Do we have free will? If not, then we are all puppets and every

[SimonA]

Do we have free will? If not, then we are all puppets and every thought, feeling, word, decision and action that we experience are an illusion.

This is the only option if we consider empirical science to be capable of producing a "TOE". The output of our brains can then only be the product of calculable chemical and electromagnetic reactions.

So the story then goes, that when you choose to raise your hand, that was actually predetermined by the electrical and chemical state of your brain before you made this supposed decision.

It's complete nonsense of course. We can claim quantum strangeness provides an escape from this anomaly. But all theories based on this way of thinking are even more crazy and evidence lacking than the original question. Even Hameroff's quantum tubules don't explain conscious decisions.

So my question is, does anyone believe that we can have a "TOE" that doesn't explain consciousness?

I suspect that all who answer "yes" will have highly specialised roles within science, but would be happy to be proven wrong.

 

[SimonA]

Let's face it, empirical science has reached a dead end. All theoretical research is now pointless. It will no longer provide any benefit for curious minds or even mankind itself. By breaking reality into ever smaller parts great things have been achieved. But the epistemology that is the foundation of the research is based on ontalogical assumptions that are simply wrong. So nothing truly significant will come from the millions spent on research. Science has been hoisted on it's own petard.

 

[SimonA]

I'm deliberately being contenscious. If no one here can defend empirical science, we seriously need to re-evaluate how science communicates with the public. They have been lead to believe that we nearly understand everything, and that man has replaced god. It's irresponsible of you to leave the public even stupider than they naturally are.

 

[SimonA]

Are there really no supporters of the value of empirical science out there any more ?

It's a good principle and researchers still think as if it's the base foundation of reality. But why is no one prepared to defend it?

It's as if the golden goose was cut apart to find the source of it's golden eggs, but I can't put my finger on when that happened. Empiricism is still the accepted measure of all theories in science, the bedrock of funding.

So why can no-one defend the natural conclusion that consciousness must be deterministic if empiricism is still the gold standard in terms of the epistemology behind science?