When did you grow out of free will and adopt genetic determinism?
I went the opposite direction OP
>>76009927
Relatively recently actually. It honestly explains a lot. Some of Stefan Molyneux's videos actually steered me to believe in determinism despite the fact he believes in free will
>>76010021
cuck
The understanding that free will is an illusion will cause one of the greatest revolutions in human thought. It is amazing how few people understand it.
>>76009927
I believed in genetic determinism until I studied Biology.
>>76010021
>retrograding to a position with ever growing evidence against it
wew
>>76010268
how is that cuck
I accept that IQ and most traits are under genetic control (explaining nigger societies, etc etc) but I don't believe in strict full blown determinism in that every action we make is merely the result of strict causality
>>76010300
You have the free will to ride a tie-dyed skateboard to the nearest nail salon and ask for a Hulk Hogan schnitzelsandwich. Therefore, you must have some type of free will regardless of any philosophical or scientific circle-jerking about the nature of causality.
Determinism might be (mostly?) true scientifically, but it's a poisonous ideology. It's for people who don't want to take responsibility for their actions.
>>76010522
That's fatalism, which is different.
>>76010608
No, it shows how little you know about the subject. Everything we do can be traced to prior causes which took place before our inception.
>>76010411
Except the real evidence increasingly shows that your diet, social & economic environment, and even things like temperature have a massive, massive effect on the way your genes are expressed. It's a little subject called epigenetics
>>76010614
well then fuck fatalism and low-IQ savages wit shitty genetic profiles
>>76009927
Never. There's no reason to either.
>>76009927
Never. People can overcome base impulses.
>>76010948
Every activity we do is based on the pursuit of pleasure and avoidance of pain. This hardwiring cannot be circumvented in any conceivable way.
>>76010195
yeah, he is retarded in that regard. like most other people, he has no arguments to back up his claims about free will.
but if you try to debate him, he'll just say "not an argument" and hang up
>>76010793
So what? A middle schooler can grasp what causality is and what it implies. It requires a man to take real responsibility for his decisions.
>>76010392
This is why you don't go to a third tier state school.
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2016/06/theres-no-such-thing-as-free-will/480750/
>>76011019
Not true. You could surgically remove the parts of the brain that lead you to pursue pleasure and avoid pain.
>>76011107
Taking responsibility for ones actions may be useful for societal reasons, but from a scientific and philosophical vantage it is patently wrong.
>>76010608
>It's for people who don't want to take responsibility for their actions.
Realizing the mechanics behind something doesn't automatically invalidate that "something", especially if you're still stuck in the same plain of existence
It's like saying that knowing that pain is just chemical reactions in your brain makes you deadpool
>>76011184
Give me any example of that happening.
>>76011136
>B-but I bet you didn't go to Yale!
>Links an article from The Atlantic
You're trying really hard.
>>76011184
>You could surgically remove the parts of the brain that lead you to pursue pleasure and avoid pain.
only if you are predetermined (by gense + environment) to do so
>>76009927
I am proof that race mixing can be beneficial. I can control both my drinking and the intense desire to genocide.
>>76011284
And you're not trying at all.
>>76011355
You can do it for logical reasons or illogical reasons, but it would still be a conscious decision which alters the way you behave.
>>76011266
What's a thought experiment?
>>76011019
tell that to emos
>>76011355
>everything you do is determined, therefore everything you do is determined
Brilliant reasoning. Top logic.
You do not realize the vacuousness of the position?
>>76009927
Reminder that while free will does not exist, the universe is fundamentally indeterminate.
>>76011490
It would be impossible to remove the pleasure and pain responses without turning the individual into a zombie (and thus unable to make freely willed decisions)
>>76011587
>the universe is fundamentally indeterminate
What is your reasoning for this?
I'll do it eventually -- or maybe I won't.
I'll just wait and see what I do.
>>76010392
You were not paying any attention it seems, free will is an illusion because the variables behind decision making are very numerous but they are still limited at the end of the day.
>>76011758
How many potential locations and momenta does an individual electron have?
>>76011919
This is a baseless argument. Simply because we don't know the cause doesn't mean it wasn't caused.
>>76011919
Are you controlling the electron? No, therefore free will is still impossible.
>>76012276
You asked for a reason why the universe is fundamentally indeterminate. I gave you the biggest one.
>>76011731
Mainly from what we know about quantum mechanics. There are some qualities that particles exhibit that either cannot be measured precisely or that we simply cannot know. To imply that all things within the universe abide by a cause-effect relationship with each other is a very large leap of faith.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causal_loop
I don't understand why people think determinism is incompatible with free will anyway.
If we lived in a universe where a banana could peel itself without expending any energy, would that universe be one with greater free will? Why do you think that?
>>76009927
Compatibilism is the only rational belief. You have to understand that things are already determined by higher dimensions, not a god.
>>76012993
Some would argue that a deterministic universe is a requirement for free will to exist: There wouldn't be any meaning behind our actions if we couldn't guarantee the outcome of those actions.
>>76013128
>not a god
And you came to that "understanding" because...?
>>76013313
Agreed. That's the point I was trying to make. In a non-deterministic universe, our 'decisions' would be based on sheer randomness. If a human living in a hypothetical non-deterministic universe suddenly made the decision to lower his landing gear and prepare for rapid photosynthesis, is he more free or less free than us?
>>76011919
What does that have to do with anything? you dont control it, its another variable.
>>76012691
So there is also something like "indeterminism". Which allows some things to act randomly, but without much effect for a whole determined universe.
That is why everything actualy works in this universe and we can call it "an order". When I throw the ball at you, in normal circumstances it will hit you. Just that simple. Maybe simple particles can act randomly, but it does not have much effect for an universe. All big things are acting linear, detemined by every previous effect that had impact on them.
>>76009927
it's not 'genetic' determinism but universal. Everything goes moves according to laws of nature that humans understand as equations and 'general rules'. When you see a waterfall, if you had all of the variables you could calculate the precise location that each water molecule passing over would fall up until all of the water on Earth boils away. The only issue is that humans cannot, and will never be able to know all of the variables. Similarly if you stood above humanity you could parse all of human history if you had the unknown variables, everything from evolution to migration flows out of material circumstances shaped by the physical processes we understand through the laws of nature.
