual" are most likely unknown or little understood biochemical, electromagnetic or quantum mechanical processes.

And I also boldly assert that in the near or distant future, these processes will be better understood, and the term "spiritual" would cease to be in our common vocabulary.

I just tire, bring some evidence to support your position and all anonny can do is compare the brain with the piano as if the piano can do anything on its own. . .Once the brain malfunctions you lose TOTAL control and start doing things abnormally. . .You can start seeing things that are no there, fail to recognize faces, do things normally you wouldn't do like move around naked etc. . .Where is the YOU if not the brain?. . .

I wonder why people waste their timw arguing with some one that believes in ancient mythology from people that thought humans reason with their hearts. . .

As I stated earlier: point to the (events and compounds in the) brain and state 'therefore consciousness.' It's coming along nicely thus far.

Uyi Iredia:

LIAR ! From the atheism monument thread:



u wan craze join ?

lol.....I studied business law for a semester. I am not a lawyer

Uyi Iredia: It isn't which is precisely my point. The brain produces imaginations without YOUR conscious effort.

Exactly what i am saying. The fact that you can differentiate between when you are controlling your brain and when your brain is not under your control is proof that your brain is not generating you.

It does take away from your posit that consciousness is not fully contingent on the brain. If damage to the brain affects consciousness, regardless of whether the person CONSCIOUSLY wants or not want it, then mind is contingent on brain. I've worked with my Dad for 4 years now and he suffers partial stroke so I relate with the bolded but you have to see that this shows that human minds are affected by the physical world on which they are contingent. In particular Google Recticular activating system and frontal lobe: it is a well-documented that damages to these parts remove consciousness especially in RAS. That is the YOU that observes itself in stroke, amnesia, schizophrenia etc. As to your condition of brains functioning without memories, that's precisely what occurs, they are incidents you forget and your brain functions well without such memories. You really won't know you have a memory. For example: when my Dad's stroke started he had problems with his short-term memory without his knowing, It was glaring to us but he didn't know eg he sent my brother to get him water he brought it then minutes after he is asking my brother where his water is. To be fair, he did know of some where he had problems recalling what he wanted to say and simply couldn't recall it, his brain continued to function as you say.

I think I wasn't really clear here. Memory might not be a very adequate illustration of what I mean. I'll explain what I mean better below.

Coma takes away the conscious will and I've told you the brain structure that mediates coma. In fact, coma is the robot state because you can percieve that brain activity is going on in the cortexes eg if you open a coma patient's eyes his brain recieves the visual input, there is no irritation or emotion from the body and so the body passively responds like non-living things to the physical world, self-awareness is gone. What you want is a conscious person unaware of his consciousness which like the square circle is an absurdity. How would a person know, feel and want without knowing it is happening to self?

Hmm, I think you've missed my point. The part in bold is simply not true. Let me see if i can clarify by explaining what I mean by consciousness or mind.

When I say a thing has a mind, I am saying that the thing has at the very least an individual subjective reality what I have been referring to as the "you". i.e. one is not merely processing information but the information has a subjective meaning to the individual.
This is the difference between a mind and a computer For instance when a computer sees the color red it can only react to red in a way that it has been programmed to do and nothing more. It has no subjective opinions of red. The computer cannot even tell that it is a computer and that a chair is not part of it except it has been programmed to see the chair in a particular way under particular conditions. The brain is more like a very advanced computer however, the person has a subjective reality and so is able to have opinions and make non-programmed decisions. He may use his brain as some processor and memory storage and can will it to make certain actions as he chooses. He might choose to call up a memory or consciously choose to suppress or forget a memory. basically you manipulate you brain like a tool. To argue that your brain generates you is simply absurd. As absurd as the claim that non-conscious matter arranged in a certain way can generate a conscious mind capable of manipulating and reconfiguring the non-conscious matter that generates it in order to meet certain conscious ends.

Imagine this thought experiment: you lost use of your 5 senses, you couldn't hear, see, feel, taste, or smell. Would you still know at the very list that you were yourself? or would you lose any sense of your existence?

Now while I appreciate that a person in a coma is still receiving stimuli however the brain is not processing the stimuli and that was not the brain condition I was demanding to be shown. Show me a mental condition where a brain receives stimuli processes it and responds to it in a robotic and totally deterministic way like a computer or robot performing functions without engaging the will and having absolutely no subjective reality.

