-->
@Stronn
Rational, logical common sense statements still exist ! +10It comes down to this: we should act as if we have freewill, because we don't have any choice.
free will
Posts
Total:
712
-->
@TheRealNihilist
Any limit on will does not make it free. It is not freedom of speech if there are restrictions. Same applies to will.
I agree and was presenting Fullers viewpoint
Less options not freedom. Freedom is to do what you want but that is never ever the case. People abide by laws or rules put upon themselves.
Incorrect optiions is no differrent from availble degrees of freedom Ex we a finite 3D set ---XYZ { cartesian }--- as degrees of freedoms or options.
There can be room of uncertainty in an ordered universe but that has remain to be seen.
Yes uncertainty of mind and I addressed that. Uncertainty of mind does not necessitate chaos.
M-Tard...The lack of order is only humans inability to find that order.
Omar,,,,This in no way answers if we have free will or not.
Nor did I ever state, infer, imply suggest that it does. Ive been very clear here at DArt in many threads that all access to metaphysical-1, mind/intellec/concepts and ego are a resultant of occupied space cause and effect i.e. all that exists is deterministic resultants.
Fuller has example of resultants if not specifically metaphysical { pattern } resultants;
human in one end of a boat as a vertical line | leaps out of the boat and in so doing that end of boat moves away on that end left or right from is original axial spine /
So then the human lands in another boat at same end pushes this end of boat away from the boat end he just leaped out /\ and,
this cause and effect actions results in a triangle relationship because the other ends of two boats come together { approximately } /\ and,
the human leaping is third line of relationship /\ that defines a triangle.
Triangular pattern is a resultant of an human { human jumping } action and two reactions;
1} each boats moving away from each other at one end and,
2}| twowards each other at other end, once the human lands in the other boat end,
3} triangular pattern resultant.
If you have any doubts that a pattern is metaphysical-1, try this experiment;
1} hold you hand { occupied space } out in front of you and move it from left to right or right to left, and as you do so raise and lower your hand as if you trying to create a sine-wave pattern,
2} once your hand comes to a stop you still see { visual } of your occupied space hand, yet the pattern no longer exists, except as concept of metaphysical-1 mind/intellect/concept.
-->
@secularmerlin
That puts freewill in the same category as god(s).
With one big difference. Only some people experience what they would consider to be God. Every person on earth experiences the phenomenon of making choices or "free will".
-->
@TwoMan
People definitely experience the sensation of coming to a conclusion and/or course of action. Whether or not they cpuld have come to a different conclusion or settled on a different course of action is unknowable.
-->
@mustardness
I agree and was presenting Fullers viewpoint
Fullers viewpoint?
Incorrect optiions is no differrent from availble degrees of freedom Ex we a finite 3D set ---XYZ { cartesian }--- as degrees of freedoms or options.
Firstly did you agree with what I said and secondly what you mean by incorrect options?
Yes uncertainty of mind and I addressed that. Uncertainty of mind does not necessitate chaos.
Guess theists and apologists for theists are begging for Quantum mechanics to save them. I doubt that is the case.
Nor did I ever state, infer, imply suggest that it does. Ive been very clear here at DArt in many threads that all access to metaphysical-1, mind/intellec/concepts and ego are a resultant of occupied space cause and effect i.e. all that exists is deterministic resultants.
Haven't seen too much from you and with what I have seen it is difficult to understand you. Forgive me if it is taking time for me to understanding how you type.
the human leaping is third line of relationship /\ that defines a triangle.
Okay let me understand this.
1) A human an actor does an action
2) A cause occurs.
3) An effect occurs from that cause
4) That effects in some way the area the human is in
Is this correct? I am sure the triangle is complete with what I said.
1} hold you hand { occupied space } out in front of you and move it from left to right or right to left, and as you do so raise and lower your hand as if you trying to create a sine-wave pattern,
I call this a weakness of our senses or a limitation. Am I wrong?
