>>12014705>The concept of a transcendental realityAs far as I'm aware there is no one denying there could be a 'reality' outside our current understanding of time and space. The problem is people claim to know it definitely does exist, and it definitely validates their universal claims (be it religious, cultist, philosophical...). Furthermore the concept of 'transcendental reality' seems intimately linked with natural selection and genetics. The texture of different groups of peoples 'transcendental reality' is linked to the selection pressures their group is up against. Also the concept of transcendental reality is ill defined - it is less well interpreted through writing than it is through feeling (why religious experiences coincide with an emotional breakdown etc, rather than a logical revelation) ie it is instinctively based and reason is used to 'dress it up'.
>How could the concept of free will emerge if it doesn't existWell you can imagine a tiny pink elephant taking a bath in the White house. Does that mean it actually exists? Well it exists in your mind - its the same for free will. Free will is the illusion of choice by the self. Does 'the self' exist? Well clearly not in a single form as we know when we cut the brain in half people report not choosing all their actions. Also your emotional state changes 'who you are' ie lots of psychometric data about you will be different depending on when you take the tests. Are you the same person you were 5 years ago, a month ago..? Is drunk you the real you, or stressed but sober you, or you after an hour at the gym? They're all you, but they are not the same.
Essentially you are an incredibly complicated detector and emitter. The illusion of the self and free will is just the decisions working their way through a very complex network.
If free will does exist how do you demonstrate it? That is not to say humans are robots, qualia exists. But we cannot prove qualia either.
