Post by cupcakes on Sept 7, 2017 14:17:01 GMT
Sept 6, 2017 19:08:42 GMT @miccee said:
tpfkar
Sure, in your cockeyed cargo cult worship. In reality, it's something to think about and a starting point into further research. And from the rest of your post, and additionally nearly all of yours on the board, your ability for rational conclusion is crippled, or you just don't mind appearing mentally bankrupt in support of your moral bankruptcy. It's positively laughable that you either keep overtly ignoring what goes on in our own heads, or try to pray it away with the mysterious ways of "it's just an illusion". And that you (pretend you?) can't see how one can easily conclude the evident from what they directly experience and given the positively embryonic (relatively) state of the science on the matter. Regardless of the wild-eyed ramblings of the goal-driven zealots. Sensible and straightforward, so of course you're comfortable with absurd statements, including projections of your own religious mania into it. Not to mention the childlike inferences of the form "That aibo does some things that looks like what we do, CHECKMATE fellow 'organic robots'. And the related shattered thinking of "We all have no actual control over anything as the molecules were set in motion from the beginning. Now I must double down to get you to change! Ha ha ha HA ha, ha ha ha HA ha, ha ha ha HA ha, hehehehehehehe!"
Not everybody needs the religiosity you do, and can go with what is presented and what is seen and lived until such time as something more persuasive is actually demonstrated. Not everybody has desperate needs for eternal life, or death for all so much that they grasp onto and butcher whatever they can get their disturbed hands on.
You're absolutely convinced that it exists, but cannot even explain how it would be possible to distinguish an actor with free will from one without free will. Nor why you think that determinism would fail to fully explain the experiences commonly attributed to 'free will'. Whether choice is an 'illusion' is a matter for debate, because our brains do go through the process of making decisions, but nobody experiences the phenomenon of choosing what they will think before they think it. Free will is perhaps then more a matter of perspective than an illusion.
And one cannot choose not to choose, so therefore I have no option but to act in the way that I am compelled to act.
Clearly, your vehement but fact-free defense of free will is evidence that you do have some kind of desperate need to retain that as an emotional or spiritual crutch.
Free will has been demonstrated everywhere humans have existed, your weaseled-out "reliably" notwithstanding. And now "matter of perspective". 
Like the perspective that having kids is by definition attacking them, or that the existence of third-world dungeon-asylums is a sane reason to facilitate mental patients offing themselves.You've not explained how it would be possible to distinguish your existence from that of a created creature of an intelligent (if sadistic and deranged) maker. By your beautiful reasoning, ergo we were created by Intelligent Design. Or how the Great Predetermination started off. Since you couldn't distinguish any reason prior to the reach back of our evidence, you're allowed to pick anything you like, just as long as it utterly contradicts what you live and breathe every day. I pick that we're not actually conscious brains that have thoughts, but actually are just egotistical mushy rocks with non-thoughts that just think they're above their raisin. <- purposefully ungrammatical
I don't really know what determinism is supposed to mean, as everything will only happen one way and will have reasons by the time it is over. That doesn't yield that no creatures have the very thing we exercise and care about, our meaningful free will. You can separately but relatedly navel-ponder about the implications of your mother and your father and how much fluoride was in your water when you grew up, but you are still a creature with traits and preferences and you make choices according to them, the only meaningful and relevant free will.
What I'm absolutely convinced of and vehement about is that the irrational ramblings of the unabashedly tendentious can be trivially lampooned. Particularly the requirement of the demented "choosing what they will think before they think it", or making ice cream rain from they sky by sheer force of will, or being invisible by thinking _real_ hard, or changing what is by definition unchangeable, or whatever other infantile nose-twitching is demanded. Or that parents mistreat their (nonexistent) children by virtue of having them without their prior express permission, or "the dead can't care" as a sound argument for anything, and anyone save sociopaths.
It is quite sad that you are compelled to have thought processes that are irretrievably incoherent. To supposedly not recognize the inherent self-contradictions and pathologically bent framings that you are constrained by your Fate to continuously field.
Clearly (⊙_⊙) what I experience and observe both directly and through considered intake of the actual relevant science is anything but fact-free. I'm just not so guileless nor dishonest as to uncritically run full speed with the highly speculative highly debated bouncing-around pronouncements, opinions and still crude yet rich with assumption studies, nor let the fame hounds, con men, and the mentally ill (not necessarily mutually exclusive) energizer bunny the conjecture and/or crazy through as "fact", or even as sensible, by overworking said opinions, speculations and controversial and criticized incredibly coarse studies *whew*.
Morally I would be fine with post-birth abortions, but I realise that this would probably be too radical to ever be implemented.