[Ezekiel Bathfire]

Re: So God gave us free will.

A human being can detach from the mind and cease thought or also, in this state, observe the mind without identifying with the mind.
I hope this has furthered your understanding of my views.

This is arrant self-deluding nonsense and meaningless garbage. If you think like this, I sincerely suggest you are possessed by demons.

If “Mind” and “Consciousness” mean something to you that they don’t mean to ordinary folk – please let us all know.

How in Hell can you think without both mind and conscience? Sir, you are mad and a madman may say and prove to his own satisfaction absolutely anything. However, be warned, he will convince no other.

I call myself the fool for thinking that for one moment I had a correspondent that could think and speak in intelligible English!

If, in the entirely remotest of possibilities, I have misconstrued anything you have said, I’m sure you will let me know. But when you do, please do not use words which have a private meaning – The transmission of ideas is through words - words, the meaning of which mankind is broadly agreed upon.

Read the KJV1611 and, if you must, come back to me with some Biblical quotations supporting your statements.

[One-eyed Jack]

Re: So God gave us free will.

Black Lion: "From [the totality of physics] all sequential events are still predetermined."

You did not read Unfalsifiable's post.

Certain quantum events cannot be predetermined. To take a real-world example:

You have an atom of U-235 and a geiger counter. The atom will decay at a time that cannot, even in theory, be predetermined. It is governed only by probabilities: it has a 50% chance of decaying in 713 million years, but it could decay tomorrow. Or it could last two billion years. There is no way to predict what it will do. When it does decay, however, that quantum event will unleash a cascade of consequences which will result in a macroscopic, classical-physics event: a click in the headphones of the geiger counter.

Einstein tried for a long time to find "hidden variables" which would predict indeterminate events like radioactive decay. He failed. They are genuinely indeterminate.

Newtonian determinism, the kind you espouse, has been dead since the 1920s. If you want to argue physics then I suggest you learn about it first.

----

We are not here to educate you on 20th-century physics, we are here to praise God. And to slap the enemies of God with a good Rebuking! Science is a false and vile path. Science, falsely so-called, is a mere twitch and snigger compared to the TRUE SCIENCE which is study of the ineffable and incomprehensible Will of the LORD!

O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called:

Which some professing have erred concerning the faith. Grace be with thee. Amen. 1 Timothy 6:20,21

You best fall down on you knees and pray for forgiveness, Buster! You would try the patience of Job...and God is a LOT LESS PATIENT than Job was!

~~ OEJ

[Pastor Al E Pistle]

Re: So God gave us free will.

Black Lion: "From [the totality of physics] all sequential events are still predetermined."

You did not read Unfalsifiable's post.

Certain quantum events cannot be predetermined. To take a real-world example:

You have an atom of U-235 and a geiger counter. The atom will decay at a time that cannot, even in theory, be predetermined. It is governed only by probabilities: it has a 50% chance of decaying in 713 million years, but it could decay tomorrow. Or it could last two billion years. There is no way to predict what it will do. When it does decay, however, that quantum event will unleash a cascade of consequences which will result in a macroscopic, classical-physics event: a click in the headphones of the geiger counter.

Einstein tried for a long time to find "hidden variables" which would predict indeterminate events like radioactive decay. He failed. They are genuinely indeterminate.

Newtonian determinism, the kind you espouse, has been dead since the 1920s. If you want to argue physics then I suggest you learn about it first.

----

We are not here to educate you on 20th-century physics, we are here to praise God. And to slap the enemies of God with a good Rebuking! Science is a false and vile path. Science, falsely so-called, is a mere twitch and snigger compared to the TRUE SCIENCE which is study of the ineffable and incomprehensible Will of the LORD!

O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called:

Which some professing have erred concerning the faith. Grace be with thee. Amen. 1 Timothy 6:20,21

You best fall down on you knees and pray for forgiveness, Buster! You would try the patience of Job...and God is a LOT LESS PATIENT than Job was!

~~ OEJ

Jack, you have been my hero for years, but a physician, you ain't. Take this horrible mistake: "There is no way to predict what it will do."

That simply isn't true, son. It WILL Transform (what you call 'decay'). Just like we don't know when JESUS will call us home, neither do we know when God will want an extra Photom or Electricon. When HE does, HE creates one. Outlaws and scofflaws are the same way. No one has caught that crazy Boson, Mr. Higgs yet, but it's only a matter of time.

I hate to have to rebuke you about these simple things, Jack. But everything happens in GOD's Good Time.