Logicboy03:

You have anonynized your way out of the very question asked-

-Show an example of consciousness working outside the brain.

You are yet to show any example.


However, let us dissect your claims

What is this example supposed to look like?

Even more Anonyism. Do you have a false analogy machine that produces irrelevant analogies when you have been debunked?

a) Who told you that breathing (controlling the respiratory system) as controlled by the brain is a background function?
b) You call breathing every single second of your life a "background function"?
c) Do you will yourself to control your respiratory system? Do you consciously filter out extraneous gases when breathing? Do you organise the routes of your oxygen carrying blood cells?

d) The false analogy. The car does not burn fuel unless you put fuel and start the engine. Your brain will continue to cordinate the digestive system, the respiratory system etc whether you eat/breathe or not.

Take the digestive system, if even you dont eat, your body will start to eat itself. The brain works with or without ones consciousness.

You are a serial liar and sophist, Anony.

It is funny how you cannot see how the bold (b and c) are contradictory. (d) is very interesting because it shows you did no grasp the analogy - which really isn't surprising when one reads your b and c above.

Using ad hominem, doesn't improve your argument in any way.

It is not a second part. It is a second level.

As for the bold, it is not "either or"...........it is both! You have two levels of consciousness

1) Where the brain as an organ controls the person
2) Where the conscious person controls his body+brain (due to the brain producing the mind through neurons and chemical stuff)

Again another absurd contradiction: What you've said here amounts to "A controls B that controls A that controls B"

mazaje: What is this failed comparison between the brain and the piano?. . .While the brain can do this on its own the piano can not, so anony's analogy fails completely. . .The brain is the YOU and YOU can not do anything without it. . .Consciousness is a function of the brain without which there will be no consciousnesses in the first place. . . .Anony;s should provide evidence of consciousness existing outside the brain for people to take him seriously else he remains a joker that doesn't know what he is saying. . .

I think I've already gone beyond this point. The fact that You can control your brain is evidence that there is a distinct you controlling a distinct brain. If this is not evidence for you, then you'll have to tell me what the evidence you seek is supposed to look like so I can see if i can help you.

As for your video, I'm afraid it didn't give me any new information sufficient to prove that it is the brain that generates the person and not the person commandeering his/her brain. You can always tell me the specific times where this was addressed here.


P/s: By the way, I'm interested in an offline conversation with you about another topic if you are game.

Mr anony: Show me a mental condition where a brain receives stimuli processes it and responds to it in a robotic and totally deterministic way like a computer or robot performing functions without engaging the will and having absolutely no subjective reality.

Did you read my last post and the link?

That particular case is exactly what you are asking for.

In that particular case, brain injury from stroke re-organizes the neural circuitry in the brain and the result is that the sensory inputs are mixed up.
The brain does not engage the will to make the correction, but behaves much like a robot.

So in this case the brain is behaving like a robotic computer, only processing the input that it receives.

It was only through the prior experiences of the person that he was able to realize that something was not right.

plaetton:

Did you read my last post and the link?

That particular case is exactly what you are asking for.

In that particular case, brain injury from stroke re-organizes the neural circuitry in the brain and the result is that the sensory inputs are mixed up.
The brain does not engage the will to make the correction, but behaves much like a robot.

So in this case the brain is behaving like a robotic computer, only processing the input that it receives.

It was only through the prior experiences of the person that he was able to realize that something was not right.

I just read the article and it doesn't meet my demand I'm sorry.

Here's the first paragraph of your linked article.

About nine months after suffering a stroke, the patient noticed that words written in a certain shade of blue evoked a strong feeling of disgust. Yellow was only slightly better. Raspberries, which he never used to eat very often, now tasted like blue -- and blue tasted like raspberries.

The parts in bold clearly show that the man maintained an subjective reality. So far I think Uyi's coma comes closest to meeting my demand.

I hope that time will permit me to give my own perception on this very important topic. In the interim, I think that a review article entitled "About the continuity of our consciousness" by the renowned dutch cardiologist Dr. Pim Van Lommel will be of benefit to those who prefer the scientific approach to understanding consciousness. The article is a bit long and I advise that posters in this thread should read the whole article. Find the link to the article below:

http://www.nderf.org/NDERF/Research/vonlommel_consciousness.htm

Best wishes

Mr anony:
What is this example supposed to look like?

See the empty barrel of a sophist?

You were claiming that there is consciousness outside the brain. Now you cant give an example of it. See the silly question you are asking me.

