Why Do the Religious Reject Science While Embracing the Impossible?

[BigMike]

if...

your thoughts aren’t under your control

...then how can anyone be deluded?

This...

Willpower is just a nice story you tell yourself to feel in control

...can't be true becuz, again...

your thoughts aren’t under your control

.

Henry, let’s clarify something essential here. Delusion, like any other mental state, is not something someone chooses to adopt. It’s a condition—an inevitable result of prior causes acting on a deterministic system. When I say “willpower is just a nice story,” I’m describing the deterministic processes that create the illusion of control, not claiming that anyone chooses to perpetuate this story consciously.

Here’s the crux: a person can be deluded in the same way a mirror can be dirty. The mirror didn’t choose to become dirty; it simply accumulated grime due to external factors. Similarly, a person’s thoughts, shaped entirely by prior causes—biological, environmental, experiential—can reflect misunderstandings or false beliefs without any volitional “choice” involved. Delusion doesn’t require control over thoughts; it’s merely a deterministic state arising from the conditions that shaped it.

So, yes, thoughts are not under your control, and neither is delusion. That’s precisely the point: we critique and address these deterministic outcomes not to assign blame but to better understand their causes and potentially disrupt the chain of events that perpetuates them. In other words, you don’t choose delusion, but you can be shaped by external inputs to overcome it.

[BigMike]

You think all will/willpower is an illusion without free will?

Absolutely, all willpower is an illusion in the sense that it doesn’t cause anything by itself. Your "willpower" has as much ability to affect the physical world as a ghost does to move furniture—none. It cannot push even a single atom, let alone rewire your brain or change your behavior without external inputs driving those changes. What you call “willpower” is simply the perception of a process that’s already underway, not its cause.

Your will isn’t some magical force; it’s an epiphenomenological emergent perception—a side effect of complex neural activity. It feels real, but so does the illusion of the sun rising and setting when, in reality, it’s the Earth rotating. That doesn’t make your will any more capable of initiating change than wishing for a million dollars will make it rain cash.

So no, your thoughts aren’t under your control. They’re the product of deterministic biochemical processes shaped by prior causes. Thinking otherwise is like believing a puppet can pull its own strings—it’s delusional. Willpower is just a nice story you tell yourself to feel in control, but the reality is far less flattering.

You don't perceive that humans have deterministic biochemical willpower, which is a serious condition.

Atla, deterministic biochemical willpower is not what you're imagining it to be. What you're calling "willpower" is simply the deterministic interaction of biochemical processes in the brain, governed entirely by prior causes. It's not a force you can wield to change outcomes independently; it's the result of deterministic systems acting on you.

The "serious condition" here isn't failing to perceive this deterministic process—it's insisting that it equates to a magical, independent power capable of overriding causality. Humans don't have "willpower" in the way you're suggesting; they have complex, deterministic mechanisms that create the illusion of control while remaining bound by cause and effect. Recognizing this distinction isn’t a failure—it's clarity. The delusion lies in believing otherwise.

[accelafine]

Lmao you really understand nothing about humans, I wasn't just imagining it. Of course you can control your thoughts without external input, even without free will.

This seems to be your stock insult: that others don't 'understand humans' like you do. Please share your profound insight and wisdom on the human condition. I haven't seen any evidence of it so far.

So what, how things seem to you and what you see evidence for have little to nothing to do with the real world.

Why not?

[Atla]

Absolutely, all willpower is an illusion in the sense that it doesn’t cause anything by itself. Your "willpower" has as much ability to affect the physical world as a ghost does to move furniture—none. It cannot push even a single atom, let alone rewire your brain or change your behavior without external inputs driving those changes. What you call “willpower” is simply the perception of a process that’s already underway, not its cause.

Your will isn’t some magical force; it’s an epiphenomenological emergent perception—a side effect of complex neural activity. It feels real, but so does the illusion of the sun rising and setting when, in reality, it’s the Earth rotating. That doesn’t make your will any more capable of initiating change than wishing for a million dollars will make it rain cash.

So no, your thoughts aren’t under your control. They’re the product of deterministic biochemical processes shaped by prior causes. Thinking otherwise is like believing a puppet can pull its own strings—it’s delusional. Willpower is just a nice story you tell yourself to feel in control, but the reality is far less flattering.

You don't perceive that humans have deterministic biochemical willpower, which is a serious condition.

Atla, deterministic biochemical willpower is not what you're imagining it to be. What you're calling "willpower" is simply the deterministic interaction of biochemical processes in the brain, governed entirely by prior causes. It's not a force you can wield to change outcomes independently; it's the result of deterministic systems acting on you.

The "serious condition" here isn't failing to perceive this deterministic process—it's insisting that it equates to a magical, independent power capable of overriding causality. Humans don't have "willpower" in the way you're suggesting; they have complex, deterministic mechanisms that create the illusion of control while remaining bound by cause and effect. Recognizing this distinction isn’t a failure—it's clarity. The delusion lies in believing otherwise.

Strawman, you simply have some condition (like autism or similar) which makes you blind to the fact that humans make decisions (under determinism, without any magic).

[Atla]

This seems to be your stock insult: that others don't 'understand humans' like you do. Please share your profound insight and wisdom on the human condition. I haven't seen any evidence of it so far.

So what, how things seem to you and what you see evidence for have little to nothing to do with the real world.

Why not?

Because you're a crazywoman who can't quite live in the real world even if she tries, that's why you've always been used on this forum as just a comic relief, duh?

[accelafine]

So what, how things seem to you and what you see evidence for have little to nothing to do with the real world.

Why not?

Because you're a crazywoman who can't quite live in the real world even if she tries, that's why you've always been used on this forum as just a comic relief, duh?

