Home | Community | Message Board
You are not signed in.
Sign In New Account
Forum Index Search Posts Trusted Vendors Highlights Galleries FAQ User List Chat Store Random Growery


This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.

General Interest > Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: Sporeworks.EU Spores for European Microscopy   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Myyco.com Golden Teacher Liquid Culture For Sale   North Spore North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies

Jump to first unread post Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 |  [ show all ]
Re: Im Back!!! and still convinced free will is an illusion ;) [Re: Frog]
    #2581431 -

Its accurate in the sense that the outcome is not known untill its observed, its in a state of quantum superposition, like the cat in shrodingers experiment. Until the box is opened the cat is both alive and dead at the same time, or neither alive nor dead, depending on how u wanna look at it. It remains in that state, just as the coin does, until its observed, then the outcome is determined and the wave function is collapsed, thus bringing one of the two possibilities into reality, but the other virtual unrealized possibility has been shown to be equally "real" atleast in a mathmatical sense. The only reason one is more real, (atleast to us) is because that is the one observed.

Another intresting thing is, that all these particles scientists discover like nuetrinos and stuff, may not actually of existed till we looked for them, they existed virtually but not physically or something like that, until we looked, and the looking brought them from the virtual to the real.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Im Back!!! and still convinced free will is an illusion ;) [Re: ZenGecko]
    #2581721 -

ZenGecko said:
Its accurate in the sense that the outcome is not known untill its observed, its in a state of quantum superposition, like the cat in shrodingers experiment. Until the box is opened the cat is both alive and dead at the same time . . .


Shrodinger's cat was hypothetical.

Quote:
Another intresting thing is, that all these particles scientists discover like nuetrinos and stuff, may not actually of existed till we looked for them, they existed virtually but not physically or something like that, until we looked, and the looking brought them from the virtual to the real.


Speculation.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Im Back!!! and still convinced free will is an illusion ;) [Re: Phencyclidine]
    #2581818 -

Agreed :thumbup:
Schroedingers Cat was a thought experiment invented to show the ridiculousness of the standard (Copenhagen) interpretation of quantum theory. David Bohm and de Broglie, however, came up with a causal theory that explains the same experimental obsevations.

:headbang:Bohm shake the room! :headbang:


--------------------
There are no differences between men and gods,
one blends softly causal into the other.
-Frank Herbert, Dune.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Im Back!!! and still convinced free will is an illusion ;) [Re: The_Visionaire]
    #2585326 -

yes the cat experiment was just a thought experiment, but other experiments have been done that prove atleast as much as anything can be proved that the assumptions are correct. Like the two slits experiment, where a single wavelength of light is shined at two slits, thus producing a pattern similar to a bar code on a wall behind the slits, even when a single photon of light is passed thru the slits the same patter of interferance appears which means that the single photon passed thru both slits at the same time, now if you were to put cameras at each slit and do the experiment again, the cameras would only record the photon going thru one slit or the other, not both. so the way u observe changes the outcome of the experiment, creating one reality verses another in a sense. if u look at the wall then the photon went thru both slits at once and made the pattern if u look at the slits it goes thru one or the other and no patter on the wall shows up. it somehow knows that you are looking at it.

When u look at the wall the photon is in a state of quantum superposition as it passes thru the slots, allowing it for lack of a better description to be in two places at once, but when u look at the slits the wave function is collapsed at that point and it only goes thru one or the other, not both. Also it works the same way with matter, as it does with energy. So it seems that everything exist everywhere and at all times, in virtual sense, till its observed, collapsing the wave funtion and making one of the virtual possibilies real, or real to us that is. But if mathmatically the virtual is just as real, as what we call the real, then is there some ultimate observer that keeps things real even when we arent looking? Its even been suggested that the entire universe existed in a state of superposition until a consious entity made the first observation and made it real. But does it stay real when it isnt observed? has the whole universe been made real, or just the parts that were observed? And again what happens to all the virtual but equally real possibilities that weren't observed. Do the occure in other universes, or remain virtual, or are they just gone?

One of the more disturbing implications of quantum theory is that if you arent looking then you cant have any idea what is happening. And then when u do look, whatever does happen is atleast in part a result of how, or when you looked. The math says the virtual possibilities are as real as the real observed outcomes, but for us only the one observed is considered real, and no one is sure what really happens to the other virtual ones.

