If someone believes that the universe is a random chance chaotic explosion show that they know very little about theoretical physics. When the Big Bang of uniformly distributed very hot energy cooled down, energy began to form particles according to the laws of particle physics. Quarks could only combine as the temperature dropped more. They formed protons overcoming the mutual repulsion of up and down quarks due to a known force of physics. Protons joined other protons in fusing larger elements from Hydrogen despite protons being mutually repulsive (both + charged) but overcome by the Strong Atomic Force. As energy became mass it clumped due to the Physical Laws of Gravity. Everything else down to the formation of Stars, Galaxies, planets, and non-living molecules grouping into living molecules FOLLOW KNOWN LAWS OF PHYSICS AND CHEMISTRY. What people see as chaos is only their inabilities to understand the deceptively speckled appearance of the visible universe. The first few seconds of the Universe was a uniformly distributed expansion of energy. It was not Chaos. It only became more chaotic in appearance as it evolved into suns, planets, and us.



You fall flat again because you try to stereotype all of us who do not have belief in Gods and Magic. I know that thinking is a complex brain process involving multiple association areas of the brain and combined to produce an action (decision). Decisions are based on memory, emotions, logic, reason, analytical thinking, sceptical filtration, and the immediate input that demands a decision. There are literally millions of synaptic points that may be off or on for many reasons (fatigue, medication, drowsiness, or unexpected anatomical change).

There is no way to test Free Will. To do so would require that a person be presented with a certain fixed set of data which is processed by the brain circuits of an individual. But to see if he has free will or acts only on where the circuits connect would require each repetition to be identical to the first.

You could give the same set of data each time. But you must use the exact same brain to process the data each time as well. But if you use the subject a second time, he would not have the same brain he had before the first trial. The trial itself changes that brain. And every repetition further changes that brain so that results would be unreliable.

A study design would require using the EXACTLY same human brain of the same human individual of the exact same age down to the year, month, day, hour, minute and seconds EACH time. That is impossible without a Time Machine in which the person would be sent back every 5 minutes by 5 minutes so that he is exactly the same every time. So I'm afraid we will never know the answer to free will. We have to work on an assumption of free will in order to function. Atheists, Non-Theistic Agnostics, and Religious Theists all behave to the best of themselves and society if they assume personal responsibility for their actions. Those who fail to do so are called psychopaths.

Amergin

__________________
Militant Agnostic: I don't know, and neither do you. There is no evidence of God so belief is optional.

I'm not stereotyping. What I'm saying is that I should be able to stereotype atheists but I can't. Let me compare it to Christianity. I was once a Christian. I believed the Bible to be the infallible inerrant word of God. I thought it was strange that many people are moderate Christians. It is like they only believe in some of the Bible. The way I looked at it is that if you don't believe all of it then there is no reason to believe any of it. I tried my best to be a fundamentalist because of this belief. I found that I couldn't because I found errors in the Bible. So, I lost my faith. At first I believed these errors were really just illusions from Satan and treated them as such. What I'm saying is that it should be the same with atheists. Atheists believe in materialism. So, if they believe that matter is all that there is then they should treat everything as just matter. They don't. If materialism is correct then hitting a tree with an axe is equal to hitting a human with an axe and feeling that a person is more than just a tree is really an illusion. No, atheist looks at it like this. They look at human beings as being more than just a tree just like everyone else does. Even though it is just an illusion that people are more valuable than trees. In short they believe in a world view that says that in reality people are just matter but they give into the illusion that people are more than matter. This seems like an inconsistency to me. If everything is just matter then treat everything as just matter.

If you are offended then I'm sorry. I'm not trying to offend anyone. I'm not trying to stereotype atheists and if it appears that I am then you are misunderstanding me. I'm not saying anything negative about atheists. I honestly believe that many and possibly most atheists are good moral people. It just seems like an inconsistency to me that they are good moral people.

__________________
"I fully comprehended the power of the human mind at the exact moment I came to the realization that I'm totally insane and have no idea what I'm talking about."

That doesn't prove me wrong because that is exactly what I'm saying. Atheists are usually very moral people and I believe that to be an inconsistency because in materialistic terms morality is just an illusion. There isn't really right from wrong in a material world. There is only matter and matter sometimes works in complex ways to trick itself into believing there is right from wrong.



