Is free-will an illusion?

Alas quite so Cis

However I suppose many of us over here on the left are also unreasonable to some extent

That's what makes politics so dumbfounding. If it were not for Romney, I may have voted for other than Obama.

Romney is a pathetic, pathological liar; nobody knows where he stands on anything. At least I know Obama can be trusted to followup on some of his campaign promises that will benefit all Americans.

Well put Cis, my reaction exactly, for what it's worth, which however isn't much around here

I went Obama partly because (1) Give him a chance for God sake

(2) In spite of some questionably constitutional moves, he leans to the left where I too reside at least on social issues. For instance how anyone with an IQ over 52 can find something sacred about a fertilized egg, is beyond me

(3) He's likable, has a presidential yet personal appeal

Though he seems irresolute he does believe himself, according to the general principle that nothing is entirely anything and while entitled to change his mind, he's no outright liar

……while apparently to half of us he's likable

Let us pray; or depending upon your camp, let us hope

You left out the conditional ending,

Some people are still unsure about his stance on higher taxes for the rich, after repeating it so many times.

See what happens when a president doesn't do what he promises to do?

It's a no-brainer on Romney; nobody knows.

I happily voted for Obama...I think he deserves four more years.

But the part of my vote that was a vote "against"...was not directed at Romney, who did most of his lying to make it through the sewer that is the Republican Party primary challenge. The "against" part of my vote was directed at the Republican Party which has allowed itself to become corrupted by the extreme right wing nuts.

Good points, Frank, and I agree. They have become the party of social-religious issues rather than what created their party.

Well put, it's true, and it'll be their downfall

Right on, ci. Right on, Dale.

Thank you Frank, a bit of encouragement is welcome in this dolorous if grandiloquent fulmination of dysphoric persiflage

I couldn'ta said it better myself!

dal,

There's so many million dollar words in that one sentence, it went way over my head....

Right on Dale, Frank and C.I..

Thank you JL, it's heartwarming to be occasionally acknowledged in this otherwise ineluctable gallimaufry sf acrimonious contention

Dale, you took the words right out of my mouth.

Thank you all Frank, C.I, JL, Dalehileman, Tomr, and Ughaibu, I thank the thanking act, thank you world !!!

Y0u're welcome, Fil.

Can we get along? Yes, we can!

Bringing this up to date; Tomr posted his proof at the above three fora. On each he was told why he is wrong, by varying numbers of posters and with varying degrees of patience. In one case, after it was pointed out that he was wrong, and why he was wrong, nobody thought fit to indulge him further. As Tomr's proof doesn't demonstrate his conclusion and as that conclusion is obviously false, there was always a danger that his thread would just be ignored, certainly I think it would have been a waste of time posting it at a site like PlanetMath for that reason. However, I'm surprised at how little indulgence he received at the sites chosen, as I've often thought that I'm rather short of patience when dealing with deniers, but the opposite seems to be the case.
Anyway, here the other posters were more patient. But eventually, in the face of Tomr's obstinance, they began speculating that he's a troll and the thread was closed. He faired even worse here. After he ignored the correction of his views, by three or four posters, for the second time, his posts were deleted and his account closed. In short, he was banned.
It should now be absolutely clear that Tomr's objection, to my demonstration that willed actions are possible in a non-determined world, cuts no ice. His argument fails, it fails obviously and trivially, as was pointed out in several posts, and not just by me, on this very thread, before opinion was sought elsewhere. I consider this matter to be closed.

Excuse me but the only thing you were debating there was numbers and not the concept of free will so old on your horses...either your math friends don't know much on ontological claims and Philosophy or you are stretching the argument beyond the scope you debated there...the matter is not close anywhere in the world and you know this for a fact so do me a favor and publish, prove me wrong, then provide the links and peer reviews !