As far as actually creating particles by looking for them, that is speculation, but the experiments back up the conclusion, though that may not actually be how things are, it does fit with the observations.
If this is what actually is happening, then that basically might mean that we actually create reality by observing reality, and how, and where and when we look effects the outcome thus shaping the reality. Now what is unsure is what happens to all those other potential realities, are they realized in another universe, or do the remain virtual, yet now less real, except for the fact that they arent observed, we just arent sure. damn repeated myself ;(

The standard copenhagen interpretation has not been discredited, though alternate possibilities have been put forward or improvements made. The problem is that most of them build on the copenhagen interpretation or include it, or they basically make the same predictions, they just go about it in a different way. So we are left with several possible explanations that all basically predict the same or similar things and they are still trying to test them, or find ways to test some that are difficult to test. There is no definative word on exactly what theory is best, or right, or even if any of them are. We have several alternatives to the copenhagen... superstring, supersymetry, multiverse, holographic, and even more variations on those, actually some of those may be aspects of some of the other ones and not seperate theories, i cant remember right off hand.

Personally i think all possible paths are realized in some kind of multiverse, or that in reality all of them coexist here, are all equally real, and are just aspects of some ultimate reality that we can barely scratch the surface of. Because we cannot percieve the system as a whole, because we are just one aspect of that system and within it, we can only percieve so much of it at once. So to us there appears to be a flow of time, motion, an unfolding of events that follows 1 path out of all the possible paths. But in reality thats an illusion or at best part of the truth but not the whole truth, and that in fact everything is just an aspect of one ultimate thing, and that thing just IS and that thing is all there IS.

There is no actual unfolding of anything, its just that our limited perception only allows us to experience a limited portion, or aspect of the whole at any given moment, thus giving us a very distorted or imcomplete experience of reality. Basically i envision reality as probably being like one giant ocean, and we and everything we experience are just waves or currents in/on that ocean, but its all still just ocean, and ocean is all there is. Within the system u see the waves and currents. They come and they go, or they change or blend together or seperate, but if you could escape the system and look down from far enough away all you would see is ocean, the waves and currents wouldnt even be visable, just ocean, but even if they were visable, waves and currents are not seperate from the ocean, they are aspects of the ocean, but its all still ocean. But u cant escape and look down, because there is nowhere to go, the ocean is everywhere and the ocean is all there is. Its the only thing that is, or its nothing and nothing is all there is, really the two are equal. What is the difference between nothing and something if there is only nothingness and no something...or if there is only something and no nothingness. Whatever u call it, either way... it just is, and it is all there is.

Some good books are The search for shrodingers cat, brief history of time, tao of physics, the mind of god by paul davies, lots more good ones too.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Im Back!!! and still convinced free will is an illusion ;) [Re: ZenGecko]
    #2586055 -

You give a good account of the common problems related to the interpretation of QM.

You are right that the standard Copenhagen interpretation has not been discredited, but as Bohr pointed out; QM is just a computational procedure that is to yield predictions, it is not supposed to say anything about the fundamental nature of reality.

This he said because it seemed like QM had reached rock bottom and there were no ways to penetrate the unspeakable realm beyond it. This is the positivistic/empiristic approach; what cannot be measured can not be spoken of, or what is not measured does not exist.

The trouble with standard QM is that the matematics used to describe it (linear operators in Hilbert-space) is not fit to penetrate the deeper level. Instead of assuming such a level, and let this level explain the behaviour of our observations, standard QM postulates that there is a fundamental randomness in nature beyond the limits of the observable. This assumption was strongly opposed by Einstein; "God does not throw dice!", he said.

David Bohm's theory, first known as hidden variable theory, but now commonly refered to as the ontological interpretation of QM, makes no such assumption.

It will be too lengthy to go into the details of this, but in his formulation of QM, the causal chain of events is maintained. The new thing about QM as opposed to classical theory is that in addition to the classical equations of motion, you will now get a quantum potential. This quantum potential can be ignored when dealing with crude matter, but on particle level it will have strong effects. The quantum potential explains perfectly well the behaviour of particles in the double slit experiment and indeed all other observed QM effects.

The Q potential is also non-local, that is, its effect is instant over all space-time, thereby trancending space time. This explains also the EPR case of entangled paricles. The quantum potential thereby points to the unbroken wholeness of the universe.

The important difference between Bohm and Copenhagen is that instead of making an uncrossable border between quantum reality and the measured world, Bohm takes theory to more subtle orders instead.

