Bartricks

There's no delay to consciousness and I doubt you've read the Libet article.

I should also add, that the new generation seem far from breezy about sex. They seem acutely aware of the wrongness of sexual molestation and sexual m...

As regards your second point - yes, quite. If there were no religions I think sex would still appear to be ethically special. It appears ethically spe...

Address the argument.

Well first we should respect appearances. If we just decide that some appearances are deceptive because the truth of our theory is incompatible with t...

Isn't it more plausible that the reason religions typically make a big deal about sex is that sex is obviously ethically special?

What you're doing is assuming that we're physical things. But that's just a dogma of the modern age. It is a self-evident truth of reason - one you yo...

We're not physical things, because if we're physical things then what you say is correct - we would not have free will. But we manifestly do have free...

yes, but it clearly is part of the story of why it is wrong, so your analysis is implausible.

I do not understand what you are getting at. Whether a god exists or not has nothing to do with what belief in such a being might inspire people to do...

No, the point is you haven't articulated a coherent problem.

I did explain what a rational intuition is. It is a representation of reason. You can see that 2 + 3 = 5, yes? Do you see it with your eyes, smell it,...

Hmm, I don't think you're saying anything. What I said was true.

I am very much of the view that many thinkers of the past are in a different league, intellectually, to most of those around today. But their intellig...

It might be demonstrable that logic requires a god. The god it requires would be omnipotent because the god in question would have control over both i...

Yes, but the way in which it involves logic is that it tells us something about what the nature of logic would need to be for there to be an omnipoten...

I have answered the question. If you insist that the question is unanswerable, demonstrate that by showing my answer to be false.

I refer you to my earlier answer. You're not addressing the question, or realizing that you're not addressing the question.

I still don't see what problem you're highlighting. God is good just if God approves of himself. So he can do what he wants, as long as he approves of...

No, why do you think I think that? We're talking at different levels. my question is about whether or not an omnipotent agent would have control over ...

Whatever it is that you're saying - and it isn't clear to me what you're saying - you're either attempting to appeal to reason, or you're not. If you ...

I appealed to reason.

that same applies to other philosophical questions - they're not questions physicists address. I think, perhaps, a lot of people with scientific backg...

And I answered the question and gave my reasons for the answer. Those reasons justify that answer. You seem to be thinking they don't - why?

There you go again - more content. You're not addressing the question.

No, this is simply false: go into a physics department and ask the physicists in it what the difference is between a compatibilist and an incompatibil...

I don't follow your argument. Indeed, you make some claims that seem incoherent to me. You say that God's goodness and his power are the same - but th...

So far I have provided for arguments for the thesis that my mind is an immaterial soul. Each one was deductively valid and had premises that are far, ...

Why can't you leave the restrictions of a physicist's mindset? Physics doesn't investigate free will at all, so what's to leave? Again, physicists are...

No, it is to do with the concept of power. To have maximum power one needs to be able to do anything at all, for if there is something one cannot do, ...

Why are you mentioning the bible? You think if the bible says something that's good evidence it is true? Sheesh.

You're just expressing beliefs about the content of logic. It's beside the point. I am asking whether being omnipotent involves having control over th...

No, I am asking if you think rational intuitions are probative. That's what my premise assumes to be the case. But if you deny that they are probative...

So, do you think that the thought "I exist" can possibly be false? If you agree that it cannot be false, then you agree that there are some thoughts w...

For example, take child sex abuse - that is seriously wrong in no small part precisely because children cannot consent to sex, yes? Yet by your logic ...

That's question begging - it IS an issue with procreation as even kids themselves recognise ("I didn't choose to be born!"). A small child is incapabl...

no, I think procreation is wrong for numerous reasons, not one alone. But if an act does something very major to another person without their consent ...

so, just to be clear, you are denying that the fact a person will be seriously affected by an act and cannot consent to it is NOT a moral negative mos...

no, it is default wrong to coerce someone - and default wrong to deceive someone - because the nature of the act is such that it cannot be consented t...

reason says what to do in such cases, namely appeal to analogous cases about which our reason is clearer.

you are not following the argument. It was claimed that it cannot be wrong to impose life here on someone without their prior consent due to the impos...

A rational intuition is an apparent representation of reason. You can't argue for anything without making an appeal to reason. The validity of any arg...

You can't answer a question with a question. I have made my position clear: I believe an omnipotent being would be able to do anything. And that's bec...

I still don't know what your answer is to the question. Can an omnipotent being make a square circle or not?

It is just there because it is possible for a rational intuition to count for nothing if, for example we can give an undercutting explanation of how w...

So are you denying the probative force of rational intuitions? If so, how do you argue for anything?

Can you show me, by using a premise from my argument and adding to it other ones, how to derive the conclusion "therefore the earth is flat"? I think ...

I am not entirely sure what you're saying - are you saying that even if an omnipotent being were bound by logic, this would not be much of a bind, or ...

Hm, a square circle isn't nothing, rather it is an object that is both square and circular. Their existence seems to be impossible. But I think a trul...

You are wrong. The fact consent is impossible in these sorts of case has no bearing on the matter as other examples amply demonstrate. For example, it...