Showing your brilliance there I don't recall ever meeting you. Well then you are just a nasty, pea-brained, misogynistic little wanker with nothing interesting to say about anything. Not even good for 'comic relief'.

[Atla]

Why not?

Because you're a crazywoman who can't quite live in the real world even if she tries, that's why you've always been used on this forum as just a comic relief, duh?

Showing your brilliance there I don't recall ever meeting you. Well then you are just a nasty, pea-brained, misogynistic little wanker with nothing interesting to say about anything. Not even good for 'comic relief'.

And have you tried to figure out why your memory keeps getting blocked like that?

[accelafine]

Because you're a crazywoman who can't quite live in the real world even if she tries, that's why you've always been used on this forum as just a comic relief, duh?

Showing your brilliance there I don't recall ever meeting you. Well then you are just a nasty, pea-brained, misogynistic little wanker with nothing interesting to say about anything. Not even good for 'comic relief'.

And have you tried to figure out why your memory keeps getting blocked like that?

You clearly have nothing to say so why not just shut the fuck up? There's a good little man.

[Atla]

Showing your brilliance there I don't recall ever meeting you. Well then you are just a nasty, pea-brained, misogynistic little wanker with nothing interesting to say about anything. Not even good for 'comic relief'.

And have you tried to figure out why your memory keeps getting blocked like that?

You clearly have nothing to say so why not just shut the fuck up? There's a good little man.

If you want to be taken seriously then you should write to someone else, maybe attofishpi, or.. hmm guess he's the only one.

[accelafine]

And have you tried to figure out why your memory keeps getting blocked like that?

You clearly have nothing to say so why not just shut the fuck up? There's a good little man.

If you want to be taken seriously then you should write to someone else, maybe attofishpi, or.. hmm guess he's the only one.

Awww. I'm deeply hurt

[henry quirk]

when I call out these behaviors, the intent is not to wag a finger at someone's supposed "choice," but to illuminate the deterministic conditions that produced them—and to suggest ways we might alter those conditions.

If your brain is a deterministic machine, operating under the same unyielding physical laws as a rock rolling downhill then you, calling out these behaviors is simply a necessary, meaningless event. Your intent, whatever it might be, is a necessary, meaningless event. You illuminate nuthin'. You do as you must.

You're a flesh-animatronic, Mike. A machine made of meat.

[BigMike]

when I call out these behaviors, the intent is not to wag a finger at someone's supposed "choice," but to illuminate the deterministic conditions that produced them—and to suggest ways we might alter those conditions.

If your brain is a deterministic machine, operating under the same unyielding physical laws as a rock rolling downhill then you, calling out these behaviors is simply a necessary, meaningless event. Your intent, whatever it might be, is a necessary, meaningless event. You illuminate nuthin'. You do as you must.

You're a flesh-animatronic, Mike. A machine made of meat.

Henry, you’re absolutely right—if determinism is true (and I argue it is), then everything I say or do is a necessary result of prior causes. My "calling out behaviors," my "intent," and even your critique of my position are all part of the same deterministic cascade. There’s no escaping that fact.

But here’s where you miss the point: just because an event is determined doesn’t mean it’s meaningless. The rock rolling downhill doesn’t “intend” to erode the landscape, but it does shape it, inevitably. Likewise, my words—determined as they may be—serve a causal function. They influence the deterministic processes in others, potentially altering their perspectives or behaviors in the future. That’s not meaningless; that’s the mechanism of change in a deterministic system.

So yes, I’m a “machine made of meat,” and so are you. But that doesn’t strip life of purpose—it redefines it. Our purpose isn’t metaphysical or chosen; it’s emergent, the result of the deterministic interplay of countless variables. And right now, my purpose is to challenge misconceptions about determinism, whether that’s the result of my meat-machine wiring or not.

[henry quirk]

(I) critique and address these deterministic outcomes not to assign blame but to better understand their causes and potentially disrupt the chain of events that perpetuates them.

Your critique is necessary and meaningless. You do as you must. Your thoughts and the actions extending out from those thoughts are causally inevitable. There is no disruption: only an unfolding of what must be.

This is you...https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=z6WMbV5Op ... Rvbg%3D%3D ...dancing, as you must.

[BigMike]

(I) critique and address these deterministic outcomes not to assign blame but to better understand their causes and potentially disrupt the chain of events that perpetuates them.

Your critique is necessary and meaningless. You do as you must. Your thoughts and the actions extending out from those thoughts are causally inevitable. There is no disruption: only an unfolding of what must be.

This...https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=z6WMbV5Op ... ...dancing, as you must.

Henry, you’re absolutely right—my critique is as necessary as your response. Every thought, every action, every word we exchange is the inevitable result of an unbroken chain of causality. But the idea that this makes everything “meaningless” is a leap that doesn’t follow from determinism.

Meaning isn’t some magical, free-floating concept that requires free will to exist. Meaning is emergent—it arises from deterministic systems interacting in complex ways. Just as a river’s flow is “necessary” but still shapes the land, my critique, though inevitable, shapes the deterministic web of cause and effect around me. It’s not “disruption” in the sense of breaking causality, but it’s part of how causality itself unfolds.

So yes, I’m dancing as I must—and so are you. But calling that meaningless is to misunderstand the beauty of the deterministic dance. It’s not less rich because it’s inevitable; it’s more so because it’s interconnected. Every step, every motion, every thought is part of the unbroken rhythm of existence.

[henry quirk]

just because an event is determined doesn’t mean it’s meaningless.

And who is it meaningful to? No one. Any meaning or value placed is just another causally inevitable thought. Any rejection of meaning is also causally inevitable.

So yes, I’m a “machine made of meat,” But that doesn’t strip (my) life of purpose—it redefines it.

It negates it. You're nuthin'. A meat puppet doin' as cause & effect directs.