As you know, determinism works both ways. What if the final conditions of the universe require agent freedom to have come into existence?

I mention this because perhaps determinism as it operates in reality, is not what you think it is. — tom

Determinism acts in both ways and all ways, because it is more of a religion than a philosophy. All one has to do is assign whatever attributes one wishes to the mystical, omnipresent, omnipotent Laws of Nature and bingo, you have your story. One can appeal to the power of God in the same way.

I is the word given to a group of matter that is experienced. — SonJnana

A group of matter that is experiencing? Care to take a stab at the line of demarcation and how that group is performing that trick. Are they talking to each other?

As for meaning, it is all about illusion. Hence, an enlightened Determinist realizes that life has no meaning because they are able to see right through the illusion.

It's amazing that there are grown adults who actually believe all this.

As I said, certain aspects of driving (and many, many or things in our lives) are habitual. However, if you are driving while completely unconscious, in all probability you and other people will be dead pretty fast.

I wish people, when creating a philosophical paradigm, would just observe what is happening. It's so much more useful to have a philosophy that actually makes sense.

In other words, it is just an illusion that scientists are discovering anything. They are merely puppets of the Laws if Nature like everyone else.

Then the causal chain recedes back in time beyond my birth and I am morally responsible for causal antecedents that occurred before I existed. — Cuthbert

There is no "I" in any form of Determinism. There is only the state of the universe which is all caused by the Big Bang. Any attempt to assert an "I" merely displays a misunderstanding of Determinism and the illusions it creates.

I can still eat ice cream and enjoy the experience. — SonJnana

There is no I in a deterministic world. It is all an illusion. Enlightened Determinists realize that they are not enjoying anything. All is without meaning.

Just because I acknowledge that I care about my family because of the way my brain state is, which is just a part of a chain of cause and effects, doesn't mean I don't care about my family or that they are meaningless to me. — SonJnana

You have made the mistake (as if such such things actually exists), of thinking you are thinking. Determinism has already determined everything that was and will be. You may think that you care only as long as determinism determines you should care. It may halt this illusion whenever it sees fit. Having graciously been allowed to see through the illusion by the feministic laws, I can assure you that everything is quite meaningless having already been determined.

When I am saying brain states I mean that the way the brain is at a certain point. So if you went through a traumatic experience, the physical state of your brain would be altered and now you would make decisions based off of the state of your brain now rather than before the traumatic experience. — SonJnana

You are mixed up. The brain doesn't make any decisions and I have no idea what "you" is. There is no trauma. It's all last illusion that determinists see through. I sometimes wonder why the Laws of Nature maintain the illusion that brain surgery has any meaning. The brain is not doing anything other than what is already determined.

Determinism makes everything meaningless including this discussion. It is quite a philosophy.

brain states are part of determinism — SonJnana

Your discussion of brain states is irrelevant as far as determinism is concerned. You might as well talk about toenail states. There is only a universal state that miraculously maintains illusionary forms for the amusement of itself.

Determinism is a hard act to follow. If anyone believes religion stretches creduity then they should be totally blown away with determinism.

Quantum mechanics is certainly not random. If it were it couldn't predict anything. It is probabilistic and is consistent with decision processes that could include choice, as Bohm demonstrated.

We don't have free will in the sense that in a deterministic world, what we choose is based off our brain state at that moment — SonJnana

It is a bit more complicated than this. In a deterministic world EVERYTHING is determined. Every single particle (including quantum particles, which is a different story entirely) is determined. The "brain" holds no privileged position. So, somehow in some totally unexplainable manner, all particles are coordinating in such a way as though it appears (to the particles) that they are making decisions. "Brain states" and the status of brains in human physiology are illusions that mysteriously arise out of the Big Bang. Permit me to be skeptical of this fabricated story.

In other words, why does shutting down the game console shut me (my consciousness) down as well, if my consciousness can exist independently of the game? — Panzerfaust

There is a difference between losing partial consciousness while still maintaining life functions (e.g. breathing, blood circulation) along with continuity of a physical life and losing consciousness and dying.

With determinism there is no moral responsibility, because the only responsibility lies in the first cause which set off the chain of events. Presumably, a determinist blames the Big Bang (God) for everything though I imagine it is difficult to mete out appropriate punishment without obliterating the universe.

Is the desire to achieve more in life in the broadest context an organic process in nature, — Fumani

Desire seems to be built into life, as described in the Four Noble Truths. However, desire can be moderated be replacing one big desire with many little ones.

In many cases, desires cannot be quantified so the word "more" cannot be appropriately used to describe the situation. Possibly one can describe it as a feeling of intensity.

