Chickenpox Lollipops

[kentonio]

If people have free will how can you predict what they will do?

As I said, its purely theoretical. The idea that if you could watch the behavior of basically every atom and build a prediction of how it will interact with every other might seem kind of compelling, but its also sort of meaningless. If you don't believe in a supernatural being controlling things, then it just becomes interesting but basically irrelevant.

Considering how nearly infinitely complex the universe is though, it still leaves me baffled how people can believe that something exists that is presumably even more complex to create it all.

[Aeson]

No, you can alter your capabilities by taking drugs or being hit around the head by a large stick, but it doesn't determine anything at all.

Ladel your brains out with a spoon. Keep going until you don't think this has any effect on your ability to choose...

[Kidlicious]

You aren't explaining your theory. You just keep repeating the same nonsense. How do you have free will?

[kentonio]

Ladel your brains out with a spoon. Keep going until you don't think this has any effect on your ability to choose...

You can break the machinery, but whats your point?

You aren't explaining your theory. You just keep repeating the same nonsense. How do you have free will?

Nonsense? Coming from you? Get ****ed.

[Aeson]

You can break the machinery, but whats your point?

The point is the machinery is the only portion that can be shown to actually exist. It also does a reasonably good job of explaining the output all on it's own. I don't see a need for further complexity to be added to the process, certainly not something which by definition could have no method of functioning.

[Aeson]

I'll point out that I don't explicitly say that the machinery we understand currently explains it fully. There could definitely be something else at work with consciousness given that we don't really know what it is yet.

But there is no compelling evidence as of yet that it is due to free will.

[Kidlicious]

No. You have no reasoning at all. I'm being serious. How can you even criticise people who believe in God?
Btw, if you take ecstacy and it makes you have sex with ugly chicks the ecstasy is a determining factor you moron.

[Elok]

Simple answer to that is we have no idea. Theoretically you could possibly say that with a powerful enough computer with enough data you can predict anything, but the range of variables is just so mind numbingly vast that it becomes a ridiculous concept that such a thing could ever be done. The chief different here of course is that even if anything can be predicted, thats still a very, very different thing to everything being predetermined by the will of some supernatural being.

Oddly enough though, I can think of very few things that make a supernatural being less believable than thinking about the number of variables that could potentially effect the future.

I'm not arguing for God here, I'm just curious how there can be free will in an ultimately deterministic universe. Yes, it's impossible to model precisely, but that's sort of beside the point the way I see it. If you can be reduced to accumulated layers of prejudices and past experiences, in what sense are you "free" at all? You might be very complex and multifaceted, but there's no homunculus in there making decisions or anything, so your opinion on an upcoming election, for example, is no more free than the weather three years, five months and two days from now. Sure, we can't predict so many variables so far out, but it all boils down to a set of reactions.

[kentonio]

I'll point out that I don't explicitly say that the machinery we understand currently explains it fully. There could definitely be something else at work with consciousness given that we don't really know what it is yet.

But there is no compelling evidence as of yet that it is due to free will.

There is certainly vast amounts we don't know, but really I suppose it comes down to what 'free will' actually means. I can see how you could argue that free will is a nonsense if you consider free will to be an absolute thing, but I'd still argue that theres a huge difference between being able to choose freely within the capabilities we have and our decisions being determined by a greater being.

No. You have no reasoning at all. I'm being serious.

You are like a fanatical sports fan sitting in the stands screaming for their team. You don't care about the tactics or abilities of the players or the progress of the game, you just care that your team is always better and you resort to stupid insults and babbling nonsense because you have nothing else to offer.

Btw, if you take ecstacy and it makes you have sex with ugly chicks the ecstasy is a determining factor you moron.

No the ecstacy is an influencing factor you stupid ****, you can give three people ecstacy and put them in the same situation and not all three will decide to sleep with the girl.

How can you even criticise people who believe in God?

Funny how you're happy to try and find holes in athiesm but when people question religion its suddenly not ok. I wasn't always an athiest, I reached this point because after endless consideration it seemed like the only reasonable decision. I can't find any rational argument that makes a being complex enough to create the universe believable. Despite this I still feel like I'm swimming in the dark, because we know so little about the creation of the universe that I don't see how anyone can feel confident enough to have a strong position. I'm just not willing to fill that ignorance with something that to me doesn't make any sense, and seems like a purely human answer to something that is far, far bigger than our insignificant little species.

The reason I like religious threads however, is because they touch on stuff that is genuinely interesting, like the implications of everything being predictable. It's just a shame that too many religious folk feel the need to cry like *****es every time anyone says anything that may question their beliefs. If you truly believe in God, then don't you think he's big and tough enough to get by without you getting butt hurt on his behalf?

[kentonio]

I'm not arguing for God here, I'm just curious how there can be free will in an ultimately deterministic universe. Yes, it's impossible to model precisely, but that's sort of beside the point the way I see it. If you can be reduced to accumulated layers of prejudices and past experiences, in what sense are you "free" at all? You might be very complex and multifaceted, but there's no homunculus in there making decisions or anything, so your opinion on an upcoming election, for example, is no more free than the weather three years, five months and two days from now. Sure, we can't predict so many variables so far out, but it all boils down to a set of reactions.

I'm struggling with that one myself to be honest. When you break it down like that, you could actually argue that everything was predetermined. Without knowing how the universe came into being though, where do you go from there?

[Kidlicious]

YOUR BELIEF MAKES NO SENSE! You're attacking your own beliefs.

I believe in free will. I have a good reason to. You don't.

[kentonio]

YOUR BELIEF MAKES NO SENSE! You're attacking your own beliefs.

You've never heard of arcane concepts like discussion and thought, have you? Of course I'm attacking my beliefs, I do that as often as humanly possible.

I believe in free will. I have a good reason to. You don't.

Based on the evidence you've provided so far your 'good reason' is that some goat herders wrote it in a book two thousand years ago. feel free to correct me if you genuinely have a better reason than that.

[Aeson]

There is certainly vast amounts we don't know, but really I suppose it comes down to what 'free will' actually means. I can see how you could argue that free will is a nonsense if you consider free will to be an absolute thing, but I'd still argue that theres a huge difference between being able to choose freely within the capabilities we have and our decisions being determined by a greater being.

Consider two hypothetical cases where the extent and nature of the influence is exactly the same... only from different sources

a) a painter is inspired by a natural scene he sees, creates painting
b) a painter inspired by the same scene shown to him by God in a dream, creates same painting

Why would there be any difference in regards to how admirable the painter is? Both cases are his mind and body recreating a scene that inspired him. His abilities are the same, the outcome is the same. What does it matter if the inspiration came from God or a natural source? In either case it's an outside source. Reserve as much free will for the painter as you want, it's irrelevant to the question so long as it's equally distributed between the two hypothetical situations.

[kentonio]

Consider two hypothetical cases where the extent and nature of the influence is exactly the same... only from different sources

a) a painter is inspired by a natural scene he sees, creates painting
b) a painter inspired by the same scene shown to him by God in a dream, creates same painting

Why would there be any difference in regards to how admirable the painter is? Both cases are his mind and body recreating a scene that inspired him. Reserve as much free will for the painter as you want, it's irrelevant to the question so long as it's equally distributed between the two hypothetical situations.

Because in one case you're assuming another sentient being that uses their will to subjugate ours. I find that rather repellant.

[Kidlicious]

Obvious there is another determining factor besides the physical laws. Right? What simpler explaination than God?