You have become a joke

Mr anony:
It is funny how you cannot see how the bold (b and c) are contradictory. (d) is very interesting because it shows you did no grasp the analogy - which really isn't surprising when one reads your b and c above.

Using ad hominem, doesn't improve your argument in any way.

Wow.....finding contradictions where there arent? I also noticed how you managed to forget to show how they are.

The funny thing that you claiming contradictions does not in any way help your original point that the brain controlling bodily functions is like a car burning fuel. Very silly analogy.

Mr anony:
Again another absurd contradiction: What you've said here amounts to "A controls B that controls A that controls B"

You are a joke

Mr anony:
I think I've already gone beyond this point. The fact that You can control your brain is evidence that there is a distinct you controlling a distinct brain. If this is not evidence for you, then you'll have to tell me what the evidence you seek is supposed to look like so I can see if i can help you.

The you is your brain, CNS and other parts of your body working together. Many aspects of your brain you can not control, rather it is the brain that functions on its own, you do not control the amount of growth hormones your brain secrets or the adrenaline your brain also secrets when you are in a fright or flight mode. . .You can take a drug and begin to hallucinate, and do things your brain wants, it just does what ever it wants and you just have to act according to how it leads, regardless the will to resit you just have to flow with how the brain leads. The brain make you do what it wants when its chemistry has been altered. . .If you control your brain you should be able to tell your brain to stop making you do things you don't want to. . .A ental person whose brain is malfunctioning should be able to tell his/her brain to control his brain and stop acting crazily, but such a person can not, where ever the brain leads the body follows. The you is just the brain, CNS and body working together.

As for your video, I'm afraid it didn't give me any new information sufficient to prove that it is the brain that generates the person and not the person commandeering his/her brain. You can always tell me the specific times where this was addressed here.

Person commanding his or her brain?. . .The brain is the person, without it you can not do anything. Your brain can make you do things you don't want when it malfunctions, you lose total control, you can not make your brain do things it doesn't want, but your brain when malfunction will and can make you do things your don't want, so what are you saying?. . .

P/s: By the way, I'm interested in an offline conversation with you about another topic if you are game.

Sure, no problem, any time. . .

Mr anony:
The fact that You can control your brain is evidence that there is a distinct you controlling a distinct brain.

This is no way, shape, or form, in any language, a fact. Exactly when did you prove your actions are not determined?

Hope you aren't going to tell me 'because I am capable of thinking', as you do know silly that sounds? If I programmed a machine to believe it had free will, exactly how do you expect it to figure out, using just its thoughts, that it doesn't possess free will? In fact, it would require a high degree of sophistication, as well as whatever tools are needed, to figure out that it is indeed deterministic. This is similar to one assuming the universe was created just for him simply because he happens to be conscious. He would need to do some hard thinking (among other things) to figure out evolution, BB (or something similar), etc etc.. That he was shaped by the universe, and not the other way round

Everything in this universe follows laws. There is cause and effect. Only quantum weirdness defeats this in certain scenarios apparently. And even if (and that's an if) so, it matters not. As you have no control over the cause, which is arbitrary, and the effect must still follow the laws. Actually, even the cause follows laws, just that they're flexible. And note, this is only at the quantum, most minute of levels. It is of virtually no practical relevance. In fact, despite its dependance on probabilities the SM is the most accurate physical theory there ever has been. It might trick one because of the unpredictability, just as chaotic systems do despite their being deterministic, but there are laws binding QM as well.

There is no where, anywhere, in this universe that we've seen (or even conceived of) logic (or just about anything else) manifesting without a physical base. Cause and effect starts with the physical causing an effect. So, until you can show consciousness without a physical base, stop spouting 'facts' such as these which violate known laws. Simply show us say a man without a brain being conscious, and we'll take you seriously. Else we'll assume it's a function of the obvious; the brain.

And btw, I have software that's capable of shutting down my PC after it completes a task, exactly how does that mean that the software must not be housed on my PC? Or that it is isn't part of the system?

Logicboy03: See the empty barrel of a sophist?

You were claiming that there is consciousness outside the brain. Now you cant give an example of it. See the silly question you are asking me.

You have become a joke

It is a simple question; how do you expect to recognize the evidence when it is shown to you if you don't know what the evidence is supposed to look like?

Wow.....finding contradictions where there arent? I also noticed how you managed to forget to show how they are.