2} once your hand comes to a stop you still see { visual } of your occupied space hand, yet the pattern no longer exists, except as concept of metaphysical-1 mind/intellect/concept.
I can't complete see it but maybe it is too dark for me to see the pattern.
-->
@TheRealNihilist
Fullers viewpoint?
Bucky Fuller
Incorrect optiions is no differrent from availble degrees of freedom Ex we a finite 3D set ---XYZ { cartesian }--- as degrees of freedoms or options.
Firstly did you agree with what I said and secondly what you mean by incorrect options?
Your incorrect, options is not differrent from the available degrees-of-freedom. Within space we have an only need a finite set of three, 90 degree angles total 270 degrees-- to attain a 3D volume of occupied space. So that is 270 degrees { options } and is the maixmal set of options required for 3D occupied space.
Guess theists and apologists for theists are begging for Quantum mechanics to save them. I doubt that is the case.
I dunno. I only know what I stated and restate. .."Uncertainty of mind does not necessitate chaos"....
Haven't seen too much from you and with what I have seen it is difficult to understand you. Forgive me if it is taking time for me to understanding how you type.
Begin with the first word and move from left to right in sequence. Its the English way of processing the written word.
..."Nor did I ever state, infer, imply suggest that it does. Ive been very clear here at DArt in many threads that all access to metaphysical-1, mind/intellect/concepts and ego are a resultant of occupied space cause and effect i.e. all that exists is deterministic resultants."....
Okay let me understand this.
1) A human an actor does an action
2) A cause occurs.
3) An effect occurs from that cause
4) That effects in some way the area the human is in
That is not what I stated ergo I will have to state it again;
1) we have two boats { | | } as two lines and the leaping human as a action vector { magnitude and direction },
2} human leaps { action } out of boat one and that end of that boat moves away { reaction / } because he pushes off from the boat when he leaps. The line ___ is the leap vector of human.
3} human lands in the end of 2nd boat and that causes { action } that end of 2nd boat to move even further away from end of 1s boat human leaped from ergo we have a visual of two boats with two ends moved away from each other and two ends reacting by coming closer together { /\ },
4} so we now have two boats as the two lines { /\ } with two ends close and two ends away from each other, and
5} we have the traveling action{ vector magnitude and direction } ___ of the human vector is third line-of-relationship __ and concludes this visual of resultant triangular scenario /\
Triangle is a patterned resultant of two boats { | | } and human leaping as vector { __ } the result is a triangle pattern { /\ } wherein the two boats remain as occupied space and the vector of leaping ceases but created two reactions.
I call this a weakness of our senses or a limitation. Am I wrong?
I have no idea what you talking about. I will repeat what I stated and that is all I know in those regards;
1} hold you hand { occupied space } out in front of you and move it from left to right or right to left, and as you do so raise and lower your hand as if you trying to create a sine-wave pattern,
I can't complete see it but maybe it is too dark for me to see the pattern.
Oh, well then you need to turn on a light or do the process via daylight or moonlight. Where there exists a desire { will } to find truth it is possible to find the truth.
.."2} once your hand comes to a stop you still see { visual } of your occupied space hand, yet the sine-wave pattern no longer exists, except as concept of metaphysical-1 mind/intellect/concept."...
So in both scenarios we have a resultant metaphysical-1, mind/intellect/conceptual pattern.
1st scenario was triangle pattern and 2nd scenario was sine-wave pattern.
Metaphysical-1, mind/intellect/concepts have no mass, do not occupy space, have no color, no charge no spin etc.
Determinism can never be rationally accepted if it is true. One would be compelled to accept or not accept determinism in the same sense that a boulder is compelled to roll down a hill upon the force of gravity.
Everything we think and do would be installed by mindless forces. Since mindless forces cannot make rational choices, and since our choices would be the sole product of mindless forces, a choice to accept determinism would not and could not be rational.
Reductio ad absurdum.
-->
@mustardness
For you, Bell's theorem is the greatest porno.
