Your religious views and positions on matters such as God and the meaning of life?

[MsMarvelDuckie]

Originally Posted by Commenter 42

Nah, we're not fighting. I like Duckie too much for that.

I'd say my analogy is, well, exactly what I meant. We're an organization of cells, working together, for a common goal. I don't consciously tell my blood to carry oxegen, my heart to beat, my lungs to breath. I never think about replacing skin cells or storing fat. For the most part, the body is running on autopilot.

I don't think I can work out the rest of your argument. From all our discussions, you seem to be a dualist as well. It's not thT I don't respect you, but I can't respect anything that requires faith, of any kind. Faith, is illogical, irrational, and to be blunt, irresponsible.

You're still not grasping the enormity of the free will experiment. You're both refuting it with "because I said so" arguments, or "science doesn't know what I know because of my personal experience of...."

If I argued an Alien stopped by my kitchen last night and told me the secrets of the universe, you'd probably think I was nuts. If I then countered with the argument that you can't know what I know, so just take it on faith, you'd hardly be moved.

This is the crux of it. If you've had personal experience, great, but it must be repeatable, on command, testable, to be verifiable.

A thing is not a thing cause I said so.

No it was not an "I said so" argument it was a "illogical conclusion/where's the proof" argunent. Keep up man. As for my own personal experiences in the realm oft classified as "supernateral" I will simply say that I have seen things science has yet to explain, and leave it at that. I could discuss at length, but that was not my intent here. But the notion that something is not real simply because it hasn't been quantified yet is limiting and short-sighted at best. Just like everyone was SURE the Eartb was the center of the universe hundreds of years ago- until proven otherwise. Some things just haven't been studied properly yet, or can't be at all at this time.

Originally Posted by Katie

If every action and reaction was determined automatically by the brain with no thought by a person, human's brains would not have evolved beyond the base reptile brain.

The reason we have big old cerebellum, and especially a large frontal lobe, is that we have evolved the ability for abstract thought, including decision making and impulse control.

Now granted, the frontal lobe that regulates impulse control is not fully formed until a person is 24 or so, but it still exists.

People are responsible for their decisions.

Ah thank you so much! We don't often agree, but you have said exactly what I believe as well, and quite well. Evolution alone should show us that free will exists. It is what has pushed us this far in our path as a species.

Originally Posted by Katie

I have been unable to locate multiple scientific studied to back this. Any different sources from the video or from the guys in the video? I mean, lets see the JAMA and psychology guys weigh in....multiple unrelated neurologists.....anything. All I see is a bunch of philisophical debate. I need actual science.

Just cause these guys are have debated a theory does not make their theory right. Yes, the sympathetic nervous system exists, as dies the human ability for abstract thought.

Show me multiple unrelated, cross dicipline studies that prove this theory. I don't buy it. At all.

Yes, please. I'd like to see some proof or evidence as well. I don't buy it either, and for pretty much the same reason. National Geographic and Discover have done some interesting articles on brain chemistry as it relates to behavior, but neither mentioned a lack of free will as the conclusion that should be drawn. I respect those scientific publications far more than a panel of random people I've never heard of philosophizing based on a faulty theory.