Free Will vs. Determinism - Page 2 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

For the discussion of Philosophy. Discuss thought from Socrates to the Enlightenment and beyond!

Moderator: PoFo Agora Mods

Forum rules: No one line posts please. Religious topics may be debated in this forum, but those of religious belief who specifically wish to avoid threads being derailed by atheist arguments might prefer to use the Spirituality forum.
#13865360
Understanding my functional instincts to live a sole existence as one lifetime extending the life of the human population one generation passing through this eternally changing total sums moment's details conceived exactly as it balances out here, now.

Actions function without thought. Trying to fool oneself to think they are greater than the species it belongs to is just a fool's perception that character matters.
#13865380
onemalehuman wrote:Trying to fool oneself to think they are greater than the species it belongs to is just a fool's perception that character matters.


That was very prolific. I have noticed something - your summary is coherent in many cases - it is what becomes before that is not. Maybe you could just form your idea and then skip to the summary?................ ;)
#13865394
Image,

Image,

Image,

Image.

Image

Imploding reality of space time back into the sole moment of eternity's results so far universally speaking back within the grey matter behind the eyes and between the ears of each sole existence of the human species that is part of everything balancing now naturally without relaity's interpretations of maybe not.

Ever hear of 6 degrees of separation while governing 8 corners of triangulating three sides against the middle playing all 6 halves the same way politically, spiritually, and economically defined separately within the same instant changes going on currently?

It is called forming a reality of the real moment's results here now.

or Capitalizing off orchestrated chaos.
#13865416
or Capitalizing off orchestrated chaos.


Well, Well....Now we have something we can talk about..... ;) Because I have many theories about this OMH. Remember what I said though - offer a good summary - we can read between the lines better than what you may think.

Barbarian Philosophy 101

Lesson 1.

An intellect needs to feed; once it has mastered our natural world, all that is left to temper the intellect is chaos. Chaos has a beginning, but it does not have an end-the perfect realm for the insane.

Lesson 2.

Human eugenic practices where a superior intellect is the result, will enslave its victim and society in chaos. It upsets the balance of nature, an appendix that was never needed or required of our natural world. Like over-fertilizing a plant, society will grow fast, but its roots will remain shallow; its base will be brittle and weak, never allowed to slowly weather.

Lesson 3.

The natural world offers sane and only requires sane for the human species to dwell successfully within. Anything far above or far below natural world norm is abnormal or quite possibly-to include insane.

Lesson 4.

The human species due to the process of evolution, is prone to apply self-deception by ignoring or rationalizing negative information about themselves and their in-group.

Lesson 5.

The weak will never willingly empower the strong, for that would compromise thier position.

Lesson 6.

Freedom-The promise, of an intellectual being given the ability to apply as truism all that evolution and genetics has blessed him or her with.
#13865492
Which evolution, genetic or vernacular? Genetics never leaves the moment while vernacular only survives it's believed syllables in governance of now's results.
#13867279
Fascinating topic.

re:Voltairine de Cleyre

He says: Our ancestors had one idea about what we are and moderns have another, and they're both sort of stupid. Of course, it depends on the condition these ideas reach us and how interested we are. But this is a common habit of intellectuals: to say every suggestion pretends to be the ultimate answer.

I like the way he says it

Treated as a narrative problem I would in principle state all the relevant options and if they contradicted I would suggest that my mind is probably too limited to figure it out exactly. We have ideas. Ideas are tools. A shovel isn't a pitch-fork, but they both have their uses. In law people need to be held accountable, even if it's rather tragic, but there are limits to what anyone can expect. I'm reminded of the scene in Gladiator:

Maximus: You don't find it hard to do your duty?
Cicero: Sometimes I do what I want to do. The rest of the time, I do what I have to.

It isn't Free Will vs. Determinism its Free Will and Determinism and whatever else you've got; fate, justice, virtue, spirit-possessions, holism and chaos. But we're just talking about ideas based on a question about causation though and I have my own line too. Which brings me to Stranger's comment, "I'm with Schopenhauer here, so no free will." That's not my understanding of Shopenhauer's ideas on the matter. As far as I recall he would agree with this:

Everything has a will and the will's potency in the world is its form.

