The Problem of Free Will and Why Naturalism is Self Refuting

James Warner Wallace has an article out today called Did Free Will Simply “Emerge”. Also, over at Cross Examined, there is an article called The Self-Refuting Nature of Naturalism

In his book An Atheist Defends Religion: Why Humanity Is Better Off With Religion Than Without It, author Bruce Sheiman gives a general outline of how atheists account for how we got here. Human Life = Laws of physics X chance + randomness+ accidents+luck X 3.5 billion yrs. In other words, the laws of physics for our present universe arose by chance (from a multitude of possible universes); the first forms of life developed by chance (arising by primordial soup combinations that resulted from the laws of physics plus accidents); the first concept of life developed purely by chance (genetic mutations and environmental randomness); and humans evolved by more improbable occurrences.

Are we really ‘free’ to believe this?


One thought on “The Problem of Free Will and Why Naturalism is Self Refuting

  1. nawdew14 January 20, 2016 / 8:13 pm

    Atheists have to eliminate free will. Otherwise, they know they will be held accountable. Problem is, if there is no free will and we are just responding to pre-determined brain activity, then truth does not exist. How would one know what is truth if we are just reacting to pre-determined brain activity? Who really is really speaking truth? How does one determine if something is objectively true? If truth is relative (a self-defeating statement), how do you know what is true? Therefore, how do the atheists know what they believe is true is everything is dependent upon the laws of physics?

    Jerry Coyne and Richard Dawkins believe the following comments Coyne wrote for the USA Today back on Jan. 1, 2012 and is so self-defeating, it is amazing anyone would accept it as truth, but this is the proof of how desperate the atheists are becoming:

    “We are biological creatures, collections of molecules that must obey the laws of physics. All the success of science rests on the regularity of those laws, which determine the behavior of every molecule in the universe. Those molecules, of course, also make up your brain — the organ that does the “choosing.””

    and further in this pathetic article;

    “Our brains are simply meat computers that, like real computers, are programmed by our genes and experiences to convert an array of inputs into a predetermined output.”

    See the problems here, they are so obvious?

    Again, if this is true, they atheists have no way of proving anything to be true. Why should I believe your brain activity is more true than mine and who can determine it?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s