Measuring devices are crude apparatus. Do you think they are fit to define the borders of the unspeakable? Then I take the human mind to be a much more penetrating measuring device, because it penetrates much subtler orders, we ARE after all the universe! :laugh: Sometime in the future, physics will have to deal with this.

The theories you mention as alternatives to the Copenhagen interpretation are not really alternatives but elaborations and extensions of standard QM. The interpretational issues at the basic level still remains. Bohm never saw his theory as a complete truth and there exists many different versions of his theory too, including multiverse theories.


As for the ocean analogy, I think the ocean unfolds the patterns and the patterns is enfolded back into the sea, and that this process is the primary pulse of creation, Brahman and Athman. But as they say, Brahman is Athman and Athman is Brahman. :sun:

As for the somethingness contra nothingness i completely agree with you :thumbup:


--------------------
There are no differences between men and gods,
one blends softly causal into the other.
-Frank Herbert, Dune.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Im Back!!! and still convinced free will is an illusion ;) [Re: The_Visionaire]
    #2590115 -

The only thing i would take issue with in that post, is that qm doesnt have anything to say about the fundamental nature of reality.

The macro is built on the quantum, however subtle qm effects might be they do exert an influence on the state of the macro. Nearly everything on the macro scale is formed from things on the qm scale. Without the qm effects, the macro and its effects wouldnt be possible. And also experiments are pushing the boundary at which qm effects intrude into what was once considered strictly the realm of the macro. Now there may be an even more fundamental layer below qm, and it may be that what appears to be randomn reallys isnt, in fact the more i think about randomness the more it seems to really be nonsense. Im beginning to think that the causal chain is just so complex that it creates what appears to be randomness, but really isnt. That there has to be some underlying order below the qm. I guess i believe it exists in the sense that the outcomes can be unpredictable to us, since we are one aspect of the system effecting another aspect, but if you could somehow step outside the system, i think you would see that everything is unfolding in some deterministic way. If there is an unfolding at all, and that isnt just some perceptual illusion generated as result of our incomplete experience of reality not only on the whole, but even in any given moment, if moments are even real. And then there is the holographic notion that this is all all just 1's and 0's or the equivelent, there is no physical in a true sense just information. Then u gotta wonder if this reality is true reality or just a simulated reality and that somewhere out there, there is a seperate and true physical reality, or is it 1's and 0's all they way, no matter how many realities within realities there may be.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Im Back!!! and still convinced free will is an illusion ;) [Re: ZenGecko]
    #2593526 -

"Im beginning to think that the causal chain is just so complex that it creates what appears to be randomness, but really isnt. That there has to be some underlying order below the qm."

Science, or QM, or pattern study can never figure out the random chaos of nature. There is no machine yet to perfectly mimick something 'natural' . There is no pattern to the snowflakes , or the rate black holes are expanding.


"there is no physical in a true sense just information. Then u gotta wonder if this reality is true reality or just a simulated reality and that somewhere out there, there is a seperate and true physical reality, or is it 1's and 0's all they way, no matter how many realities within realities there may be"

I do not think it is as complicated as you make it seem. There is the reality we are in, and that one is a pysical, time driven earthly existence. There are also existences of eternity on other levels. I do not think this Universe is all a stimulation of my mind, because it existed loooong before the first human walked the earth to contemplate 'his' existence and questions such as these...

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Im Back!!! and still convinced free will is an illusion ;) [Re: 2Experimental]
    #2595462 -

>There is no pattern to the snowflakes
-Actually, all snow flakes have 6 sides and form a fractal pattern that is geometrically expressable.\

>I do not think this Universe is all a stimulation of my mind, because it existed loooong before the first human walked the earth to contemplate 'his' existence and questions such as these...
-The Universe is not dependent of us observing it. If it exists in actuality then we are able to observe it (directly or indirectly)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Im Back!!! and still convinced free will is an illusion ;) [Re: ZenGecko]
    #2813176 -

this thread can never die :wink:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Im Back!!! and still convinced free will is an illusion ;) [Re: ZenGecko]
    #2814096 -

ZenGecko said:
this thread can never die :wink:


Atleast if you wont let it.

You are excercising free will. It will inevitably disappear and be buried like all those other posts. But right now, you choose for it not to suffer that fate.