It's kind of a no shit idea to say that determinism is true, but since humans are human we will never even approach understanding of the God function so there is no reason to live any differently than if we believe free will to be true. Free will is an abstraction we use for consequential purposes, it helps us understand the world from our know-nothing perspective better.
>>76015215
Exactly how biblical prophecy operates aswell.. major events.. but minor events less so.
Like.. major event.. sun is going to do something, you might not be able to control.. this is a major event. Just an example not necessarily a real example but just a conceptual one.
>>76014523
Can't have a 1 dimensional line without a 2 dimensional plane, can't have a 2 dimensional line without a 3 dimensional plane. You can't have a 4th dimension (time/duration) without a higher dimension to contain those frames.
There are time frames of your entire life, birth to death running in synchronous existence in higher dimensions.
>>76015461
(cont) we are minor compared to the rest of the univese and or solar system is a miniscule part. so when other parts change.. we change aswell.. that's also involuntary.. how we adapt to these things is another matter.
>>76015561
You can assert that. Where does God disappear as a possibility, exactly?
>>76010948
/thread
Determinism is shit for weak people who complain on r9k all day. Free will is a fundamental of what it means to be human, the way God made us
>>76015609
(cont) also there's the determinator part of this, that some have the power to change this, those who direct the major events.. or can alter them.. might be called gods.. or god level interactions in what we think of that to be..
If you analyze yourself you will realize we are biological robots.. very advanced, not the tinker toys we create.. it's very possible that we have build in things that relay every expression and every thought to some kind of storage..
We are the most advanced robots that exist.. the biblical god is clearly considering us his children.. that they made us or had a role in making us.. But we are not tinker toys.. the level of intelligence to create something like us.. well just consider micro bacteria being more advanced than our most sophisticated robitic technology.. if they wanted to kill us.. we would barely even recognize it before it was over.. Clearly they have other motivations..
>>76015461
Not exacly.
But yet, IMO indeterminism is some kind of easy shortcut. Chaos theory sais that EVERY event has an impact for every other thing in the universe. Which would mean, that tiny little quantum bastards are messing all the order, and make everything pretty random. Well, still we don't have free will, but our future is just not detemined.
But I think there must be some other force and law which moves that quantum particles in determined fashion, and we are lacking with evidence for their determined movement. Now we see their randomness. I hope someday we will find the answer for that dilemma, and all things will be clear from then.
>>76016080
(cont) masters of technology.. biological technology.. very advanced compared to metal tinker toys.. Infiinately more advanced and capable of so many things.. or wasting it all aswell. And being mislead..
>>76009927
>stopping at genetics
>not being governed by the laws of the universe
It's like the entire world is playing catchup to what I figured out 10 years ago.
>>76016390
(cont) just consider for example something as simple as birds.. they are connected to earths magnetic fields and use it for navigation.. consider our insanely advanced cerebrum.. It's not even far fetched that there are such relay things in our brain that simply relay all choices all expressions all choices all thoughts into another place.. especially considering that 10.000 holy ones are going to come from the sky and judge us with jesus leading them.. all according to our deeds.. were they just wizzing about us cloaked with candid camera.. ofcourse not.. :)
>>76009927
When did you grow out of determinism and adopt both determinism and indeterminism?
>>76016744
(cont) far more likely that they would read you in some fashion.. like the palm of your hand. But in a more sophisticated way.. "next."..
>>76017350
Are you the guy with the default white pigmentation theory or do just all potato mouths type in this autist monologue tone?
>>76017598
it's me with the "autist default pigmentation theory." And i speak for myself only. But i accept your apology in advance. http://www.foxnews.com/science/2016/05/27/dna-from-ancient-phoenician-stuns-scientists.html
>>76015742
I just don't think a god can have direct influence over humanity and their actions and intentions.
>>76017070
99.9999% deterministic indeterminism, sure
>>76018032
Ya. . kinda like that..
>>76017976
One of the qualities of most theistic conception of God is that of omnipotence. I don't see how an omnipotent Creator would be incapable of doing *anything*.
>>76010804
Those things wouldn't imply that you have a choice in the matter.
>>76017976
If he wants to, but it's very clear that man is left to their own devices and it's all settled in the judgement.. go see matthew 13.. that way those who do bad can start to do good etc. instead of immediate judgement which would destroy most of them unjustly because it would destroy those who do bad and change for good aswell were it it to come right away..
You are a sequential biological robot.. with sentience.. you live in time in a sequence of events determined by actions.. conceptually god sees your entire line instantly and when you change something he see's it also instantly your future changed.. when you yourself only see your past and the next choice ahead of you.
>>76010804
>massive, massive effect
you're exaggerating here. The impact is actually so small it's still difficult to prove where they come in effect.
If you're a fat slob that isn't epigenetics.
True op. People who "refuse to act on their impulses" are only doing so because something in the environment or their own biology caused it.
If something happens outside of causality it doesn't exist.
>>76018150
omincient: check
omnipotnent: check
leads to contradictory logic: check
we need to embrace paradox. Afterall, who really was phone?
>>76009927
When 11
>>76018337
(cont) infact this is so clear that even the high priests of judah started worshipping the fallen guardian cherub (satan) saying god does no longer care god has abandoned this world because he didn't interfere on their behalf.. ezekiel 8-10
>>76018337
I'm not talking about God.
>>76018150
>One of the qualities of most theistic conception of God is that of omnipotence.
Irrelevant since this hypothetical god doesn't have any defined qualities. A god doesn't have to be a creator.
>>76018608
God precedes the world in which there would be logic, Mr. "private-languages-are-incoherent".
>>76018720
chicken and egg.. chicken and egg.. Inevitably regardless how far you extend it.. there is something permanent that maintains that which is impermanent.. Because nothing comes from nothing, or you wouldn't even exist, and if you don't exist then we go full nihilism.. so it's not a new thing this line of thought.
but your brain enabling you to think these things, and your beautiful mother and father didn't come simply from nothing..
