while on my way home from the beer store, that although I've had a few too many - or maybe that's the reason for this in the first place I don't know, there's no way this life is a random occurrence that will end up with you dying and then losing your consciousness. I can't really explain right now what I want in order for you to see what I see, but hopefully tomorrow I will remember that I made this thread and follow it up. Wish me luck. Or you (luck) rather.

Yeah, there's no way that I was born without superpowers... I want to have them so then I must have them...

Grunching, but you really should stop making threads right after using drugs.

What's the line on this thread still being here when OP sobers up?

Yahweh or No Way.

Beer is the only kind of liquor this store sells? You drank all the beer on the way home from the store?

Nope. You ain't gonna get it, sorry.

I like your erb inspired ops better.

Nuh uh. Your move.

I still want to know why my herbal wisdom is viewed as less credible.

I think it's the obvious negative-societal-influence towards something so profound that gives the hint deception is at hand. My only question is, what is it about my personal freedom that the prince of the world is worried with me finding out?

Meh an idea is an idea it either has merit or not.
I dont believe in the prince of this world.

Can we move this thread to 4L so it can be treated to the response it deserves?

maybe conciousness doesn't even exist

Apparently the brain makes a decision well long before we are aware of it. (Scientists can predict whether you will pick left or right 6 seconds before) who are 'we', what is aware? Maybe the whole universe is concious and we are just observation points

Do you have a citation for this?

I can find one, experiments on this are happening all the time so you should be able to aswell. However it is bed time for me and it is beleiveble anyway for thoughts are a layered depth and one can look deeper to know that the front of the mind is (The perception, particularly of I) effect rather than cause. (then theres the pardox of who is looking blabalba my words are not so good)

When he finds one, I'm pretty sure he will find that it states that the time is probably 6 milliseconds, not 6 seconds.

no its deffo 'up to 6 seconds before' and that is with complete accuracy,,,,, brain scanners.

Horizon - The Secret You(part 4, 7:50min)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W-0uPcRT4ZY

I actually meant a scientific paper, but I appreciate the link. Thanks.

Ok, interesting.
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releas...-udi041408.php

I knew of this: "More than 20 years ago the American brain scientist Benjamin Libet found a brain signal, the so-called "readiness-potential" that occurred a fraction of a second before a conscious decision."

But I didn't know of this:
"In the study, participants could freely decide if they wanted to press a button with their left or right hand. They were free to make this decision whenever they wanted, but had to remember at which time they felt they had made up their mind. ...The researchers found that it was possible to predict from brain signals which option participants would take already seven seconds before they consciously made their decision.

...

The decision could not be predicted perfectly, but prediction was clearly above chance. This suggests that the decision is unconsciously prepared ahead of time but the final decision might still be reversible."

I knew you wanted a scientific paper, but I remembered of the video and wanted to share..

Don't drink and drive.

That paper has to be unnerving to those of us who believe in free will. There's still room for it, but it undermines the evidence from experience pretty directly. I wonder if you can "fool" the scientist by trying to change your mind at the "last" moment.

Well, I'm not so sure the conclusions are sound. If I ask you to pick left or right, and you take longer than 6 seconds to be conscious of a decision, what are you doing for those 6+ seconds? It shouldn't be so shocking that even though you are undecided, you are leaning one way or the other. After all, the 6 second prediction beats random chance, but isn't scoring 100%.

How do we know that the scans aren't picking up a lean instead of a clear decision that is still changeable?

I realize it's not a disproof and the abstract makes that point too ( I'm hoping to dig out the whole paper later this week). Nonetheless, this six second lag seems to be a real effect which I can't say I would have predicted based on experience. It could be a "leaning" but presumably that would show up as there would be some people who made snap decisions and would therefore have none of these brain patterns ahead of time. I'll be interested to see the whole thing and also to see other trials/developments.