[Flint]

I just like to be specific. I like to start from a set of known facts and proceed accordingly, regardless of how I feel about where the facts are leading me. There has to be objectivity which isn't influenced by a fear of unwanted conclusions.

So, from the beginning: is our nervous system composed of physical materials? Yes. And do physical materials have to obey the laws of physics? Also, yes. That is a known set of facts.

A second set of anecdotal evidence consists of our perception that there is an "x factor" which elevates us above the mere sum of a complex organic computing system. We want to believe that our thoughts and emotions are something more than neuro-chemical phantoms generated by ordinary chemical reactions. But, what evidence is there to support this?

What is "awareness" - what is it made out of? Does it exist in a magical dimension seperate from physical reality? We don't have the answers to this question, but I like to start from what we do know.

We can't put the cart of our expectations before the horse of the available evidence. We don't want to think of a society where people are absolved of personal responsibility, so we avoid what we know about reality - in favor of what we are more comfortable with. We choose ignorance because we cannot immediately see the outcome of exploring an unknown path. That's not clear thinking, that's not good science - a flawed foundation will never produce a solid result.

Whatever makes us tick has to be either #1 a physical process that obeys the laws of physics or #2 a magical spirit from the land of fairies and unicorns. There is no fuzzy middle ground.

And by the way, Quantum Physics doesn't help tear down this Newtonian-sounding argument. Quantum Physics adds, at best, an element of pure randomness. Going on the assumption that a comfortable-feeling conclusion is desired: would one rather be a robot that obeys a set of complicated laws, or a unpredictable anamoly with no control over a series of random occurances?

You'll notice I haven't ventured one step beyond what I said in my very first post here. Like I said, I like to start at the beginning, from a set of known facts, and proceed accordingly. Also, I like to avoid acting like a shit-flinging monkey who has no response beyond personal insults and unsubstantiated non-rebuttals.