Pastor Al

[The Black Lion]

Re: So God gave us free will.

How in Hell can you think without both mind and conscience? Sir, you are mad and a madman may say and prove to his own satisfaction absolutely anything. However, be warned, he will convince no other.

Yes, I think you got some things wrong.

I never said consciousness (i.e. that which perceives or is aware) could think independently of the mind. The consciousness can, however, exist and simply be aware of being without the necessity of thought (i.e. the mind). The mind is like a tool of the consciousness, but it is not the consciousness. This is something I have personally experienced, therefore debating it is a pointless endeavor seeing that meditation is a practical exercise that anyone can learn to do and experience for themselves.

If you still think I'm possessed by demons and do not wish to converse with me that is certainly your choice.

[The Black Lion]

Re: So God gave us free will.

Newtonian determinism, the kind you espouse, has been dead since the 1920s. If you want to argue physics then I suggest you learn about it first.

So your entire premise revolves around assuming there are no immutable laws simply because Einstein wasn't able to figure out the nature of the law? I hate to disappoint you, but a human being's inability to understand something doesn't rule out its possibility.

My premise is that either A.) The Laws of Physics exist, are immutable and 100% predictable despite appearing otherwise to the limited understanding that human beings possess, or B.) There really are no set Laws of Physics if phenomenon can act in unpredictable ways.

In option A, the universe is a predetermined chain of sequential events that can proceed in only one direction.

In option B, the universe would seem to being guided by a steadfast will or unknown outside force (beyond the material universe) which mimics the characteristics of immutable laws to a degree.

I could not care less if certain individuals ruled out determinism in the 1920's. I have not ruled it out and what I conclude concerning the subject trumps anyone else’s opinion on the subject when it comes to what I believe to be true. Simply stating that some other guy thinks differently does not automatically make that other guy right, no matter how many books he may have written.

I can understand that as a Christian theist it is much easier to insert a god into the equation when the universe can be seen as miraculously stable while at the same time showing no signs of concrete predictable physics. So I completely understand why you are so adamant about determinism being false; It contradicts the supposed divine nature of mankind's existence.

[Ezekiel Bathfire]

Re: So God gave us free will.

Yes, I think you got some things wrong... This is something I have personally experienced, therefore debating it is a pointless endeavor seeing that meditation is a practical exercise that anyone can learn to do and experience for themselves.

If you still think I'm possessed by demons and do not wish to converse with me that is certainly your choice.

Nope, what you have experienced is called "Dropping off to sleep."

I still have not heard from you on the definition of the difference between mind and consciousness - Descartes had a similar problem and his mind did not manage to grasp it - neither will yours if you spend time dropping off to sleep.

I still have not heard what ridiculous and ungodly religion you follow.

You still have not refrained from uttering unsubstantiated pronouncements in a private language.

Merely because you have experienced something does not give you any authority to tell others what it is without an objective investigation. What you describe -and it is described in the vaguest possible terms - as consciousness may be to another merely a daydream.

Moreover, earlier you said that you had no desire to discuss God, yet you come to Landover Baptist Church and start prattling on. Do you not see there is a degree of illogicality here? It is as if I were to walk into a Hells Angels' Convention, announce that I wasn't bothered about motorbikes and start talking about chlorophyll!

Are you one of those Harry Crishna chaps? One tried to give me a book the other day and when I took it, he seemed to want money. I notice that Harry Crishna chaps are always cagey about their beliefs (with good cause) until they have their hands in your pocket.

To reiterate:
I still have not heard from you on the lucid definition of the difference between mind and consciousness.

You still have not refrained from uttering unsubstantiated pronouncements in a private language.

I still have not heard what ridiculous and ungodly religion you follow.

We are anxious to do the Lord's Work here. So, let's have some solid answers to the above solid questions.

[Ezekiel Bathfire]

Re: So God gave us free will.

I could not care less if certain individuals ruled out determinism in the 1920's. I have not ruled it out and what I conclude concerning the subject trumps anyone else’s opinion on the subject when it comes to what I believe to be true. Simply stating that some other guy thinks differently does not automatically make that other guy right, no matter how many books he may have written.

This is rather long, but I hope to end this argument, which (both the argument and my hope) may be futile.

Let us do a couple of thought experiments.

You are in seated in total darkness and unable to rise as your hands are strapped to the arms of the chair. Every now and again you feel a small object strike your head. The blow may be on top of, at the side of your head, on your face or below your chin. You can hear no sounds and no sound accompanies or precedes the blow. There is no sound after it. By listening to your pulse, you determine that the small blows come at unpredictable intervals.