It makes sense to me because if all you are is matter and the way matter behaves is predetermined by the laws of nature then your actions are also predetermined by the laws of nature. If matter is all there is then there is no freewill and thinking you have freewill is just an illusion. If you treat people like they have freewill then you are giving into the illusion. Everything above is consistent with materialism. Many atheists do believe in freewill but their belief is inconsistent with their belief in materialism. The atheists that don't believe in freewill are being consistent with their belief in materialism but they are being inconsistent in treating people like they do have freewill. To be completely consistent they must believe there is no freewill and treat people like they are not responsible for their actions or stop being materialists.



If evolution has given us an intuitive morality then it has given us the illusion that there is a right from wrong even though there really isn't. In strictly materialistic terms there are no right and wrong actions but only actions. If you feel guilt for doing a "wrong" action then nature is creating the illusion that you have done something wrong even though there is no wrong. As a Deists I agree with you that we do have a intuitive morality but I don't believe it to be an illusion created by evolution to trick us into surviving. I don't believe it was created by evolution but created by God and passed down to us by evolution. So, instead of morality being a illusion it is a reality. There really is a right from wrong because our existence isn't nothing but pointless matter.


Well, I did come up with this by thinking for myself. When I was a Christian I didn't think for myself. I believed atheists were more immoral than theists. I think for myself now and I agree with you that it is the opposite but I see both as an inconsistency. Many Christians behave as if there is no god and many atheists behave as if there were one. You're kind of proving my point by the above paragraph. You want all the atrocities to stop. You want people to start becoming more moral. You want people to behave as if there really is a right from wrong even though morality is caused by matter deluding itself into believing that it is more than just matter. You want people to give into the illusion. You don't want people to see it as an illusion but to see it as a reality. That's what I meant by,"It's like they don't believe in God but want people to live as if there were one."

__________________
"I fully comprehended the power of the human mind at the exact moment I came to the realization that I'm totally insane and have no idea what I'm talking about."

You're right! I was wrong! I should of said,"If someone believes that the universe is a POINTLESS ACCIDENTAL RANDOM CHANCE OCCURRENCE that has finely tuned natural laws that caused the universe to evolve into more complex structures in an orderly fashion then they should behave as if they are a POINTLESS ACCIDENTAL RANDOM CHANCE OCCURRENCE by treating themselves and others as nothing more than complex matter."

To illustrate the kind of treatment I'm talking about here is an example. Women don't want to be treated as objects,as pieces of meat, or as sex toys(Well, some do ) They want to be treated as if there is something more to them. If materialism is correct then they are just objects, pieces of meat, and there is nothing wrong with treating them as sex toys because there isn't anything fundamentally different between them and a blow up doll. Both a real woman and a blow up doll are made of matter and the only difference between them is that a woman is matter organized in a more complex way. That is it. There is no fundamental difference. There is nothing more that makes up a woman than matter. If materialism is incorrect and there is more to a woman than just matter then there is something fundamentally different between a woman and an object. So, you should treat a woman as being more than just an object made of matter. I see an inconsistency in atheists treating woman as being more than matter when they as strict materialists believe that there is nothing but matter in existence.


I'm not stereotyping anyone and I didn't say anything about magic. I'm just trying to express my point. My point has nothing to do with atheists behaving in a stereotypical manner. If it is coming off that way then I'm sorry. All I'm trying to show is that I see an inconsistency in atheists who are strict materialists that treat people in a moral way by seeing them as being more than just matter. I could be wrong in this perceived inconsistency but I'm just trying to explain it as I see it. I'm not trying to offend you or anyone else. I'm trying to share how I see things in the nicest way I can. I'm trying to have a friendly conversation with everyone on here. I don't care if you're a Christian, a Buddhist, a Satanist, an Atheist or anything. What I care about is that you are a person. I'm trying to befriend everyone on here. I'm not trying to start any crap with anyone. I want a peaceful conversation. Is there something wrong with that?

Of course there is no way to prove if freewill exists but if materialism is correct then it can't. I agree that,"Atheists, Non-Theistic Agnostics, and Religious Theists all behave to the best of themselves and society if they assume personal responsibility for their actions. Those who fail to do so are called psychopaths." If materialism is correct then the psychopaths are the only ones not giving into the illusion that they have freewill. If materialism is correct then everyone you just stated are insane except for the psychopaths because they understand the reality that they are not responsible for their actions.

__________________
"I fully comprehended the power of the human mind at the exact moment I came to the realization that I'm totally insane and have no idea what I'm talking about."

Stereotype.


Non sequitur.



Non sequitur.


Which has nothing to do with what humans are composed of.

Why is it an illusion?


Why?

This is something I fully agree with you on.

__________________
"I fully comprehended the power of the human mind at the exact moment I came to the realization that I'm totally insane and have no idea what I'm talking about."