--------------------
As the life of a candle,
my wick will burn out.
But, the fire of my mind
shall beam into infinite.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Im Back!!! and still convinced free will is an illusion ;) [Re: psyka]
    #2814185 -

Or, on account on the reactions occurring in his brain based off of genetic structure as well as past events (cause and effect), his "will" to "choose" to not let this thread die was created. You example is not necessarily one of free will, as even quoting it was the result of previous neurological causes, as is this respones of mine.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Im Back!!! and still convinced free will is an illusion ;) [Re: deff]
    #2814259 -

Quote:
deff said:
Or, on account on the reactions occurring in his brain based off of genetic structure as well as past events (cause and effect), his "will" to "choose" to not let this thread die was created. You example is not necessarily one of free will, as even quoting it was the result of previous neurological causes, as is this respones of mine.



OH NOOO! I'VE BEEN LIVING A LIE!

*kills self*

BTW, I'd like for you to argue with me in that suicide is not an excertion of free will (although, not a very smart one). Unless of course past expirences, previous neurological causes and/or genetic structures indicate that is the next logical step one must take in their life.


--------------------
As the life of a candle,
my wick will burn out.
But, the fire of my mind
shall beam into infinite.

Edited by psyka (06/21/04 02:28 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Im Back!!! and still convinced free will is an illusion ;) [Re: psyka]
    #2814378 -

Past experiences have resulted in the individual's view on life to be negative. This can be accerlated by genetic conditions such as neurochemical irregularities, which are the result of incorporating/combining the genetics from both "gene donor" parents. For example, a person is depressed based on a known neurological disorder, such as bi-polar. This was the result of the combination of genes from their father's sperm cell and mother's ovum, which were combined based on the result of them deciding to have sex at that very specific millisecond, and in those very specific conditions, as otherwise a different sperm cell could be assigned which would create a different genetic make-up. Now, this person one day is walking outside feeling depressed, when a group of people approach him, start pushing him around, mug him, whatever the case may be. This incident is the result of both parties deciding to be outside, in that location, at that moment in time, whcih itself is based off of previous causes, such as the cancellation of an appointment. Now this act towards this person "pushes them over the edge", and the thought of suicide arises. Based off of past depression and experience, the person's brain decides that it calculates, sends the signal to the muscle of the person's trigger finger, and BAM - they die. Free will is overrated.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Im Back!!! and still convinced free will is an illusion ;) [Re: deff]
    #2814557 -

I was bipolar, chronically depressed so I know what that hole feels like. I was supposed to take my zoloft prescription but I didnt because I actually enjoyed the sadness that I harbored (for creative purposes - it helped me write music). I wasnt depressed out of self pity or want for attention...it was just there and I couldnt escape the negative point of views in life.

On a very intense mushroom trip (my 2nd one to be exact; the first was different because I was in the presence of others) I was pushed over the edge and got a glimpse of what I could see in my future. On one hand I had the very real possibility of taking my own life, on the other I could change my perception of thought. At that moment I made my DECISION (my excertion of free will) and here I am before you today eager to expirence and eager to see what the future will hold. Its like I completely let go of these mediocre problems and worries (but in a responsible compassionate way, mind you) and it truly feels like I am blossoming into what I should become.

I think within that decision I excercised free will. And I know its hard to reply to personal stories so I'll break it down in to where I think free will exists in this story.

On the one hand you have life, on the other you have death. Instinct and everything your body was made to do pushes you towards the direction of self-preservation (most depression victims suffer suicidal thoughts but not very many act on these thoughts). Choosing to take your life is EXTREMELY irresponsible as your life means so much and not just to yourself, but to me it is the ultimate "fuck you," so-to-speak. Our oppressors use the image of death to push control on us, but on a personal level when one CHOOSES to take his life out of CHOICE (Buddhist monks during Vietnam*) reflects everything that NEEDS to be changed in society.

Peace :smile:

* also worth mentioning is these monks CHOSE to stay in Lotus position despite their bodies being engorged in flames.


--------------------
As the life of a candle,
my wick will burn out.
But, the fire of my mind
shall beam into infinite.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Im Back!!! and still convinced free will is an illusion ;) [Re: ZenGecko]
    #2814578 -

There seems to be much confusion between "observing" and "measuring" as the two terms are being used interchangably.

