For the discussion of all things philosophical.
https://canzookia.com/
No, you are mixing things. An agent is made of mind and body. The body is deterministic, the mind is free. We can do things by our bodies because our bodies are sometimes in an undecided situation, the moment that mind can intervene.
Your mind is part of your body. It's just determinism isn't the case in general.
Don't get caught up in the semantics. This was written to TS, and TS is a physicalist, which means, for TS the physical and the natural are the same thing. In his terms if it's not physical it's not natural, thus, supernatural, or transnatural, exceptional, or perhaps trascendental. You can call it whatever you like.henry quirk wrote: ↑Sat Jun 19, 2021 4:03 pm*I think my bein' a free will, a causal agent, is perfectly natural.*It's also never an issue for dualists, like IC and Henry, (which I am not,) who just attribute consciousness and volition to something supernatural, while retaining **a deterministic view of physical existence. I think it's only a problem if you insist the only properties possible to existence are physical properties and try to make those physical properties non-deterministic, "in some cases," to explain volition.
Event causation, the vast interweave of causal chains we call Reality, is the norm.
Agent causation is the exception.
Exception is not synonymous with supernatural.
It would make more sense to say that "physical" and "existent" map to the same thing for me. It's not as if I think there are--or even could be--supernatural, transcendent, etc. things (if we're equating "natural" and "physical").RCSaunders wrote: ↑Sat Jun 19, 2021 7:19 pmDon't get caught up in the semantics. This was written to TS, and TS is a physicalist, which means, for TS the physical and the natural are the same thing. In his terms if it's not physical it's not natural, thus, supernatural, or transnatural, exceptional, or perhaps trascendental. You can call it whatever you like.henry quirk wrote: ↑Sat Jun 19, 2021 4:03 pm*I think my bein' a free will, a causal agent, is perfectly natural.*It's also never an issue for dualists, like IC and Henry, (which I am not,) who just attribute consciousness and volition to something supernatural, while retaining **a deterministic view of physical existence. I think it's only a problem if you insist the only properties possible to existence are physical properties and try to make those physical properties non-deterministic, "in some cases," to explain volition.
Event causation, the vast interweave of causal chains we call Reality, is the norm.
Agent causation is the exception.
Exception is not synonymous with supernatural.
And anyway, since you believe reason can lead to wrong answers as well as right ones (do I need to get the quote?) what are you arguing about.
Intuition tells me I'm right and your wrong. You accept that as evidence right? Or are some people's intuitions better than others?
and all these processes obey the laws of nature. I hope this trivial fact is clear to you.henry quirk wrote: ↑Sat Jun 19, 2021 3:44 pmall the various processes that physically comprise a person,Janoah wrote: ↑Fri Jun 18, 2021 6:11 pmHigher cerebral functionshenry quirk wrote: ↑Thu Jun 17, 2021 7:33 pm
Has it been established that mind, will, intent, purpose, personality, identity, etc. are processes in neurons? If so, then I'd like to see the map of it all along with the relevant explanations of how the brain generates mind, will, intent, purpose, personality, identity, etc.
The neurons of the cerebral cortex constitute the highest level of control in the hierarchy of the nervous system. Consequently, the terms higher cerebral functions and higher cortical functions are used by neurologists and neuroscientists to refer to all conscious mental activity, such as thinking, remembering, and reasoning, and to complex volitional behaviour such as speaking and carrying out purposive movement.
https://www.britannica.com/science/huma ... -functions
The frontal lobe is associated with executive functions including self-control, planning, reasoning, and abstract thought
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_brain
No, they are not.henry quirk wrote: ↑Sat Jun 19, 2021 8:30 pm all the various processes that physically comprise a person
and all these processes obey the laws of nature.
Which brings us right back to: Has it been established that mind, will, intent, purpose, personality, identity, etc. are processes in neurons?