What can you conclude as to the nature of the blows and the room?
Nothing.


Can you tell when the next one will come? No.
Are the blows defying the laws of physics? You do not know.
In this situation, how long would it be before you were able to work out the cause of the blows? You would die before you found out.

From this information can we say if the universe is A or B? No.

There are two light aircraft on the ground on Utah Salt Lake Flats. They are in a square 5 miles wide. One is travelling at 40 mph Due North. The other is at a position 3 miles east of the western boundary and 1 mile north of the southern boundary. Do the aircraft collide?

From this information can we say if the universe is A or B? No.

I the first experiment I have a small ball-bearing on the end of a fishing rod and line. I am in the room with you and have an infra-red beam and night-sight goggles.

The second is of course a crude demonstration of Heisenberg’s principle that we can know either the position or the momentum of an particle but not both simultaneously. It indicates that, by the Laws of Physics, we are precluded from knowing a vital fact and thus our calculations leading to conclusions in certain directions are destined to be impossible or wrong.

In the first, more importantly I have freewill and am able to strike whenever I wish. No amount of information that you might possess would tell you when that was.

You will say that I am nothing but elementary particles and that they too must obey the laws of physics and that ultimately all is determinable, but in doing so you operate on two levels at the same time: one the quantum, where we cannot have sufficient information to conclude anything and one, where I swing the ball bearing, where Newton’s Laws will apply. The combination is such that my actions creates at least the appearance of randomness in the universe.

You will say that this is not real randomness. I will say that it is indistinguishable from real randomness, just as the blows to your head in the dark room were to you.

You will say that ultimately it is calculable. I will say that by the time the mathematical proof is done, we are both dead; the events of our life have passed and so, in reality, the mathematical proof is pointless. We do not and can never have the wherewithal to make a calculation that would have any value. We cannot even extrapolate, the physical laws prevent it.

You will say that regardless of whether it can be calculated or not, the fact remains that it is determined.

Your conclusion is thus that, for all time, it was predetermined that following your birth you would believe in determinism and your rather arrogant statement, quoted above means that you need not have read any books at all.

In the above, I have not touched on the possibility of there being something behind String Theory. If there is, there are many more dimensions than we are prevented from even experiencing but from which strings enter and leave our universe at random, thus fouling up all calculations, even the easy ones, as there would be no means of knowing whether our or any Physical Laws applied in those dimensions nor when the strings would arrive.

So whether there are Physical Laws encompassing not only the presently know 4 dimensions at both Newtonian and quantum levels but also any amount of other dimensions may be something that, despite your certainty above, you nor I can ever prove. (I suspect you are young enough to believe you know everything. Remember, I was your age once and know what it is like: you have never been my age and can’t even imagine it.)

And I am back to Arminianism:
God created man
He permitted the Fall, as an acceptance that He had given Man freewill.
He provides the means of salvation to all
Mankind is urged to follow the path to Salvation.
Salvation is granted to those who accept God.

Your belief is Supralapsarianism:
Prior to the creation God chooses some men for Salvation, the remainder are condemned to Eternal Fire
Man is then placed upon earth
He permitted the Fall, without any reference to freewill, belief or fairness
God places Salvation upon only those he had earlier chosen.
The chosen ones are allowed to enter Paradise.

Now which is more probable?

Perhaps it was predetermined that you should come here and benefit from Landover Baptist Church and change your mind and accept God?

[One-eyed Jack]

Re: So God gave us free will.

Pastor Al: "Jack, you have been my hero for years, but a physician, you ain't. Take this horrible mistake: 'There is no way to predict what it will do.'"

Yeah, you're right -- I am a spectator and not a physician. Mistakes creep in. I know perfectly well that the probability of decay sums to 100%. The writing is faulty. "There is no way to predict when it will do" would have been better.

----

It's common to find posters who have developed their own notions about things without reading the available background material on their subject of interest. In my experience such discussions can go forever because the respondent simply circles back to his idee fixe until icicles form in Hell.

The only possible argument in such cases is to tell the poster to READ THE BOOK!

And by "the Book" I mean the King James Bible!

All knowledge of matters spiritual, philosophical, scientific, historical, etymological, and speleological can be found in God's Book. There is no higher authority to which appeal is possible. No experiment can contradict in the least particular the facts of the Bible.