It is the act of measuring that changes something, not mere observing. If I stick a thermometer which is 72F, into water that is 38F, the thermometer will slighty warm the temperature of the water. The change will be dependent on the volume of water, the surface area, mass, index of heat transference, etc. properties of the thermometer. If the mass of water being measured is large enough the change will be negligable. If the mass of water is only a few molecules, the change will be rapid and radical.

However, the mere opening and closing of my eyes to read the thermometer or look at the water will have ZERO affect on the water temperature whether it is an ocean or a single molecule.


--------------------



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Im Back!!! and still convinced free will is an illusion ;) [Re: Swami]
    #2819961 -

Deff has it right.
its really quite simple... you dont pick the environment your born into, you dont pick the genetics your born with. Environment has been proven to actually effect the ways some genes are expressed, nutrition even plays a role. the combination of environment and genetics mold the person you are, they CAUSE you to be you, thus everything you do is just an effect of the initial causes that made you who you are. Choices dont exist, just the illusion of choice, same for freedom, atleast freedom of will. If something doesnt cause you to do something, yet you still perform an action/make a "choice" then it is a randomn or spontanious action. You can initiate a random event such as a coin toss but you cant control the out come, you cant even be sure once you decide to toss the coin that you actually will get to,(something might prevent you from exercising your "free" will) you might have an anurism and die just before. You cannot will the outcome of a random event and the initiation of the event is an effect of all the prior events leading to it, not just the events of your life, but of every life, and every thing, from the begining of time till that moment. If the action is spontaneous, well u just CAN'T decide to be spontaneous, or it isnt spontaneous at all, so again no will, no volition. Now if something isnt randomn, isnt spontaneous, and has no cause...how the fuck did it happen? and how did you conciously will it to occur? you willing something to occur is the cause, and something prior to that moment caused you to will it. So each cause has an effect, and each effect is itself a cause and so on and on and on.

So for free will to be real, we need something that allows us to perform a non randomn, non spontaneous event that has no cause. And if we really have true freewill then we should be able to predict the outcome and every effect that outcome will have for all time, or else our will isnt really done. If i perform an action, and the immediate outcome is as expected then ok, but what if that same action set into motion a chain of events that kills someone, maybe even myself sometime in the future. I didnt will that person to die or for me to die, infact i would most likely not want that to happen, but i have no idea that it is even going to occur, so not much i can do. I may have caused this future event but i did so with no conscience will. If i had true free will i would make sure i only willed good things to occur, and only good things to occure because of those things for all time, but i cant do that. I dont have that kind of control...i dont have any control. At best im aware of whats happening, and what im doing, but i'm always going to do what i must do, given all the prior circumstances including environment and genetics and every quantum event, any event period leading up to that moment.. if what i do is not caused by those things then its randomn, or spontaneous, neither of which i can exert my will over. Actually randomness wouldnt apply here unless it is a fundamental aspect of the nature of reality, but either way.. no way for me to exercise my will.

So again for freewill we need the ability to make a "choice" that is not randomn, not spontaneous and has NO CAUSE, yet still be able to perform the action of "choice" without ourselves being the cause, because as we've established all we are is the culmination of every event that came before any given moment, so whatever we do is an effect of the causes that caused us to be us :wink: We need a mechanism, a conception...something to allow free will....and the only thing that i can think of to call this mystical thingy is "MAGIC"  In my entire life i have never seen an event without a cause, or that wasnt randomn or spontaneous, ive never seen a MAGIC event. So without proof of the existance of MAGIC there is no basis to conclude we could possibly have free will. In fact most if not  all evidence says we dont. What we do have is the ability, to ignore rationality, logic and all reason, and believe in something we have no reason to believe in, other then thats the way we want things to be. The catch is...that desire is simply another effect of all the prior causes leading to the moment that desire manifests itself. So if you believe in free will at this moment, or even if you dont... You cant help but to believe it...your caused to believe it..u have no control, no free will not to believe it in that moment. Circumstances may change and thus your beliefs may change, because you are no longer the person that you were. All you really have is uncertainy, but no control over if you believe that or not, can get comfortable with it or not.

So we need MAGIC, but how can we get it? what is it made of? where does it come from? and if it is real, how can we ever really be sure of that, or if we actually have it?

If you invoke God here, then god caused magic, and magic caused free will and free will caused all those non randomn, non spontaneous events that have no actual cause. what the fuck? that makes no sense.... Hell maybe thats how it is...but i've got no reason to believe that.