>>76019017
Then where did god come from?
>>76018720
No, but you're trying to rule out God as a Creator. Or else you aren't, in which case you're not saying anything greater than you personal opinion when you say
>not a god
>>76012443
If there are three holes for the marble to fall in, and two are closed, the marble will always fall in the open one.
All of that even though the atom had infinite potential locations and momenta.
>>76019123
Where did He come from? I don't know. I'm trying to understand why I should reject God as a possibility.
>>76019017
>>76019043
>can't have a discussion about gods without Christfags exclusively talking about God and basing their arguments on God
>>76019126
I rule out God because I believe all human religions are inherently false and human conceived.
>>76019250
So you're not talking about God when you refer to gods? Is God special to you or what?
>>76019425
Why believe that?
>>76019123
He simply is.. I AM that's the declaration of eternal holy spirit.. the heavenly father within the universe acting on its will and the emmisary jesus christ son of god.. the right hand of god where the heavenly father is the "ARM".. extended into its own creation. (the universe). maintainers/shepherds etc.
If you didn't have something that is permanent you wouldn't even exist.. do all the mental gymnastics you require.. and take chicken and egg as far as you want you will always come to the same conflusion.. The only thing that resolves it is something permanent that precides over something that is impermanent.. and the universe is impermanent.. so it cannot be the eternal, even if it remodels itself and rebirths itself in new solar systems.. because doing so it would lose its basic mechanisms..
>>76019481
Because why should I trust them? Why would a human know how or what the universe what created from?
>>76010268
Is there anything more cucked than submitting to fate?
>>76009927
thats literally the dumbest excuse for being a cuck i have ever seen. either way you would be exercising free will. choose to be a cuck or choose not to be a cuck and only raise your own children
>>76019497
(cont) the only alternative to this is that the entire universe is an advanced simulation, but then again you've just simply extended chicken and egg yet again.. the only resolution for you even existing is that there's something undefined that is permament.. and aware. and able to form a structure that facilitates us..
theism is inevitable the only question is really who is right and who isn't.
>>76009927
When I got into programming and realized that logically humans must work the same way. Even dna is a binary system.
>>76019741
Will cannot be "free" in any sense in neither a deterministic or indeterministic universe.
Check mate.
>>76019778
(cont) and to circumvent the who's right and who isn't the secular societies created the big bang theory and pushed evolution rather than bioadaptation.. to move the conversation to neutral ground.. It's understandable but it's not correct.
>>76019549
I'm not suggesting you should. I'm asking you how you rule them out. You can not trust someone - it doesn't mean everything they say is necessarily a lie.
>>76019201
You shouldn't. We should just accept that the idea of a god cannot be proven nor falsified since the concept is logically paradoxical. I don't know how I feel about worshiping paradoxes.
>>76020032
No, but to have trust means there must be some evidence to gain that trust. Are you going to believe every news article you see without clear sources?
Of course you're not.
Damn nigga you smart
>>76009927
Let me ask muh genes.
>>76020106
I've got no qualms. You also, I assume, have few qualms about use of inductive reasoning, even though justification for doing so is logically nonsense.
>>76009927
Damn you are like a decade + late since the idea expired.
>>76020163
What you're willing to qualify as evidence is arbitrary though. I'll believe what I want to believe - I'm not going to pretend I have much in the way of objective criteria as to whether or not whatever I believe is undoubtedly right, since there is no such thing as far as I or anyone else I've encountered has articulated.
>>76020583
How do you know what I'm willing to qualify as evidence or not?
>>76020423
Since inductive reasoning exists, I can only accept that the arguments drawn from it hold water so far as its premises do too within the context. It is a part of our reality and I find that fortunate because it gives clues to the nature of the larger system in which our reality is some subset. I sometimes think if there is a god, it must have backdoors and loopholes in our reality at its disposal.
>>76019950
(cont) thankfully to the bible it seems thinks are building up to the day of visitation.. yes it's literally called that in the bible, the day of judgement is what it is called in general.. where they will reveal themselves for all mankind to see and settle the disputes and explain to us these things to us their children that are in a fallen state and will be given new and more glorious bodies because the body of sin cannot enter the kingdom of heaven.
>>76020704
I don't, but whatever it is it's arbitrary, since you could just as easily choose other criteria for what you'd qualify as evidence.
>>76020952
It actually might very well give 0 clues as to the nature of anything at all. If you're in the Matrix, it tells you quite literally nothing about reality.
>>76021000
>but whatever it is it's arbitrary
Whatever you say.
>>76020583
> there is no such thing as objective criteria
> there is no such thing as empiricism
> being an epistemological relativist
wew lad
i shiggy your diggy friendo, on the philosophical landscape you belong right in the trash
>>76020967
body of sin can't enter into the kingdom of heaven.. it's prohibidado..
"Now I say this, brothers, that flesh and blood is not able to inherit the kingdom of God, nor does decay inherit immortality." 1 cor 15:50
and the remnant nations are caught up with god in the AIR.. and given new glorious bodies aswell And the dead are ressurected.. to be judged according to their deeds.. (the grand ressurection) these beings have left us to our own devices to decide for ourselves and only support those who have faith and the understanding of them, this is why so much injustice is happening.. Why they have left us to this is because of what the cherub did and to facilitate the judgement of him and all who follow him..
>>76021122
So you can give me objective criteria for what constitutes evidence?
>>76021597
(cont) their powers would appear as magic to us. And they stay hidden, and forbid worship of them, "don't make any idols of that in heaven etc." the cherub decreed that man should worship him and his watchers.. and ruled as a cruel god.. before the flood.
>>76021597
Er du på hash?
>>76021290
Problem of induction.
>>76021771
(cont) infact Amen means praise to the hidden ones..
>>76021106
The matrix would be modeling a probabilistic system which is something like a monte carlo simulator. The only way it could do this is if it had access to probabilistic truths. Basically we cannot have truths in a subset that are not also in the super set.
