Sassey

Game of thrones has been terrible since season 3.

We have a reasonably good understanding of the components that the brain is made of (neurons, neurotransmitters, hormones, ect), and how they interact with each other.

Knowing if a given planet has water or not doesn’t change our understanding how planets interact with each other, or the properties of water.

(Unless we discover water in a place that it shouldn’t be able to exist.)

Knowing if a given planet has water or not doesn’t change our understanding how planets interact with each other, or the properties of water.

No evidence that they exist. You have to prove that they exist before you can create laws about how they function.

Time is well understood. In which situation do we not know how time will operate?

The laws mostly likely operated differnetly when the universe started, if it started. Otherwise it it has always existed and the laws are…[Read more]

Free will requires that the brain has some special property that operates outside the normal laws of physics.

This has never been observed, there is no refutation of this in the magazine article you linked to.

I don’t see how that is relevent in any way.

Such as?

To assert that free will exists, without evidence is the same as asserting that a god exists, without evidence.

None of those things are laws, or effect laws.
I don’t think you know what a law is.

None of those things are laws.
I don’t think you know what a law is.

The laws of physics dictate that the same decision must always be taken, anything else is impossible. You have to prove that the laws of physics are wrong.

They have remained fairly constant for a long time now.I’m not sure where you got this idea that they are always changing from.

If you want to ‘ammend’ the laws of physics, then you need very strong evidence, of why the current laws do not work, what the new laws should be, and why the new laws are correct.

That’s what my post was …

That a brain in the same state, given the same environmental stimuli would produce different behaviour each or some of the times that those stimuli are applied.

Deus vult!

Historians aren’t scientists, history isn’t a science. I don’t care much what they accept or not. There is no evidence that Jesus existed, so there is no reason to believe that he did.

(The bible also says that there was more than one Jesus, most people seem to ignore this)

History isn’t science. There is no evidence that Jesus existed, so there is no reason to believe that he did.

(The bible also says that there was more than one Jesus, most people seem to ignore this)

Free will is the idea that if unknowingly placed into identical situations a person could make different choices each time.

This requires that the brain has functionality outside of its biological and chemical components. The laws of physics dictate that given the same state of molecules, electrons, ect inside of the brain, and given the same…[Read more]