Daktoria wrote:(prisoner's dilemma etc etc)...determinists are making an excuse for their own bad behavior...
A dialect wouldn't be fully functional if it didn't accommodate a tendency to rationalize. The capacity to rationalize has its limits too - regardless if its, "My genes made me do it" or "My sinful nature made me do it" - - people have deeper intuitions and the world has a greater variety of ways of expressing justice than what our calculating minds can grasp.


TCR wrote:The discovery that choices are made before we're even aware of them acts in favour of the determinist argument. However, even if we don't have free will in the sense of the mind/body duality, we still experience the effects of existing - the debate is (in my opinion) quite inconsequential with respect to ethics.
I don't know which discovery you refer to but I don't think that's always the case, it can be the case. It needn't pass through the deliberating part of my brain - what I am - - fate doesn't have mass or location. I think that's what this means.

omh wrote:Actions function without thought.


I think probably it depends on what we're talking about and what we hope to achieve by our talking - whether will or fate is the more useful paradigm. If you want a more technical assessment of the nature of things at that level I would suggest that it seems like as a person grows up and as a people progress they become aware of more and this gives their will greater leverage. That determinism and will are just words for the world and the self. That there are natural limits to will (as I said above, because there are many wills), and expanding these limits is essentially heroic and spirited - fun things while they last but generally dangerous as a matter of setting an example. Every cow has its fence, its easier to be the right size for one's field than it is to assimilate the neighbor's lands, but the latter makes better theater.
#13867340
CounterChaos wrote: That was very prolific.


:lol: Why do I do this shit all the time? Why does my brain think profound but I write prolific :?: This happens all the time to me - is there some kind of syndrome that I don't know about that causes this?
#13867531
CounterChaos wrote::lol: Why do I do this shit all the time? Why does my brain think profound but I write prolific :?: This happens all the time to me - is there some kind of syndrome that I don't know about that causes this?


Freudian slip?
#13868072
Sceptic wrote:Freudian slip?


I don't think so - I'm more in the alternative category I think.


Alternative explanations of "slips of the tongue"

In contrast to Freud and his followers, cognitive psychologists claim that linguistic slips can represent a sequencing conflict in grammar production. From this perspective, slips may be due to cognitive underspecification that can take a variety of forms – inattention, incomplete sense data or insufficient knowledge. Secondly, they may be due to the existence of some locally appropriate response pattern that is strongly primed by its prior usage, recent activation or emotional change or by the situation calling conditions.[2]

Some sentences are just susceptible to the process of banalisation: the replacement of archaic or unusual expressions with forms that are in more common use. In other words, the errors were due to strong habit substitution.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freudian_slip

Edit: Oh crap - I see now why - I'm an Aspie and it is just another part of it I guess.
#13876952
Suska wrote:Maximus: You don't find it hard to do your duty?
Cicero: Sometimes I do what I want to do. The rest of the time, I do what I have to.

It isn't Free Will vs. Determinism its Free Will and Determinism and whatever else you've got; fate, justice, virtue, spirit-possessions, holism and chaos. But we're just talking about ideas based on a question about causation though and I have my own line too. Which brings me to Stranger's comment, "I'm with Schopenhauer here, so no free will." That's not my understanding of Shopenhauer's ideas on the matter.


If you use another frame of reference the discussion changes, of course. We can talk about what people want to or have to do (against their personal will) in a society, but I was talking about the very basic issue, not actions in the context of a group of people.

I could agree if you said: "It's subjective experienced Free Will and Determinism". How could both of them coexist? What bothers me most is the use of the term 'free will' without any definition. I cannot grasp the concept of acting without cause, since the only other option would be randomness, which doesn't sound very free at all.
#13876966
It's a question of how people perceive themselves. If they see themselves as an agent of change and someone who is capable of determining the future, then they will act accordingly. If they see themselves as being buffeted around by forces beyond their control, they will also act accordingly. However even if we appreciate our individual agency, we also understand that there are forces in existence that are beyond our direct control at this moment. The movement of the planets, the Earth's tectonic activity, etc. Things that are determined by natural processes. We are a product of those natural processes, but we have the ability to observe, reflect, decide, contemplate, etc. Whether or not our paths before us are truly determined is irrelevant ultimately because I think if we hope to be productive and happy human beings, we must BELIEVE in our free will and our ability to progress, change, and determine the future as opposed to being determined by the past.
Last edited by grassroots1 on 19 Jan 2012 23:30, edited 1 time in total.
#13876993
grassroots1 wrote:Things that are determined by natural processes that don't "act." We are a product of those natural processes, but we have the ability to observe, reflect, decide, contemplate, etc.