Protip
-->
@Fallaneze
Determinism can never be rationally accepted if it is true.
One would be compelled to accept or not accept determinism in the same sense that a boulder is compelled to roll down a hill upon the force of gravity.
Yes gravity ( ) and dark energy )( are ultra-micro root of deterministic phenomena, so you are half-way to being on the correct, rational, logical common sense geodesic Space set of tracks.
Everything we think and do would be installed by mindless forces.
Thats correct. Metaphyscial-1, mind/intellect/concepts are what humans access and they exist in complement to occupied space Universe.
Since mindless forces cannot make rational choices, and since our choices would be the sole product of mindless forces, a choice to accept determinism would not and could not be rational.
eternally existent Univer does not need to make choices. Why you thinketernally existent Universe needs to make a choice is what is irrational, illogical and lacks common sense.
I understand the anthropological concept of what is the point of Universe if there exists no metaphysical-1, mind/intellect/concept accessing critters to consider the most comprehenisve wholistic set of "U" niverse aka "G" od.
The problem is you confuse human and access to mind with some mythological God. Your confused and have yet to offer any rational, logical common sense pathways for understanding Universe and its eternal existence.
Physical/energy and all occupied space cannot be created nor destroyed. Read my lips/text over and over until you can grasp this simple concept that relates to eternal { beyond finite periods of time }.
See my explorations and findings associated with black holes via numerical, geometric and others findings regarding black hole phenomena.
1} see cubo-octahedron and specifically spherical cubo-octahedron
.......perfect balance between 24 chords and 24 radii.....
2} see four surface planes of tetrahedron at zero volume define the cubo-octahedron LINK
Start with the above then I can show you more associated stuff.
-->
@Fallaneze
Determinism can never be rationally accepted if it is true. One would be compelled to accept or not accept determinism in the same sense that a boulder is compelled to roll down a hill upon the force of gravity.Everything we think and do would be installed by mindless forces. Since mindless forces cannot make rational choices, and since our choices would be the sole product of mindless forces, a choice to accept determinism would not and could not be rational.
Equivocation fallacy. You are using rational to mean logically consistent and capable of recognizing logical consistency. These are not the same attribute.
-->
@secularmerlin
If Fallaneze's argument were worded another way, how would you respond? For example...
A) Mindless forces cannot make choices.
B) Humans make choices.
Therefore,
C) Humans are not solely controlled by mindless forces.
Denial of free will effectively leads to blaming God for every evil that you (actually choose to) do.
Oddly enough, this might be what Calvinists believe.
-->
@Mopac
Not really. Denial of free will means accepting existence is no more than time 'cranking the handle' from big bang to heat death.Denial of free will effectively leads to blaming God for every evil that you (actually choose to) do.
-->
@keithprosser
The ultimate reality is no more than time "cranking the handle" from big bang to heat death.
Behold your god!
Kali ma
Kali ma
Kali ma
-->
@TwoMan
Choice implies the abity to have done otherwise and whether or not things could have been otherwise is unknowable. Choice is simply not a term that is in keeping with our epistemology.
-->
@secularmerlin
I had a feeling that the word "choice" was really what your contention was with, not "rational".
So you reject the premises outright. Fair enough.
-->
@TwoMan
I only reject premesis that cannot be proved. Suggest a method of testing past events to determine if anything else could have happened and we'll give it a try. I'm simply unaware how one could implement such a test.
-->
@secularmerlin
All knowledge is contained within our epistemological limits. "Rational" meaning "what is understood to be consistent with logic and reason" is the standard we apply to beliefs to determine whether they should be accepted or not. As I've said many times, mindless forces cannot be rational so if our beliefs are the selection of mindless forces, our beliefs would not be rationally selected.
-->
@secularmerlin
I only reject premesis that cannot be proved.
Not everything that is true can be proven. I reject/accept premises on an 'informal' basis. I reject what seems nonsense and accept what seems likely, although its rarely if ever strictly binary.