Read the King James Bible, Black Lion! YOUR SOUL DEPENDS ON IT!

~~ OEJ

[The Black Lion]

Re: So God gave us free will.

You can learn to meditate and discovery the truth for yourself or you can continue to dictate to others that meditation is not real, having never attempted it yourself and thus speaking from complete ignorance. As always, the choice is yours. Moving on.

I still have not heard from you on the definition of the difference between mind and consciousness

Consciousness: That which perceives; is responsible for awareness. Consciousness is awareness of being, Consciousness experiences the impressions of joy, sadness, anger, etc. It is the core of our existence.

The Mind: That which thinks; is responsible for thought. The mind is that which thinks, and reasons, and assigns values to impressions. It is because of the mind that joy is good, sadness is bad, etc. without which the consciousness would merely expereince such impressions impartially without identifying with them. The mind is futile without the consciousness, but the consciousness can still experiences without the mind.

If this is over your head or unclear perhaps I can find some material written by more skilled writer that can aid you in your comprehension.

I still have not heard what ridiculous and ungodly religion you follow.

I follow no organized religion?

Moreover, earlier you said that you had no desire to discuss God, yet you come to Landover Baptist Church and start prattling on.

I said I would not argue for or against the exist of God in the Biblical context because such belief is a matter of blind acceptance in which reason does not factor into the equation. We can peacefully discuss the contents of the Bible if you wish, but not debate the validity.

[Dr. Ernest C. Ville, D.C.S.]

Re: So God gave us free will.

You can learn to meditate and discovery the truth for yourself or you can continue to dictate to others that meditation is not real, having never attempted it yourself and thus speaking from complete ignorance. As always, the choice is yours. Moving on.

What sort of "mediation" are you speaking of? The Bible speaks several times about mediums and others who concentrate on evil and such things, and never in a positive way. In fact, Jesus specifically spoke about those who practice witchcraft, and recommended that they be exterminated! That should show you how strongly he feels about those who practice witchcraft. Now I know you'll say that you don't see that many people in regular life that "cast spells", but what you don't realize is that modern witchcraft is much more self-contained, hidden behind the playful name of "Yoga". And it is eerily similar to this practice that you speak of...

Consciousness: That which perceives; is responsible for awareness. Consciousness is awareness of being, Consciousness experiences the impressions of joy, sadness, anger, etc. It is the core of our existence.

The Mind: That which thinks; is responsible for thought. The mind is that which thinks, and reasons, and assigns values to impressions. It is because of the mind that joy is good, sadness is bad, etc. without which the consciousness would merely expereince such impressions impartially without identifying with them. The mind is futile without the consciousness, but the consciousness can still experiences without the mind.

If this is over your head or unclear perhaps I can find some material written by more skilled writer that can aid you in your comprehension.

This sounds like something written by the chinese food guy--what's his name? You know, the one naked in a bathrobe and the pot belly? I know that when I go looking for wisdom, I don't go running to Hong Kong Gardens for "Wisdom to Go" with a side order of pork fried rice!

I said I would not argue for or against the exist of God in the Biblical context because such belief is a matter of blind acceptance in which reason does not factor into the equation. We can peacefully discuss the contents of the Bible if you wish, but not debate the validity.

You speak about "peaceful", but you come here to spread witchcraft and whatnot on God's forum? That's right on par with Islam being a "religion of peace" You can't have it both ways: either give in to Jesus' Love and recognize His Will in your life or turn your back on Him and prove yourself a liar.

[The Black Lion]

Re: So God gave us free will.

Ezekiel, you are continuing to demonstrate your inability to grasp what it is I am trying to convey to you. I will attempt to break it down into portions that you can comprehend.

The Case for Determinism

The matter (or physical substance) of reality I’ve defined in the context of this discussion as everything perceivable to include photons, gravity, atoms, frequencies, etc. This being anything we can detect or all that which can interact with each other.

We agree that there are properties associated with the material substances of reality, correct? These properties, in their entirety, I am defining as the Laws of Physics.

When I say “The Laws of Physics” I am referring to the absolute reality of physics and not just that which a human being may understand.

Now, regardless of any human knowledge on the subject of physics, seeing that we agree that there are properties associated with matter, the Laws of Physics are everything - period. Not simply the extent of what human beings know or think they know.

Therefore, no matter how spontaneous an event may seem to a human being, the theory goes that it is NOT necessarily spontaneous. In other words, the limits of human comprehension and observation are not taken into consideration.