The idea is so crazy, but it's related to the matrix and the many worlds ideas. We have concepts of infinity and we know that simple laws can create emergent behavior. Laws can all be encoded in number systems, and if numbers can be the atoms of reality, then many realities will exist in a paradoxical fashion.
>>76021857
for at sige hvad der er i bibelen? jaja god tobak der.. Du lader som om det er noget jeg bare finder på.. Tak for snakken. Hygge..
>>76021989
Undskyld, du skriver bare en masse goegl. Glem det XD
Husk at afgive vaelgererklaering til Nye Borgerlige
>>76021765
There's evidence that supports we need Oxygen to live. Turns out our lungs like, do something with it or something.
It's almost magic.
>>76021857
Phillipans 3:21
"who will transform our body of humiliation, conformed to the body of His glory, according to the working enabling Him even to subdue all things to Himself."
And many such references.. come and see :)
https://www.openbible.info/topics/glorified_bodies
enjoy the sjov tobak..
>>76022191
Det virker som en masse gogl hvis man aldrig har hort det for mester :) Du kan gå i kirke hele dit liv og aldrig hore om de ting men læs bibelen selv det er der det hele.. Faktisk er det det det opfordrer til mattheus 6-7 viser at vores nuværende kirke gor det forkert.
>>76017912
lol that proves nothing about your theory
>>76021986
It wouldn't have to be modeled so at all. Someone could direct and control it themselves, projecting controlled illusions into your brain.
>>76022738
I didn't think that was what we were talking about here.. but i was just being honest with you.
>>76022257
Which evidence is that? What makes it evidence as opposed to not-evidence? Empiricists are very, very poor at answering such basic "define your terms" questions.
>>76022831
Har du erfaringer med LSD? :)
Det skulle bringe en taettere paa naturen..
>>76022866
Kek, it must be a little frightening to be you sometimes.
>>76023034
Not at all. I'd imagine it'd be more frightening not being able to articulate your own philosophical beliefs.
>>76022738
let me make it short.. blacks are massive bioadaptation on blacks aren't.. blacks even require special hair products because even their hair is more coarse to shield from UVB radiation in equatorial africa..
Your dispensation seems to be that this is all made up and we all come from africans.. my suggestion is it's exactly the other way around which also accounts for the caucasoid egyptians and the inability of africans to produce a modern civilization..
But hey mock me all you want :)
>>76023095
>Evidence is arbitrary, you can't prove anything. What evidence is there to support humans need oxygen? Tell me. Where's the evidence I'm even real right now? Tell me where this evidence is. I need to look at it so I can call it arbitrary, because it is.
>>76023322
You'd think "what constitutes empirical evidence" wouldn't be such a hard question to answer. Until you look at everyone's attempts to do so. Maybe try reading Popper? He tried really hard.
>>76023496
It's a question that doesn't need answering. Do you truly find it necessary to ask where the evidence is to support why we need to drink water to survive?
When did you grow out of the Self-Inclusion Fallacy that all phonetic languages are based on and accept the TETRAGRAMMATON as your lord and savior?
>>76022931
nej fandeme nej.. ingen stoffer.. kun lidt alkohol i ny og næ... hold dig hellere fra lsd og dmt.. det lader sig til at dmt er produceret i hjernen under specielle tilfælde.. For eksemple når dem der har lavet os ville kommunikere via dromme med deres designered profeter.. men hvis du tager det i store doser åbner du op til ting du ikke bor rode med.. ligesom at åbne fordoren og alle kan komme ind.. temmeligt farlige sager at rode med..
>>76023690
>it's a question that doesn't need answering
Yeah, like just like "piety". Brilliant, Euthyphro.
>>76023858
WHERE'S THE EVIDENCE WE NEED WATER? TELL ME.
>>76023853
Er du velbevendret inden for det paranormale? Tarotkort, yoga, etc.
>>76022782
Yes, but you deny they must have access to probabilistic truths in their more real reality?
I think truths and falsities are just compound mathematical combinations in an "allegory of forms" number system that has some kind of divine structure, where chaos and unpredictability derive from garbage sequences, but the interface gives time-like animation to these systems which are basically just infinite numbers contained within a larger infinite number, and so goes a paradox I embrace. I have no proof for any of this, but I am pursuing the mathematics from several angles.
>>76024103
I feel really sorry for some of my empiricist professors, given you're the kind of person who only happen to agree with them.
>>76024287
PROVE TO ME WATER EXISTS.
>>76024107
jeg er bekendt med disse sager og det sidste sted jeg ledte var i bibelen havde hele mit liv troet det var noget sovs.. men det viser sig at andet er tilfældet. Kan kun tilkendegive at hvis du ikke onsker at spilde din tid.. så start der i stedet for at slutte der.. Hele new age sagerner er dypt satanisk og stammer ultimativt fra islam, vidste du at i islam de har en jinn(demon) med dem alle der konverterer som kompagnon.. hvis du læser surat al jinn direkte fra koranen (qur'an) surat all jinn, leverer muhammad beskeder fra demoner der siger de ikke kan komme ind i himlen fordi det er bevogtet med stærke vagter.. at gud ikke har nogen son og at de konverterer til islam og at allah er deres mester.. det lyder næsten joke level bare at sige det.. men det er direkte i koranen.. og alt for få ved det.
>>76024219
Unless you believe there's something absolutely lawlike and predictable about human will - which you might, though I find that position philosophically lacking - a will making fiat changes doesn't utilize probabilistic truths.
Also this leaf is brilliant. He should go to school for philosophy - he'd make professor in no time with his brilliant argumentation ability.
>>76009927
Last year. Sure was a tough pill to swallow.
>genetic determinationist feels the need to convince people of his belief
>not realizing genetic determination will take care of itself
At the very least, OP isn't very bright.
Anyway, this is unknowable, and it's also irrelevant.
>>76019167
source? double slit shits all over your proposition
>>76024796
It's also vacuous.
>Everything is determined because everything is determined
It's nonsense from square one.
>>76010608
>It's for people who don't want to take responsibility for their actions
Not necessarily. The stoics have an interesting way of looking at this.
It may be true that your actions result from causal factors, but the way you react still shows your character.
