ajaysinghgoshiyal

Sure. I hope they allow it.

You want me to provide the name of the author of the book that is the original source? If so that is definitely against forum rules if i am right?

I have said exactly the same thing on this forum under a different name but no one seems to understand. It is because their brain is seemingly hard wired to think in old ways and that leads them to falsely reject any new information and to evade reality. To such people I would say that without a brain a mind would not exist and that the choices that they make are not their doing and that they are not morally responsible for their thoughts let alone their actions and that raping or killing someone is not their fault. Consider a particular scenario. A person who has Obsessive Compulsive disorder is forced by his brain to do things which are irrational to his rational mind. Yet he can make the choice via his mind given that he accepts its power to veto that very action that his brain his telling him. It is a very simple case of Free Will versus Free Wont. To refrain from an act is no less an act than to commit one. Charles Sherrington 1947 AD

I agree. Sorry for the misunderstanding. I am biased towards Jeffrey Schwartz. Ever heard of him.?? My view as well. They call it a user illusion. This is materialist reductionism at its very core. Like I just said. Benjamin Libet said it years ago. It is called the readiness potential. This is very simple Quantum Physics and also subatomic particles. Also called mindful awareness. The power of the tangible over the intangible. You are totally wrong. Please google a term known as Materialist Reductionism to understand my view. You are totally wrong. Please google something called Materialist Reductionism to understand my point.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schrödinger_equation Line 02 describes how the quantum state of some physical system changes with time - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncertainty_principle Line 12 this physical argument is now known to be fundamentally misleading - So there are no limits to any thing. So maths cannot define every thing.

I have provided the evidence many times in something called a work (stuff that really works ) b**k. But rules prevent me from naming it out here. Case is closed yet again. End of argument.

You would not believe what i say as usual. So i will not bother writing anything. Case is closed. End of discussion.

http://philpapers.org/rec/SCHQPI This is also good It is the very same article on another web site

http://www.amazon.com/OBSESSED-Compulsions-Creations-Jeffrey-Schwartz-ebook/dp/B00EO4R3SK Schwartz is best known to the public as the man who coached Leonardo DiCaprio for his Oscar-nominated role as the OCD-afflicted billionaire Howard Hughes in The Aviator. But his extraordinary professional contribution, achieved through a lifetime of obsessive work, is a breakthrough therapy that has helped free thousands of OCD sufferers from their habitual behaviors, compulsions and irrational fears. http://books.google.co.in/books?id=Q3EPeOcnEpMC&pg=PT176&lpg=PT176&dq=henry+stapp+jeffrey+schwartz&source=bl&ots=iZIO89tTLe&sig=RUI2Qswkq8TiHdUsbRWMupvLpvo&hl=en&sa=X&ei=h2GuUtTnDIOOrQeq6oCoCw&ved=0CGQQ6AEwDg#v=onepage&q=henry%20stapp%20jeffrey%20schwartz&f=false Read Quantum Zeno effect http://www-physics.lbl.gov/~stapp/PTRS.pdf This is Really Hard.

http://science.howstuffworks.com/life/genetic/question85.htm

What does time have to do with the nature of the mind ? Are we going on a tangent out here ?

That link i posted appears to say what you have just said. But I honestly cannot imagine the mind being made up of bits of knowledge like a dumb computer that cannot even think. If a computer had one hundred trillion synaptic oh sorry electrical connections and was simultaneously capable of using its 2..5 petabytes of mass storage at quantum speed (maybe less) ... then maybe it can possibly think...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_mind

I meant that both have to co exist. Please read the following. The layman always means, when he says "reality" that he is speaking of something self-evidently known; whereas to me it seems the most important and exceedingly difficult task of our time is to work on the construction of a new idea of reality. Letter to Markus Fierz (12 August 1948), as quoted in The Innermost Kernel : Depth Psychology and Quantum Physics : Wolfgang Pauli's Dialogue with C. G. Jung (2005) by Suzanne Gieser I hope this is not plagiarism. Please issue a warning if it really is.

It is not apparent from such intellectual discussions as to why one would argue whether free will exists or not because in sum it is apparent that people here possess enough free will to write what they want to write. The mind has enough free will and more over the brain but not entirely so because the mind has programmed the brain since childhood to do what it wants it to do. please look this up http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/your-brain-work/201005/is-free-will-real-better-believe-it-even-if-its-not please look this up as well http://phenomena.nationalgeographic.com/2013/08/26/book-review-obsessed/