But we are still part of these natural processes and in no way independent. 'We' are far more complex than most of the stuff going on the universe, up to the point where 'we' may have the illusion of independence, but that doesn't change the fact that 'we' are part of the physical universe and therefore bound to the laws of physics.

Whether or not our paths before us are truly determined is irrelevant ultimately because I think if we hope to be productive and happy human beings, we must BELIEVE in our free will and our ability to progress, change, and determine the future as opposed to being determined by the past.


I agree, this is what I also wanted to express in my very first post in the thread. It's dangerous to fully incorporate a deterministic point of view.
#13877011
grassroots1 wrote:Would you say it's possible that new things can simply originate in our minds? Is it possible that thoughts and actions do not have specific physical causes that follow certain laws?


Yes (more or less) and No.

I think it's certainly possible to develop absolutely new ideas, concepts and things in our minds. I mean 'new' in a way that the specific thing has not been thought of by any other person. However, that doesn't imply that the train of thought came out of nowhere, it is the combined experience of the individual which ultimately led to the idea.
What exactly do you have in mind if you talk about non-physical causes?
#13877025
It's kind of out there. We assume that things have a cause and effect because this is how we've seen it works on the macro level. The movement of stars, comets, and planets, our ability to make precise machinery, our ability to create a craft that can go into space and land on the moon, with all of the complex mathematics involved. This reinforces our faith in these seemingly inviolable natural laws. In this context things are predictable. But as everyone seems to know we're continuing to run into things on the micro level, in quantum mechanics, that can't be explained by those natural laws, and seem to violate them. The fact that a particle can seemingly be in two places at once, the idea that the very observation of these particles influences their state. Given that uncertainty, maybe we shouldn't so quickly jump to the conclusion that our electrochemical activity in our brains necessarily follows the pattern of direct, predictable cause and effect.
#13877043
Yes, I should probably mention that I don't think we will ever be able to understand the fundamental 'roots' of the very existence of.. well, anything. You can only objectively observe a system if you are NOT part of it, so it should be impossible. Why we experience ourselves and don't just 'be' as some kind of machine might be the one mystery we will never solve.
That being said, I remain agnostic and while looking at science and humanism I have trouble acknowledging anything outside the realm of causality, mainly because I just don't see the point, it could just be randomness, which is also what quantum theory could imply. Either way, I don't get the 'free' in 'free will'.
#13877230
Stranger wrote:. Either way, I don't get the 'free' in 'free will'.


Take the rule of 72 within economics that equates time and money formulating simple compounding interest.
Do you remember the penny a day and double the sum every day and one is a multi-millionaire within the month of February?

What physical function mirrors that projection, but only looking at it backwards, as forward is exponenetially inverted results from within the moment each lifetime existed or exists? Ancestry to the ancestor conceived by each specific compounding results so far here however randomly it appears to have taking place within eternity's results so far on this planet.

How many genders are their in any species for the purpose of adding lifetimes to this exponential adapt or become extinct that applies to each sole result as a lifetime conceived as a total sum existence within each plant, animal, predatory, prey, male and female lifetime that ever inhabited this planet compounding with self contained self maintaining flowing molecular elements to the periodic table of gaseous, liquid, and mineral indiividual characteristics forming everything working now as always?

See I agree with everything you said, so I just describe how it has always physically functioned where every body human states nobody can know philosophically.

How about instinctively? Gender liberty or character's rights because in societal evolution a gender doesn't matter. it is their social identity that counts in reality.
Last edited by onemalehuman on 20 Jan 2012 03:48, edited 3 times in total.
Russia-Ukraine War 2022

Yale course on Ukrainian history: https://www.yout[…]

He is still under checks and balances while other[…]

So the evidence shows that it was almost certainly[…]

Israel-Palestinian War 2023

The claim is a conditional statement. This is one[…]