Think of pushing an object down a hill. It started rolling because you pushed it, but the way it rolls is determined by its own characteristics.
Although one isn't necessarily responsible for their actions, we can still make character judgments.
>>76024107
Se denne video og begynd din rejse. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ChB1MN6pv2g hvis du vil. Du vil aldrig se islam på den samme måde igen, og vil lige advare dig.. når du læser de 3 tekster i islam.. qur'an (recitation) sira (muhammads biografi hvor han troed han var demon besat og forsogte selvmord 2 gange og det væsen der dikterede til ham stoppede ham begge gange) of hadiths (profetens goren of væsen) hvorfra de får sunnah aka sunni dem der folger sunnah af mohammad.. når du læser det bliver det kun værre.. Men det er vigtigt at vide. Held og lykke til :)
>>76012443
Indeterminism doesn't save free will either. Read a book.
>>76025401
>it's either perfect order or complete chaos
Read a book senpai.
>>76025279
og fra sunnah er hvor de får sharia fra.. her er 288 narrationer af muhammad selv der siger at jihad er det bedste en muslim kan gore og at slagte kuffar (folk der ikke er muslimer) og at være mujahid har den hojeste belonning fra allah.. http://hadithcollection.com/sahihbukhari/85-/3853-sahih-bukhari-volume-004-book-052-hadith-number-041.html og bukhari har den hojeste autoritet andet end koranen, pirateri er også sagt at muhammad at de skal gore så disse somaliske pirater gor bare hvad de har fået besked på.. somalia er næsten 100% muslim.. Når du ved hvad islam er forstår du også bibelene meget bedre, men du vil aldrig være den samme mere, du vil forstå hvad deres hensigt er.. Men nu er vi jo på pol så det må du you regne med :)
>>76011233
How about this philisophically:
A man follows the paradigm set forth in this thread, he seeks pleasure and avoids pain. He then meets one who makes him consider others on a deeper moral level, one that increases alturism at the expense of pain. This influences his further decisions, and ultimately changes what he was biologically determined to do. Has he not received influence outside his genetics?
>>76024938
No, it doesn't.There are indeterminate states sometimes, but they don't exist everywhere.
In case of the double slit - hold down one of the two slits, and every photon hitting the screen will have passed through the open slit: there is no longer a statistical distribution among the two openings then.
>>76025699
Yes yes, ved godt at islam er cancer :) men tak
>>76025884
Yes, he certainly was influenced outside of genetics. However, being influenced by an outside source cannot be considered "Free will"
>>76011919
I like how they won't give you a direct answer.
Fortunately one of the redeeming qualities of materialism is that free will is absolute and its the only absolute.
>>76026243
But he wasnt forced to change his behaviors, he chose to. His decision to increase alturism is an example of free will.
>>76026424
You can't choose to change your behavior. You can only do what you believe will be the most pleasurable and least painful outcome. In the case of altruism, the expense of pain would outweigh the greater satisfaction of doing a "good deed". Your argument is null.
This guy has a really weird format where he raps about complex subjects over a video of Call of Duty but they're actually pretty damn good
Related to the thread:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sqCCcmNPJTg
>>76026576
What if two choices present themselves that are of equal pleasure/pain ratios? It stands to reason that if choice can vary in these values, they could be equivelant as well.
>>76026154
Se den video med walid shoebat jeg gav til dig, han er tidligere medlem af al ikhwan.. kan ikke stresse det nok.. når du har nået til enden af det vil du takke dig self for det! Du vil sidde tilbage chokeret og sige fuck.. det er jo rigtigt hvorfor helvede så jeg det ikke for nu.. Hvorfor fanden spildte jeg min tid på alt det andet lort.. måske optimistisk fra min side hvis jeg kunne dog bare give dig så mange år af information og boger osv. omkring disse ting.. men vi skal alle starte et sted.. og det er ikke et dårligt sted for dig at starte.. for at være ærlig.
>jaja jeg ved islam er cancer
MEN HVORFOR.. ved du hvorfor du bor vide hvorfor fordi den retning vores verden er på vej til du bor vide disse ting så du ved hvad du skal gore og hvordan du kan besejre deres argumenter, for jeg vil næsten garantere dig at de vil komme til dig på et tidspunkt i fremtiden og prove at få dig til at konvertere ved at lyve overfor dig.. ja.. i islam de kan lyve.. men de siger det ikke er tilfældet.. ALDRIG LÆR ISLAM FRA EN MUSLIM de lyver overfor dig! Og de ved meget godt at hvis du bliver en muslim så er der dodsstraf for at forlade det.. så du vil blive "overbevist" om at blive i islam hvis du har konverteret.. af den lokale muslimske "mafia".. der er forbundet med moskeen i dit område..
I took a molecular genetics course and read some philosophy textbooks
>>76026836
No two events would have the exact same ratio. In any event, the individual would have to make the choice they *percieve* to be the most pleasurable and rewarding, regardless of the actual nature of the choice.
>wasting effort with mental gymnastics
Stop. It doesn't matter at all.
Since this is kind of relevant, I remember someone here citing an experiment with iq tests where they gave an untampered test to a shithole and then gave another one using only symbology from their culture and the tests had the same results. Got into an argument over it and it would help.
>>76027304
>possibly the biggest revolution in human thought and history
>doesn't matter at all
You are one stupid fuck.
Free will is fake, however your genetics have nothing to do with it
>>76009927
Aww Nature v Nurture... You fickle bitch.
>>76027452
>thinking that the unknowable idea of genetic determination means anything
>especially if you believe in genetic determination
>>76027031
Og når du begynder at forstå det.. hide your power level.. du vil hav lyst til at snakke om det men pas på.. for som du ved.. hate speech osv. inklusiv her for nylig den nye lov de lige har accepteret.. vær forsigtig.. du vil have lyst til at sige til hele verden.. FUCK VÅGN DOG OP OMKRING ISLAM DET ER FOR VILDT DET HER.. HVORFOR SNAKKER VI OVERHOVEDET OM AT ISLAM KAN EKSISTERE MED OS.. DET ER DET RENE VANVID.. men pas på.. og lær mere.. og snak med folk du kan stole på omkring det.
