[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

Originally Posted by Open Mind

You say we have freewill, Blackmore says we don't .... you obviously don't agree on the very meaning of the word 'freewill'?

Where did I say we have "freewill"? Haven't I been asking for a definition?

I would say freewill = awareness of having a degree of choice and making a choice

Making a choice how?

Does anyone know? All I am saying is the materialist's argument doesn't work , there is something wrong with it.

So you're blabbing on and on about freewill without knowing what you're talking about? I thought that was the case.

Why? Because there is no evolutionary advantage to unconscious processes becoming conscious, if consciousness is an illusion generated by the unconscious processes, there is no evolutionary advantage in a sense of conscious freewill either, if all choices are unconsciously made in brain prior to sense of freewill . ... this is an internal contradiction of materialist logic and a violation of materialist's natural selection, materialism is not enough IMHO...

All choices are not made prior to a sense of will! That would require that I make all my choices the instant I am born, because pretty soon thereafter the feeling of will sets in.

Materialism reduces a sense of consciousness and a sense of freewill to pointless delusion, epiphenomena with no survival advantage other than self deception?

No, it doesn't. But apparently you are going to ignore everything I've proposed about the evolution of will, just so you can beat up on materialists.

When I said 'solved' I meant there is no need to view 'Libertarian Freewill' as the only alternative to materialistic type of solutions. In response to the common question 'is life fate or freewill?' ....I was saying it is both. Our freewill is a cause, the effect is fate... the materialist is arguing fate is the cause, freewill is the effect. The exact opposite of our experience.

But you refuse to describe the source of your free will decisions. So your version of free will is a textbook case of a god of the gaps argument.

~~ Paul