The funny thing that you claiming contradictions does not in any way help your original point that the brain controlling bodily functions is like a car burning fuel. Very silly analogy.

Lol, some people just don't get it.

You are a joke

What an excellent display of logic

mazaje:
The you is your brain, CNS and other parts of your body working together. Many aspects of your brain you can not control, rather it is the brain that functions on its own, you do not control the amount of growth hormones your brain secrets or the adrenaline your brain also secrets when you are in a fright or flight mode. . .You can take a drug and begin to hallucinate, and do things your brain wants, it just does what ever it wants and you just have to act according to how it leads, regardless the will to resit you just have to flow with how the brain leads. The brain make you do what it wants when its chemistry has been altered. . .If you control your brain you should be able to tell your brain to stop making you do things you don't want to. . .A ental person whose brain is malfunctioning should be able to tell his/her brain to control his brain and stop acting crazily, but such a person can not, where ever the brain leads the body follows. The you is just the brain, CNS and body working together.

I asked you to describe what the evidence you seek is supposed to look like? You ignored that and started preaching long sermon. Are you sure you are interested in having your question answered at all?

Person commanding his or her brain?. . .The brain is the person, without it you can not do anything. Your brain can make you do things you don't want when it malfunctions, you lose total control, you can not make your brain do things it doesn't want, but your brain when malfunction will and can make you do things your don't want, so what are you saying?. . .

I asked you to show your argument from the video you presented by citing the specific times in the footage. Again you ignored that and started reaching again. Are you sure you want a two-way discussion or are you more interested in reading your own words?

Sure, no problem, any time. . .

How does this evening sit with you? Have you got skype?

wiegraf:

This is no way, shape, or form, in any language, a fact. Exactly when did you prove your actions are not determined?

Hope you aren't going to tell me 'because I am capable of thinking', as you do know silly that sounds? If I programmed a machine to believe it had free will, exactly how do you expect it to figure out, using just its thoughts, that it doesn't possess free will? In fact, it would require a high degree of sophistication, as well as whatever tools are needed, to figure out that it is indeed deterministic. This is similar to one assuming the universe was created just for him simply because he happens to be conscious. He would need to do some hard thinking (among other things) to figure out evolution, BB (or something similar), etc etc.. That he was shaped by the universe, and not the other way round

I wonder how exactly you would go about programming a machine to believe. I hope you do realize that you are making a huge jump backed with zero empirical evidence that you can make non-conscious matter develop a subjective reality. That idea only happens in science fiction.

Everything in this universe follows laws. There is cause and effect. Only quantum weirdness defeats this in certain scenarios apparently. And even if (and that's an if) so, it matters not. As you have no control over the cause, which is arbitrary, and the effect must still follow the laws. Actually, even the cause follows laws, just that they're flexible. And note, this is only at the quantum, most minute of levels. It is of virtually no practical relevance. In fact, despite its dependance on probabilities the SM is the most accurate physical theory there ever has been. It might trick one because of the unpredictability, just as chaotic systems do despite their being deterministic, but there are laws binding QM as well.

There is no where, anywhere, in this universe that we've seen (or even conceived of) logic (or just about anything else) manifesting without a physical base. Cause and effect starts with the physical causing an effect. So, until you can show consciousness without a physical base, stop spouting 'facts' such as these which violate known laws. Simply show us say a man without a brain being conscious, and we'll take you seriously. Else we'll assume it's a function of the obvious; the brain.

I agree totally that there is a cause for every effect however I do not subscribe to the notion that the cause and effect is and can only be physical matter causing an effect in physical matter.
Consider this research for example about London taxi cab drivers whose brains increase in physical size as they learn the London road network. That is clear evidence of non-physical knowledge causing a physical effect. So my friend, I'm afraid you are wrong here. non-physical causes do accomplish physical effects.

Secondly, you have asked me to show you a man without a brain being conscious and I will ask you what is this man supposed to look like bearing in mind that consciousness like knowledge is a non-physical thing?
I have already shown you that the fact that you can control the activities of your brain is evidence that you are distinct from your brain. If you want further evidence than that, then you'll have to describe what this evidence you seek is supposed to look like.

And btw, I have software that's capable of shutting down my PC after it completes a task, exactly how does that mean that the software must not be housed on my PC? Or that it is isn't part of the system?

If you cannot see how this obviously means that the software is distinct from your PC, I really can't help you.