Oh and swami isnt the two slits experiment evidence that the mere act of observation can cause something to occur, since by looking at the slits, one electron/photon whatever goes thru just one slit, but if you dont look at the slits just the back wall, then it goes thru both causing the pattern of interference which wont occur when looking at the slits?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Im Back!!! and still convinced free will is an illusion ;) [Re: ZenGecko]
    #2821665 -

Free will versus determinism, (or in Christian theology, Predestination) is a paradox that has been debated for centuries. It really matters not what you or I think about which 'mechanism' functions primarily in the universe, since an opinion is more reflective of the psychology of the thinker than of the true workings of things. We can describe things deterministically, and we can just as well illustrate free will - our 'existential' ability to choose over and against our determined animal natures. One can vacillate forever, saying that it was predetermined that I would make a certain choice, thereby rendering my free will as 'relatively' free will.

Certain streams of theological thought taken from the Bible lend support to free will, another stream to predestination. John Wesley's Methodism hailed free will as having primacy, while John Calvin's predestination formed the basis of Presbyterianism. Not to give a dissertation on church history, but these guys are historical exemplars of both theological perspectives, and theology has had more to say about this debate than philosophy has. Whether or not you ascribe to a theological belief in God doesn't even matter at this point because you are still discussing metaphysics, and metaphysics as a branch of philosophy asks "what is Reality?'' The theological answer is that Reality - Ultimate Reality - is called God. Also, God can be said to be 'with attributes' and 'without attributes,' and still remain as the 'Absolute Cause' (to use the pre-Christian Aristotle's term for God - Aristotle did write a book called 'Metaphysics' after all).

A suggestion that I have is to categorically separate the metaphysics that can be attributed to the Absolute Cause Itself, which is unknown, from the metaphysics in which we as humans participate. There is a difference because we are not merely self-conscious 'nodes' in the fabric of space-time - we are human beings who derive our individual existence from the Ground of Being. It does not help to speculate on the inner life of God which known only to God (even though Patristic theology does this speculation routinely).

Our 'freedom' is not defined by our ability/lack of ability to transcend physical laws. Our human freedom is primarily defined by moral freedom, and that in turn determines the thoughts we entertain and acts we do. Before you minimalize or dismiss the moral imperative as a measure of human freedom, consider this: when a red-blooded American man can tell a beautiful busty blond stripper who moved in with girlfriends next door to put her top back on before he comes over to fix their pool filter, because it would hurt his wife's feelings, THAT is an exercise of freedom, of compassionate detchment, of free will. Later.


--------------------
γνῶθι σαὐτόν - Gnothi Seauton - Know Thyself

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Im Back!!! and still convinced free will is an illusion [Re: MarkostheGnostic]
    #2821818 -

You are on a raft on the river. The river is fate. You can walk around on the raft...that is your free will.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Im Back!!! and still convinced free will is an illusion ;) [Re: MarkostheGnostic]
    #2823245 -

"So again for freewill we need the ability to make a "choice" that is not randomn, not spontaneous and has NO CAUSE, yet still be able to perform the action of "choice" without ourselves being the cause, because as we've established all we are is the culmination of every event that came before any given moment, so whatever we do is an effect of the causes that caused us to be us "

I dont understand how people just ignore this fact.
all that stuff you said mark did not address this arguement.

You said "A suggestion that I have is to categorically separate the metaphysics that can be attributed to the Absolute Cause Itself, which is unknown, from the metaphysics in which we as humans participate. There is a difference because we are not merely self-conscious 'nodes' in the fabric of space-time - we are human beings who derive our individual existence from the Ground of Being."

How do u know this? and what is "ground of being"?

You also said... "Our 'freedom' is not defined by our ability/lack of ability to transcend physical laws. Our human freedom is primarily defined by moral freedom, and that in turn determines the thoughts we entertain and acts we do. Before you minimalize or dismiss the moral imperative as a measure of human freedom, consider this: when a red-blooded American man can tell a beautiful busty blond stripper who moved in with girlfriends next door to put her top back on before he comes over to fix their pool filter, because it would hurt his wife's feelings, THAT is an exercise of freedom, of compassionate detchment, of free will. Later."

Where is your proof? "Our 'freedom' is not defined by our ability/lack of ability to transcend physical laws" i would say that is exactly what our freedom, if we have in is defined by. Every thought i generate and every act i perform has a cause, so i was caused to think something or caused to perform a particular act. I must somehow transend the physical laws of nature to be able to do these things with out cause, yet still not be randomn or spontaneous, because if they are either of those, then i cant exercise my will over them. And if there is a cause, then i was caused...i had to think or do it.