Once I realized that quantum effects were caused by the resolution limits in the simulator.
>>76027945
faggot
>>76027233
Why would they never have the same ratio? You didnt really give a reason, you just said thats how it had to be. In fact, the way determinism is presented seems to be like that as well. You claim things like morality are predetermined because of genetic factors, but what are those factors? It seems like a combination of nature vs. Nurture, where nature sets the base of decision making, and then any variance from that which may indicate a conscious, independent choice boils down to "well genetics did it" with no further reasoning. Sounds a lot like the patriarchy or the jews to me.
>>76027841
Kun meget få af mine venner vil lytte til mig når snakken går på politik.. Mange af dem stemmer Enhedslisten/radikale.. De er gode venner, men fatter ikke hvorfor de er så naive og stemmer på sådan nogle idiotpartier..
Jeg har også luftet lidt for mange holdninger til min familie, det er svært at holde inde..
>>76028120
Suppose there was a situation in which there were equal amounts of pain and pleasure. Upon making his choice, the individual could not account for why he chose one or the other. It could therefore be understood that the cause behind the choice was unknown to him, and thus not a result of "free will"
>>76028227
Jeg kender det.. det er hårdt.. og specielt når du ved hvad islam er og hvad deres tekster siger.. Jeg kender det meget godt men jeg vil advare dig omkring det alligevel..
Det er præcist derfor bibelen siger be wise as the serpent (forstå hvad islam er) but harmless as doves.. snak om det på en pæn måde men du ved at de vil henrette dig under sharia.. Islam er bæstet.. bæstet er det nye kalifat.. ottomansk.. det havde et "mortal headwound" 1922.. det kommer tilbage, storre end for, ledet af en som muslimer kalder mahdi.. (guided one/den vejledte) på arabisk.. der vil være kejser af dem.. kalif.. alle 1.6 milliarder af dem.. og de rovrender os med konspirations teorier omkring eu osv.. og alt imens ved muslimer meget vel at de vil gerne have mahdi til at komme! som er suveræn kejser over et nyt kalifat! Det er bæst imperiet som biblen beskriver.. og dem der ikke forstår islam forstår ikke bibelenen.. fordi når du forstår islam forstår du bibelen fordi islam er direkte djævelens manuskript.. det er vandvid at folk ikke ved det.. jeg tror folk har in generel ide om at der er noget meget galt ved islam men de hiver altid en eller anden imam eller whatever op til interview og selvfolgelig som forventet lyver han roven i laser.. men hvis folk ville læse deres tekster og vide hvad det er islam står for.. hvis jeg kunne knipse mine fingre og fra i morgen alle i danmark muslim og ikke muslim osv. ville vide præcist alt hvad islam er og hvad der er i deres tekster.. så ville der gå 2-3 dage for der ville blive foreslået lovgivning for at islam ville blive ulovligt at praktisere.. men det er selvfolgelig onsketænkning.. men det er SÅ slemt.. tro mig.. men tro mig ikke bare.. læs det og når du har forstået hvor slemt det er så vil du vide at du kan stole på mig omkring det.
>>76028777
So what was it in the unknown that ultimately urged our man to choose red from blue?
>>76029135
Det er ikke kun Islam, der er problemet.
Tænk hvor mange danskere stemmere på rode partier fort af feminister og emaskulerede mænd. Hele vest/nordeuropa er blevet feminiseret. Det ved vi, når vi ikke må kritisere kvinder -- men værre endnu: vi må ikke kritisere islam!
Hvis ikke vi havde fået alle disse satans 68'ere og deres hippieafkom, ville tingene se anderledes ud. Borgerlighed er dod.
>>76029135
Det her er hvad der sker.. når islam overtager en nation via fodselsrater.. de har 4 koner med vilje for at overtage den nation de er i.. for at oge deres demografi.. via moske bryllupper så de statistisk ser ud som enlige modre.. nej nej nej.. Det er ikke et tilfælde.. i islam selv livmoderen er et våben imod kuffar.. imod dem der ikke er muslimer..
Så du ikke for relativt nylig.. muslimsk kvinde med 12 born der ville have resten af familien over også.. hvad tror du der sker med danmark.. hvad tror du de gor det for.. er det ikke åbentlyst.. de gemmer sig bag "racisme" men islam er den mest intolerante ideology overhovedet.. allah elsker muslimer og hader ALLE ANDRE..
>>76029482
>>76029482
Enig! Islam ville aldrig få det fodfæste som den har fået uden dem.. de er forrædere det er meget simplet, vores forfædre ruller i deres grav og vil sige til os.. STOP DEM! og hvad gor vi.. vi gor ikke en skid men jeg tror folk begynder at forstå hvad klokken er slået og at danne fællesskaber med disse hensigter. Det er så åbenlyst hvilken retning dette bærer hen at selv de dummest af mennesker bor lugte lunten..
>>76009927
False dichotomy. Genetic determinism doesn't eliminate agency of individuals to change their environment altogether. For all but the most severely crippled, we have some amount of free ability to change our own destinies.
>>76009927
> top theoretical physicists think multiverse is a real possibility
> we have only one destiny goys
I believe the war against agency is ultiimately an evil one.
>>76029914
True...
Jeg så Debatten i torsdags, det handlede om kvinderettigheder.
Selvfolgelig var der en klam hættemåge i panelet. Hun mente, at mænd og kvinder er "ligeværdige" i sialm hvilket er totalt nonsens. Så sagde hun andet lort om islam, så som at det forste ord i koranen er "læs" eller sådan noget. Efter at have hort hendes udtalelser er min konklusion, at hun ikke selv tror på det lort hun siger. Det er ren og skær taqiiya (lyv de klamme kuffirs op i deres hvide ansigter for at fremme islam).. Foj for helvede.
>>76030247
De fleste mænd i vores land er feminiserede og vil hellere sidde på deres rov og gå i dialog, end at gå i krig mod muhammedanerne. Det er sådan jeg ser det, desværre. Vi har fået feminisme-propagandaen i for lang tid, og det vil ligge stort set alle unge mennesker i dag så fjernt at tage del i "borgerværn", da det vil stemple dem som racister osv.