Although a human being may, based on his or her observations, conclude that certain events are spontaneous based on their inability to figure out any other probability; this does not erase the possibility that there is a concrete property of physics unknown to said human being which, if comprehended, that human being could predict the previous seemingly spontaneous event.

STOP: Are you following, Ezekiel? If not, stop here. If you still feel that you disagree at this point you have not comprehended what I have written and therefore should not proceed any further.

The possibility of there being a force in the realm of physics that scientist have not yet identified and have yet to observe experimentally that can account for seemingly spontaneous events has not and can not be ruled out. To state anything to the contrary would display a horrendous amount of arrogance unless the individual making such a bold assertion was omniscient. Therefore it is a plausibility that determinism can explain the nature of the universe.

STOP: Take some time to soak it in.

The Case for Indeterminism

The matter (or physical substance) of reality I’ve defined in the context of this discussion as everything perceivable to include photons, gravity, atoms, frequencies, etc. This being anything we can detect or all that which can interact with each other.

We agree that there are properties associated with the material substances of reality, correct? These properties, in their entirety, I am defining as the Laws of Physics.

When I say “The Laws of Physics” I am referring to the absolute reality of physics and not just that which a human being may understand.

Now, regardless of any human knowledge on the subject of physics, seeing that we agree that there are properties associated with matter, the Laws of Physics are everything - period. Not simply the extent of what human beings know or think they know.

If we now make the assumption that there are no additional forces within the realm of physics to account for events that we cannot predict and appear completely spontaneous to our human minds then we have to conclude that there is no actual Law associated with those particular events.

The trajectory of electrons and the precise moments of material decay, being used as examples of spontaneity, are therefore unfathomable in terms of Laws of Physics. Each individual piece of material reality then has its own properties yet as a whole the interaction between the individual parts is chaos. Despite this chaotic relationship order seems to be the ultimate result.

If there is no concrete Law governing the interaction of matter and any outcome is possible and yet consistent outcomes are the overall result, it is conceivable to conclude that something - “something“- is producing said spontaneous events something is guiding the electron to a path, something is causing the decay of material at its leisure. In this scenario, we have ruled out the possibility of an unknown force within the realm of physics, otherwise we must revert back to determinism, so what we are left with is an ambiguous emanation that brings forth effect without cause which, in the bigger picture, displays characteristics of a steadfast willpower projecting out of conceivable nothingness.

I believe you favor this line of thought because it more easily than determinism allows for the insertion of a sustainer/creator being that you can arbitrarily and subjectively declare to be a “god persona“.

[Ezekiel Bathfire]

Re: So God gave us free will.

Ezekiel, you are continuing to demonstrate your inability to grasp what it is I am trying to convey to you. I will attempt to break it down into portions that you can comprehend.

The Case for Determinism

Why did you do that? You have merely reiterated what I wrote. This being the case, it is clear that my arguments were, somewhat ironically, above your head and you can only manage to chant out rehearsed dogma about which you have never thought in any detail.

The Case for Indeterminism

see above

I believe you favor this line of thought because it more easily than determinism allows for the insertion of a sustainer/creator being that you can arbitrarily and subjectively declare to be a “god persona“.

You have chosen to invert cause and effect: Because God gave us freewill, indeterminism is the way to go.

Your definitions above all depend on being able to decide which of the two possibilities is more probable. You mention in both options a degree of uncertainty caused by incomplete knowledge.

Thus, I deduce that you imply that it is not possible to reach a conclusion on the truth of determinism / indeterminism and the best that we can say is that we do not know for certain.

Nevertheless, with a confidence born of astoundingly misplaced self-confidence and deep ignorance, you state quite firmly you are a determinist. You say that you require no exterior references to show this. (So that's going to be real accurate isn't it?)

On the earlier matter - Mind / consciousness - you suggest that there can be consciousness without mind. You are either deluded or speaking a private language, which, I assume, you and one other know, in which these words have a meaning differing from the common and accepted.

(Whoever the other person is who understands your private language - has he taken any money off you recently?)

Here at Landover we speak American. We read KJV1611 and we talk plainly. The Truth of The Word of God therefore shines out clear and warming.

Black Lion, navel-gazing and dropping off to sleep is no way for a young man to go - reconsider your foolish ways, let us re-clothe you in your rightful mind.

[Ahimaaz Smith]

Re: So God gave us free will.

I personally am of the philosophy that the mind is a construct engineered toward fulfilling the needs of the biological organism.