Nobody on this board or in real life has been able to address my core arguements and provide a logically consistant counter proof. All their ramblings and philosophy simply amount to basically saying "Nah thats just not how it is...cant prove it, and i dont know how it really is, but your definately wrong!" or they will put forth a theory of how it really is offering little if any evidence and based on little if any logic, and their theory doesnt explain why mine must be incorrect.
Most of the arguements take the form of look 2+2=5...this is obviously correct because look, "5" is what i wrote down, thats what i think it is so that must be how it is, your answer of 4 is obviously wrong because as you can clearly see i have written down 5!" Its insain, but they dress it up and it almost sounds coherent...but it isnt, and it doesnt provide a proof againts my own arguements.
Some claim that free will isnt logical, but it does exist, strange that the universe and events there in..can so accurately be described by Math, which is pure logic, yet humans seeminly have this special status of not being subject to the processes that govern every single other thing around them, and are allowed to have free will. Ofcourse no one can put forth a mechanism that allows this to occur short of invoking something akin to Magic. They cant explain how it works, what its made of, or how we got it, or especially how they are sure its real, and not just some delusion...but to them atleast the arguement for free will is that they "SEEM" to have it...so they must have it" that whole look 2+2=5 crap again, since 5 is clearly what they wrote, and clearly what they see it must be correct, even if there is no evidence or logic to support that answer.

Randomness isnt freewill, spontanity isnt free will, cant exert your will over either. And if your action is caused by something, then it isnt willed freely...it was Caused, its just an effect of that cause. If its none of these things, in effect a non randomn non spontaneous non caused event...how the hell does it occur short of invoking magic? How does it manage to exist exempt from the laws of nature, yet manifests itself in us a physical being that should be just as subject to those laws as the computer and desk im typing this on right now?

Sincerely,
That which is, and has no choice but to be

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Im Back!!! and still convinced free will is an illusion ;) [Re: ZenGecko]
    #2823421 -

ZenGecko writes:

Nobody on this board or in real life has been able to address my core arguements and provide a logically consistant counter proof.

Incorrect. The fact that you choose not to accept the validity of the arguments does not invalidate them.

You go on and on about "logic", always forgetting that logic is not reality, logic is a set of mental mathematical operations performed on observations about reality. Logic doesn't exist in a vacuum.

Your position is in essence that if I toss a rock into your lap, I have not demonstrated "logically" the existence of that rock. That rock may just be an illusion that we both (volitionally) agree to deem an existant. You dismiss out of hand the necessity of ostensive argument, yet at the same time build up straw man arguments totally dependent on the behavior of particles that cannot logically be proven to exist -- their existence can only be apprehended ostensively. Some would call this flaw in your argument hypocrisy, others would use the kinder term "inconsistency".

You can't have it both ways, Gecko.

pinky


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 |  [ show all ]

Shop: Sporeworks.EU Spores for European Microscopy   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Myyco.com Golden Teacher Liquid Culture For Sale   North Spore North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies

General Interest > Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Free will is bullshit.
( 1 2 3 4 ... 19 20 )		 Phluck 36,403 380 01/16/07 04:57 PM
by Brugman
* A Sound Argument for Free Will shroomydan 3,001 17 10/11/04 08:21 PM
by deff
* free will and insanity
( 1 2 3 all )		 NiamhNyx 5,891 51 02/02/04 07:52 AM
by kaiowas
* fate - free will : paradox
( 1 2 3 all )		 11polakie11 6,141 42 05/15/03 01:34 AM
by Sclorch
* Reality and illusions and so forth... Sclorch 2,808 15 06/24/02 12:32 PM
by Sclorch
* materialism, determinism, and free will revisited Anonymous 923 4 09/27/04 08:35 PM
by deff
* Big Questions (comments on free will)
( 1 2 3 all )		 Attackgecko 5,221 49 04/22/07 10:23 PM
by Phred
* What is free will?
( 1 2 all )		 silversoul7 3,265 30 10/23/04 06:35 AM
by fireworks_god

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Middleman, DividedQuantum
17,405 topic views. 0 members, 12 guests and 7 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2026 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.026 seconds spending 0.007 seconds on 17 queries.