Jeg har ikke meget håb for vores land eller hele vestlige/nordlige Europa.
Here's what scares me:
I believe that free will doesn't exist. However, I don't think I TRULY believe it, in that my mind is totally prepared to except it. I still live as if I do have free will. Emotionally, it's like my mind just can't handle that.
Because if I didn't have free will, and I was utterly convinced, everything would seem totally pointless. I feel like I would just crawl into a hole or something.
>>76024571
I think there are many families of sequences and patterns of human will encoded in an infinite amount of strings
>>76031060
And what causes them to realize?
I don't even know my guhnetix that well. My uncle tested for 98% British Isles and 2% neanderthal, but my dad's side is general eastern jews.
>>76030723
Jeg har meget håb, jeg forstår god din fortvivlelse og du har gode grunde for det.. men jeg tror ærligt at folk har begyndt at fatte det.. min reservation omkring det er at de fleste har stadigvæk ikke læst de islamske tekster.. og så længe de ikke kan argumentere på det niveau kan muslimerne altid hive en taqiyya fætter op og sige "ah alt normalt bare slap af vi mener det ikke (endnu fordi vi ikke er i flertal)" Men folk har begyndt at lugte lunten.. men de ved ikke hvad de skal gore alt det propaganda omkring åh nej hvad hvis nogen siger jeg er racist.. hele min verden falder ned.. jeg tror vi måske skal begynde at blive lidt mere som kim bodnia i i kina spiser de hunde "du er fucking racist mand" "OG HVAD SÅ.. du siger det som om det er en dårlig ting" Men ved du hvad.. det er ikke engang racisme.. fordi islam er en ideologi, og det er ideologien der er farlig.. rent faktisk.. ex muslimer er nogen af de mest braveste folk.. de hader islam fordi de ved hvad islam er og de hader hvad det gor og hvad de repræsenterer og under sharia ville disse brave mennesker blive FUCKING SLÅET IHJEL.. islam er så sygt.. ja muhammad siger det adskillige gange i bukhari og så hiver de en fag op der taqiyyaer det op i medierne.. som om de ikke ved det.. selvfolgelig ved det det.. .. Det er ikke SÅ meget personen der er trusselen så meget som det er ISLAM der er trusellen..
>>76031386
Godt sagt.
Anyway, tak for snakken, godnat.
>>76031697
Lige over.. respekt.
>>76031697
Sov god mester, danmark skal sku nok blive ok med folk som dig :)
>>76029192
There was never any difference, I think there was only ever one pill if both choices are truly equal, the idea of there being 2 pills and a choice is invented by the brain, false memories. If we took a picture at the moment our man "chose" there would only be one pill, one path, one reality.
>>76010300
This.
The advances of neuroscience this century will see will make it impossible for any moderately educated person to believe in free will anymore. This will have deep consequences to how society perceives itself.
>>76031200
They don't realize and they do both at once, it's part of the paradox of infinity and primes, and I imagine it possible through some sea of unique structure that can be navigated in any direction through any lens or scope and all perspectives normalize to unity where they also contradict nothingness together to create each other in a sense as a paradox.
For our own reality, I think we have substrates of logic, and at the levels we're reaching in physics and science, there is some kind of information encoded upon a topological surface which itself is all encoded in a string sequence. Through some translation of this infinite string you can derive any experience, both valid and invalid, and networks or families of experiences form, and some will perfectly meld into others, while others have abrupt destructive sequences. All of the combinations are based in probabilistic terms in the way entropy is described. I suspect garbage sequences create chaotic links in patterns with actual information content, and I think some of these sequences manifest as our consciousness kind of like a signal riding on a carrier frequency of reality, except the frequency is a unique string scope.
>>76032526
*structure sea of numbers
>>76032526
>they don't realize
Then there's no instantiation, in which case you're not talking about anything with ties to substances.
You're going to have something similar to the interaction problem substance dualism suffers from if you don't have something you ascribe causal powers to actually realize.
>>76032899
Instantiation is infinite and exists in a normalization to 1 in paradoxical contradiction to nothingness, just like as god is described to exist.
>>76009927
Determinism is the way of the world. There aren't any arguments against it, though that doesn't mean you can't enjoy life
We have some free will. Look up "epigenetics"
>>76033105
If something instantiates it's realized. I don't see where anything reduces to "nothingness", though I think nothingness is an incoherent concept to begin with.
>>76033105
The ties are to 2 substances. Unique numbers which are infinite strings of 1s and 0s representing the paradox of nothing and the infinite. The possible sequences come from the structure of the primes and their indivisibility by anything other than themselves and 1 (the normalization to connect the structure).
>>76033316
>epigenetics is proof of free will
Wew lad
>>76032150
Im not talking about red pill vs blue pill, it could be the same if the choices were green and purple. What im referring to is aesthetics.
>>76009927
Grow up.
>>76033454
You're a metaphysical realist.
I don't know how you possibly derive an ontology for this speculation of yours though.
>>76034072
based leaf :D have a you for once you make canada proud. Credit where its due is a good thing.
>>76030909
Do you think there is a distinction between free though and free will?
>>76009927
Sounds like a good way to validate killing yourself.
You should try it.
>>76009927
Like straight after reading Nietzsche and volunteering at """""at risk schools"""" desu senpai
>>76034275
>metaphysical realist
Not really. My speculation I'm describing is more spiritual and mystical because I am embracing paradox and hoping it explains how we can have confined free will. I think of consciousness as information interaction, or more flattened, as a unique number sequence.
I guess take godels incompeteness (and stuff like chaitin's omega number) + chaotic unpredictability + applications of measure theory with probability and topology (things like fibre bundles).
In the end, our conscious experience has an origin out of nothingness and from then on it is a constant flow of information available to us which can be classified as how we perceive it and the interactions of these information and the mathematical rules that govern their interaction manifest as our consciousness, and because the structure is infinite, there is a greater being for which we belong to kind of like those russian dolls. Each of our existences is both infinite and nothing thanks to the endless possibilities in the primes. I have no ontology, I just am spouting this.
