<shakes head> ;-)
I hope ya don't buy that argument Kicky, it has some really glaring leaps of pure faith and is, on the whole, just a baseless cum hoc ergo propter hoc argument.
Break it down:
Quote:If you believe in free will, then it follows that we have souls.
No it doesn't. This is similar to saying: "If you care about humans you will be a liberal"
The very issue at hand is supposedly proven by simply assuming it's true.
Quote:The soul is the incorporeal essence of oneself, and free will is about voluntary choice, being able to choose one's own actions; the freedom to make choices that are not determined by prior causes.
Soul can also be described as onés imagination. It can be called corporeal. But more importantly, the notion that we can make decisions without the influence of prior causes is a giant leap of faith.
It's a false assertion slipped in there.
Quote:Therefore, free will is a cause and not an effect in its interactions with corporeality.
LOL
Because of the baseless claim (that happens to be false).....
Quote:So if free will exists, its basis must be incorporeal.
Actually, it doesn't. "And if people had half a brain they'd recognize..."
No basis for this repeated claim is made except with other unsubstantiated claims.
Quote:If free will exists it has to have some kind of existence. And since the basis of free will cannot be corporeal, the only alternative left is the incorporeal.
Here we get to the root of this misleading argument.
It takes something intangible and trys to assert spiritual existence based on it.
Ask yourself whether a fart is corporeal. As yourself whether a thought is corporeal.
We don't see these as tangible things but they are. Each have corporeal manifestation and this is proven (e.g. farts are made up of particles that can be observed, thoughts have manifestation as electrical impulses).
This is the kind of argument that can call anything that is marginally intangible a spirit.
Static electricity for example.
Quote:The self chooses one's own actions and is thus the basis of free will. So, the basis of the self must be incorporeal if free will exists.
The soul exists because free will exists.
Now, it closes with repetition.
Now a sould may well exist, but this argument certainly makes no attempt to substantiate that so much as it simply tries to sound confident about it based on same games with intangibles.