You are personally of the philosophy that everything is a mental construct. Time, matter, chairs, leopards, the mind, none of it seems to exist for you except as a thing whose inherent being is to be denied.

The inherent consciousness of a human being, that which perceives, is identified with the mind.

Can I quote you on that?

I see the mind and consciousness as two separate entities.

Or none at all, you don't seem to be real consistent on this point.

Thus a human male might state "I want to have sex with that woman"

Which is tantamount to saying "I want to go to Hell," unless she is your wife.

I want to eat those oatmeal raisin cookies"

Luckily, Jesus said it's OK to eat oatmeal raising cookies.

when in fact the mind is simply reflecting the biological imperative of the flesh and/or the psyche (ego) is compelled to reproduce a positive experience.

Actually, I take back some of my harsh words. You're onto something here, though you need to get rid of the pseudo-Darwinian concepts like the urge to reproduce, and replace it with mankind's inherently sinful nature.

So perhaps a truer statement by the human male would be, "A biological imperative compels me to mate with women".

Nah, it's the Devil.

I guess my point is that when we are angered, jealous, joyous, lustful or sorrowful these emotions are not a conscious decision perpetrated by that which perceives (i.e. the consciousness), but is an automated predefined psycho-biological response to external impressions.

Yes, in the short run, sin is fun, which is why we're tempted.

Throughout our lives the sensual impressions we receive shape and build upon our ego,

I'm a little unclear on this. By ego do you mean mind or consciousness, or is this yet a third independent construct?

Each individuals persona is a culmination of their experiences and genetic predispositions in relation to those three basic initiatives. Given a particular sensual impression the mind-body will react in one, and only one way, based on its conditioning.

Can you produce any evidence to back this statement up? It's one of those facile statements you make that sound profound on the surface, but frankly that have no meaning at all.

And therefore the conscious will identify with this psychological response without any genuine conscious awareness of the minds inner workings (sub-consciousness).

Great, I was hoping there was at least one more nebulous concept of mind involved in this.

Example: Someone punches us and we get angry and take actions based on that anger.

Hopefully turning the other cheek.

We don't decide to be angry and no actual conscious reflection on the event takes place before we act. Our behavior is autonomic.

Yes, it's completely different from something like, say, homosexuality, which is a conscious choice.

I considered the concept of free will despite the presence of biological imperatives and seek/avoid conditioning; However, without the ego the consciousness, that which perceives, has no inherent motivation that I can comprehend.

Please forgive my ignorance, but how can you have consciousness without an ego?

[Ahimaaz Smith]

Re: So God gave us free will.

Black Lion,

The inability to prove the converse of a proposition isn't the same as disproving the proposition. For example, I can't prove to you that the Hindu gods don't exist (though I can show that it is very likely that they don't exist by pointing to how Christian prophecy has been proved over and over again, whereas Hindu prophecy is idiotic and wrong) but that is hardly the same as proving that the Hindu gods do exist. You seem to have real difficulty distinguishing possibility from truth.

Take some time to soak it in.

[Azriel]

Re: So God gave us free will.

Here at Landover we speak American.

No, you speak a weak variation of English. Known as American-English.

Luckily, Jesus said it's OK to eat oatmeal raising cookies.

Where the hell does it say that? Cookies weren't even invented when Jesus was supposedly walking this God forsaken Earth.

"A biological imperative compels me to mate with women".

Nah, it's the Devil.

So is our species supposed to just die out?

Yes, it's completely different from something like, say, homosexuality, which is a conscious choice.

Homosexuality is not a conscious choice, you don't wake up one day and say 'I know I'm going to be queer!' It's a disease of the mind (no offence to anyone who might be gay and reading this). It is basically when the primal part of your brain which draws men and women together is damaged, it then works in the opposite way and attracts two of the same sex together. much like a damaged magnet, where to negatives might attract each other.

Please forgive my ignorance, but how can you have consciousness without an ego?

Non-human animals, animals of lower intelligence maintain consciousness and awareness of their environment and condition without baring an ego. Only humans ((in all their arrogance)) have egos and these are generally subconscious.
You have to egos, one is completely oppressed and subconscious, this is the ego that every human shares. It's what makes you admire yourself in the mirror every now and again. You then have your other ego, the second ego is completely conscious and only a handful of extremely arrogant people have it. This is the ego that makes you put other people down and boast about your perfection.((forgive me for not remembering the names of them I haven't seen my mother in some years so the psych she taught me is a little rusty.))
My point is that you can have ego without consciousness. They don't come hand in hand.