I reject the existence of gods (and such) not because I can disprove their existence nor prove their non-existence but on my assessment of what seems probable. I doubt you are really so mechanically hyper-rational as you try to come across!
-->
@Fallaneze
Are you using rational to mean logically consistent and capable of recognizing logical consistency?
Again they are not the same thing.
-->
@Fallaneze
"mindless forces" is meaingingless ergo Fallanese has yet to ever offer us any rational, logical common sense statements in these regardless.As I've said many times, mindless forces cannot be rational so if our beliefs are the selection of mindless forces, our beliefs would not be rationally selected.
Bosonic forces ex photon in of themselves have nothing to do with metaphyscal-1, mind/intellect/concept and ego.
Bosonic force gluons { strong sub-nuclear } is same as above.
Bosonic mesons { strong nuclear } force between hadrons.
Bosnic weak forces { W+ W- and.Zo }
None of these, in of themselves are relevant to metaphysical-1 mind/intellect/concepts and ego. They are mindless forces.
Access to metaphysical-1, mind/intellect/concepts does not gurrantte access to rational, logical common sense and Fallanese is evidence of this truth and fact.
-->
@secularmerlin
By "rational" I mean basing your beliefs off of logical reasoning. Not having your beliefs installed by mindless forces beyond your control. You've agreed that mindless forces are not rational. If you posit that deterministic, mindless forces control all actions, then our beliefs cannot be rationally chosen.
-->
@Fallaneze
If you posit that deterministic, mindless forces control all actions, then our beliefs cannot be rationally chosen.
Strike the word "chosen" from this sentence, and it falls apart.
Beliefs can still be rational (and irrational) whether or not we actually choose them.
-->
@Fallaneze
The distincaton falls apart if logical reasoning is a mindless force.By "rational" I mean basing your beliefs off of logical reasoning. Not having your beliefs installed by mindless forces beyond your control.
in fact,logical reasoning is forced and beyond control.
consider the classic
socrates is a man
all men are mortal
socrates is mortal.
the conclusion follows from the premises as does a physical effect from from its causes. That is logic demands socrates is mortal - one's mind does not 'control' logic.
-->
@Fallaneze
By "rational" I mean basing your beliefs off of logical reasoning. Not having your beliefs installed by mindless forces beyond your control. You've agreed that mindless forces are not rational. If you posit that deterministic, mindless forces control all actions, then our beliefs cannot be rationally chosen
They are not chosen at all. Even if there is freewill beliefs are not a choice. Also your beliefs were not installed they were developed. They evolved over time. This was based partly on your experience with what would appear to be mindless forces like the laws of physics and partly on interactions with other minds in particular by authority figures from yoir childhood.
Denial of free will is functionally the same as blaming God for making you such a shithead... or even blaming God for why you don't believe in God.
I'm a fool because God made me this way, it's his fault!
The reason why this is an unhelpful and even harmful belief is because it denies the reality that man doesn't have to live like an animal, tossed to and fro by his passions and the environment. Man has been granted the ability to change his mind.
Yes, we do choose our beliefs. To a certain extent, we all have to, because as even these epistemological nihilists know, we can really only be so sure of things, and even our own understanding is untrustworthy.
To deny free will is to embrace defeatism and make yourself less than human.
-->
@Mopac
I do not blame any god(s) for anything.
As for blaming reality... that is nonsensical reality does not appear to have a mind.
-->
@secularmerlin
So you are saying it wouldn't be right to blame the hurricane for destroying people's homes and displacing a population from the land?
Oh no, you'd say maybe caused.
In that case, adjust accordingly.
-->
@Mopac
Blame is not useful in dealing with natural disasters. It's use is questionable when dealing with sentient beings.
In either case your last post is completely besides the point. Lucky for you this is not an indication of your debating prowess since you are not really debating here.
Again I urge you to go find that proclaiming web site you were looking for when you accidentally stumbled onto us.