>>76009927
>When did you grow out of free will and adopt genetic determinism?
When "my" genes determined "I" would.
You don't adopt anything under genetic determinism. It's already there. Nothing changes it, and whatever might have influence it certainly is not "you" or your mind. There is no such thing. It's just particles in motion. We're not even having a discussion. We aren't even here. We don't even exist.
>>76035166
You can used whatever adjectives you like. "Realism", in the sense of metaphysical realism, doesn't exclude things you might ascribe those descriptors to.
>>76034037
There was literally only one pill, maybe it was white or black or whatever, the idea of separate pills only exists as a memory for you,a false one, in your head as fact
>>76035504
Man, your level of metaphysics is getting anime
-tier. Red and blue can objectively exist in this scenario.
When did you grow out of genetic determinism and adopt free will?
If free will is an illusion, so is everything else.
>>76019947
Isn't it a quaternary rather than binary system because we have 4 possible letters (bits)?
>>76035459
There is something about paradox that will always let things be both real and unreal. There are many dead ends, infinite regressions and such that lead to realities that mean nothing. 0 and 1 are a duality like the yin yang and they encapsulate infinity paradoxically.
>>76035726
Well then then the only possible motivation for him to choose one pill over the other would be free will, if he doesn't exist then he would always choose the same pill and the other pill might as well not exist and essentially doesn't.
I suppose you could make an argument for infinite realities where every choice forms a new string of consciousness in an immensely huge web of lifetimes. But you as a conscious being and observer in your limited dimension could only ever observe one reality at a time and therefore would only see one selection. The argument could be made that whatever choice you made was always the choice you were determined to make and the only reality you could ever perceive.
Sorry dawg free will is essentially an illusion in our existence, we need to be a dimension up looking down in order to have enough information to know if our choices are of free will or not, like a god would be to us.
>>76036152
Could you describe to me an unreal thing?
>>76036403
that* not he
>>76036470
A string sequence with 0 information content.
Ultimately, if you take a set of logical axioms or postulates and go from there to explore your emergent world of truths (the infinite, arbitrary, abstract, coincidental families of sequences), for any paradox you come across, there will be a resolution to this paradox through a greater context, but that reality is unavailable to you so it is unreal in your subset consciousness of limited logical truths, and once you enter the new context, your reality is not the same. At any level there is a limit to the provable truths and provable falsehoods available to you, but if you add more context they are resolved, yet new paradoxes will arise since no set of axioms is self consistent. What the structure of all these sequences mean I don't know, but I believe it has to be related to the primes since they are infinite, have a common friend of 1 which is the duality of 0 and exist as the anti-infinity encapsulation paradox, and are shattered into irrational sequences of 1s and 0s when divided by anything else. Any whole number can be constructed from a sequence of primes.
>>76037228
How do you distinguish between a strong sequence with 0 information content and string sequences that *do* have information content?
>>76037502
calculate entropy which is a probabilistic meaning. Perhaps probability is built into the structure of the primes? Anyway, you will find patterns with information. Patterns can represent many things in different frameworks and context (like the theory of forms, or abstraction of software), so an infinite sequence may be unique, but that infinite sequence is also not unique in that it's also a finite number within a larger infinity as it expands out further. All numbers relate back to primes which relate back to 1 though, and so all possible sequences of infinity exist equally in paradoxical contradiction to nothing.
>>76038155
>calculate entropy
Uncertainty doesn't necessitate a lack of information though.
I'm just trying to figure out where informationless information is coming from or how it could even be identified, because that's the only way you could have and "unreal thing" in your odd metaphysics.
>>76038396
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entropy_%28information_theory%29#Entropy_as_information_content
>>76038497
K, that's not how I was using entropy. That doesn't tell me what has information content though. It only tells me some things can be regarded as not conveying information.
Do you like Bayesian probability?
>>76038396
It is identified in its paradoxical nature. It is just a string of numbers that do nothing or provide a logical contradiction. It would be coming from the structure of primes where we get all our labels basically. We will have infinite labels for non sense but they almost certainly will be some kind of failure in a synthesis of what we are just like a fractal has many meaningless structures which only help to further propagate its steady state recognizable patterns.
>>76038770
>Do you like Bayesian probability?
Yes, that's my more comfortable way of understanding probability for now.
>>76038786
>do nothing
They exist. And you can describe them. I wouldn't call them an unreal thing if that's even a possibility.
Meaning is also something we ascribe to things to begin with, unless you think any of your numerical strings as conveying something like brute facts. But then I'd be brought back to where your ontology is coming from for why that would be the case.
>>76038939
Lots of people in philosophy of mathematics and science like it.
>>76036403
You have about 5 things going at once, my friend. Regardless of modes of existence, parallel dimensions, or recursive loops, a choice was made on preference, which was developed by our character's own self.
>>76039319
What preference though? They are the same pleasure and pain as far as he can tell
>>76039127
Yes, they exist in the sense of chaos or as contradictory information within a given scope. This is the defining attribute of chaos to me. I mean nothing in the sense of useful information content rather than the number 0. Information content is useful when it is used in a context to provide emergent reality.
>>76039127
What do you think of it? I only skimmed the surface of the frequentist approach because the authors of my texts decide to focus on bayesian, even in the practical applications.
Can't help but cringe when /pol/ tries talking about shit like this. Nobody here has any clue.
>>76039662
Contradictory to what though? Other strings? What if those strings are actually necessary and serve a function, and perhaps you just couldn't find the relation? Making the determination between useful and not-useful information seems troublesome without something akin to omniscience or total knowledge of everything as a whole (which is an inexhaustible infinite so not really feasible).
There's a trouble with what you're articulating as coming off as being an ad hoc type metaphysics. I don't have any problem with such, but alot of people - mostly naturalist types - really object to such kinds of system formulations.
>>76039662
I agree with the most fundamental premise - that belief comes in degrees. I really strongly believe it's a nigh fruitless endeavor to tie or qualify/quantify belief in degrees though.