*Agreed.bahman wrote: ↑Sat Jun 19, 2021 8:32 pm*No, they are not.henry quirk wrote: ↑Sat Jun 19, 2021 8:30 pm all the various processes that physically comprise a person
and all these processes obey the laws of nature.
Which brings us right back to: Has it been established that mind, will, intent, purpose, personality, identity, etc. are processes in neurons?
This is the problem with Materialism or Physicalism. They have to say that all things like mind, conciousness, personality, identity and so forth are just "brain."henry quirk wrote: ↑Sat Jun 19, 2021 8:41 pm*Agreed.bahman wrote: ↑Sat Jun 19, 2021 8:32 pm*No, they are not.henry quirk wrote: ↑Sat Jun 19, 2021 8:41 pm Which brings us right back to: Has it been established that mind, will, intent, purpose, personality, identity, etc. are processes in neurons?
Again, not everyone is a realist on laws of nature. Real laws of nature would require an ontological category that I don't think is coherent, much less plausible.Janoah wrote: ↑Sat Jun 19, 2021 8:18 pmand all these processes obey the laws of nature. I hope this trivial fact is clear to you.henry quirk wrote: ↑Sat Jun 19, 2021 3:44 pmall the various processes that physically comprise a person,Janoah wrote: ↑Fri Jun 18, 2021 6:11 pm
Higher cerebral functions
The neurons of the cerebral cortex constitute the highest level of control in the hierarchy of the nervous system. Consequently, the terms higher cerebral functions and higher cortical functions are used by neurologists and neuroscientists to refer to all conscious mental activity, such as thinking, remembering, and reasoning, and to complex volitional behaviour such as speaking and carrying out purposive movement.
https://www.britannica.com/science/huma ... -functions
The frontal lobe is associated with executive functions including self-control, planning, reasoning, and abstract thought
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_brain
Which is okay as your opinion, but it should have nothing to do with being able to understand the logical possibility of making a cleavage between physicalism and determinism.Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sat Jun 19, 2021 8:47 pmThis is the problem with Materialism or Physicalism. They have to say that all things like mind, conciousness, personality, identity and so forth are just "brain."
That's like picking up a copy of Crime and Punishment, and saying, "It's paper, with ink on it."
The physical description is so utterly inadequate as a description of what is really going on that it's nearly laughable.
It's clear to me you have no idea what Causal Determinism is. So you'd be in no position to say.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Sat Jun 19, 2021 9:02 pm Which is okay as your opinion, but it should have nothing to do with being able to understand the logical possibility of making a cleavage between physicalism and determinism.
for example, the laws of electricity, gravity and others are related to each other. This can be seen from the general theory of relativity.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Fri Jun 18, 2021 6:22 pmThe "one law of nature"? Can you explain what you're thinking there?Janoah wrote: ↑Fri Jun 18, 2021 6:16 pmthis is an interesting question!Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Thu Jun 17, 2021 7:28 pm
If laws of nature obtain somehow, just what are they? What sort(s) of existent(s)? Where are they located? How do they instantiate in particulars? Etc.
This can be discussed in a separate topic.
While we can say that there is no scientific opinion that something does not obey the laws of nature.
In my opinion, there is one common regularity of nature, and the formulated laws of nature are approximate, limited views on the one law of nature. That is, the laws of nature are not independent, but united in the one law of nature.
You can be a physicalist and also be an anti-realist on laws of nature.Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sat Jun 19, 2021 9:16 pmIt's clear to me you have no idea what Causal Determinism is. So you'd be in no position to say.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Sat Jun 19, 2021 9:02 pm Which is okay as your opinion, but it should have nothing to do with being able to understand the logical possibility of making a cleavage between physicalism and determinism.
But the Stanford Encyclopedia knows what you're missing: "Causal determinism is, roughly speaking, the idea that every event is necessitated by antecedent events and conditions together with the laws of nature."
Now, tell me why that isn't a description of Materialism/Physicalism, as well.