Achieve, is entirely subjective, and I don't believe I think in this manner. I think more in terms of learning something new.

Deriving seems that is is done automatically. — bahman

Part of driving is learned habit (body/muscle memory). Part of it better be quite conscious as I described. You are perceiving an image and consciously making decisions based upon what you perceive. You might see dozens of cars in front of you and make a decision to leave the road, or otherwise.

That doesn't make any sense. — bahman

To me it does, but I've spent many decades contemplating it.

However, the issue I was trying to point out is that your OP describes certain beliefs as facts which calls the OP into question.

They are one and the same.

As I described it.

There are always many options. Only on tests are there two.

Is it brain dependent or is something separate like soul? — bahman

It's just there.

And what is mind? — bahman

It's what is exploring, creating, and communicating. It's us.

The above statement basically says it all. I use my brain pretty much in the same way I might use a transmitter/receiver. It is a tool of the mind.

Of course there are habits that one isn't always conscious of. But you are claiming you drive while unconscious - and live to tell about it. This is an entirely different matter.

What is the use of brain?[/quote]

I use my brain.

Have you any reason to suppose that what we see in nature does not also apply to us? — charleton

What exactly do you see in nature? I see change/evolution.

What "rule" of cause and effect are you referring to? The one at the quantum level?

think we can agree on the fact that brain is a set of neurons which they interact with each other. Any mental state, physical state of brain, leads into another mental state by following laws of physics. — bahman

You realize that there is zero evidence for either of these statements. Your "fact" it's a belief.

I don't know if it is like this for you but I can derive miles without being conscious of deriving, unless an expected thing happen. — bahman

You are driving while unconscious? Ok.

Wow, if I made choices like that on the highway, I would have been dead by now, not to mention the hapless fate of others who happened to be on the road with me at the time, as I one by one tried to memorize the dozens of cars surrounding me and then unconsciously choosing the one that I will not hit (the others will just have to avoid me the best they can).

The history of Christianity is far more complex than simple text and the history of the Bible as a living and changing document is not the sole or maybe even not the most important reason for the growth of Christianity. Consider it a good marketing tool.

Are you conscious of the options at the moment you decide? — bahman

Of course. There is an image in my mind and I consciously decide to take action in a certain direction. What's going on in your mind? Are you groping in the refrigerator and removing what ever you touch? Don't you see all of the choices and choose one? Maybe your mind works differently?

I think you are explaining unconscious decision. You can neither be conscious options as an coherent image nor you can consciously give them a weight. — bahman

I have no idea what you are experiencing in your mind but I described what I am experiencing in my mind. It is quite conscious and deliberate.

One is simply conscious of alternative possibilities. I look in a refrigerator. I see several foods that creates an image. I then might gradually widdle it down to two or three possibilities, all envisaged as a single image in memory. Then I choose one course of action. Reach and grab the apple.

If two different things experience time in two different ways, this does not mean that one of them does not experience time at all. — Metaphysician Undercover

Personally, I would not want to speculate on how rocks may experience time. However, from direct experience, I understand how I experience time. Admittedly this state changes in nature all the time which is definitely of some interest. When I understand this better, it may be appropriate to understand if it is possible that duration, an experience of mind, can be extended to living plants or non-living rocks.

There is an apparent difference between living and not living. But if one wishes to argue that there is no difference in the ability to experience duration between living and not living, I'm all ears.

Why would you have to be able to communicate to experience duration? — Metaphysician Undercover

I don't have to communicate but that is because In am Mind, however, if I'm claiming that it is possible to n experience duration without a Mind then I would like to hear it from the horse's mouth. On the other hand, one could claim that a rock is also Mind and can experience duration as Mind, but that is a different story.

Only the mind can experience duration, unless you have communicated with a rock who told you otherwise.

So, is consequentialism dead in the water? — TheMadFool

Objectively yes. Subjectively is all we have and it is filled with all kinds of problems.

Scientists love to congratulate themselves for corrupting food and health. Helps keep the money coming in.

This what I call idolization. Waves in the universe are ubiquitous. They are literally everywhere. So some scientists got a ton of money from the government (us) to find gravitational waves and if course they found them. So what? Gravity created waves just like everything else in the Universe. I wish they spent the money provided good, nutrious food to children who really need it.

Duration is not a feeling. — bahman

I don't know anyone who cannot close their eyes and feel time passing.

Within very narrow span of universal events, science can make some approximate predictions simply because the universe does develop habits. People tend to get carried away with what science can approximately predict based upon repetitive observations, all if which are still subject to the unpredictable nature of the universe. This idolization of science is just another form of religious worship.