I guess you didn't comprehend what I've clearly posted above in plain English. My conclusion is that free will exists and that gods do not. I don't hold either belief "in order to" be consistent with evolution, even though both are. You'd better check with your gurus. Free will is not consistent with materialism.
The philosophical implications of naturalism are troubling both to naturalists and non naturalists. One of the more absurd implications is the absence of free will:
See Robert Wright's The Moral Animal: Why We Are The Way We Are; 336,350-351,324-325,355. Wright states that free will is only an illusion. Don't forget that Dawkins calls us survival machines and sophisticated robots.
Nature Magazine (May 8,2003), in an article entitled, The Buck Stops Here claims that free will is a subjective illusion.
Daniel Dennett claims that humans are zombies without consciousness (Consciousness Explained, 1992).
Of course
it takes a free will to argue against the existence of a free will. This is why the conclusion is troubling to naturalists. It is both absurd and self-refuting.
It is also worth noting that any worldview that puts more effort into denying reality than explaining it really isn't something to take seriously.
And here's one compliments of Gary:
He writes in his 1994 book The Astonishing Hypothesis:
The Scientific Search for the Soul, "Your joys and your sorrows, your memories and your ambitions, your sense of personal identity and free will, are in fact no more that the behavior of a vast assembly of nerve cells and their associated molecules." Crick, Francis Harry Compton
posted on 11/19/2004 4:44:29 PM CST by GarySpFc (Sneakypete, De Oppresso Liber)
"It is also worth noting that any worldview that puts more effort into denying reality than explaining it really isn't something to take seriously. " ::snip snip:: *tucks it away* I didn't steal your quote! Nope, not me!