|
Post by cupcakes on Dec 17, 2017 14:32:03 GMT
tpfkar You should get a bagel tattoo to commemorate the fact. I already have a large bagel tattoo from when I went through a gluten phase. It doubles as a cushion. start me up
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on Dec 17, 2017 14:40:34 GMT
tpfkar I only know what we experience, what the science shows and the utter lunacy of your choice but no choice mania as well as your free-wheeling need-driven empty "likelys". It's not a matter of responding to "new" information, whatever that is in your thought processes, it's the derangement in furiously finding importance in making choices that you simultaneously believe aren't. And I think anybody who can read your posts, your wish for Trump to nuke the world, your frequent wails about safe spaces and the like, etc., can see both the distress, incoherency and psychopathy of your posts, and that honest appraisal does not insult make. But feel free to bawl some more about getting responses and not getting responses in between "safe-space" "harassing me" "brownie" hisses. ![trumpshrug](https://s7.postimg.org/jyv2idyjf/shrugforthedoofus.png) Not at all, because it's better for me to suffer than for a greater number of people to suffer. Subjective experience, when closely analysed, supports determinism. People don't make random decisions without precursors. Free will is the nebulous explanation that was devised to explain behaviour in the infancy of humankind. And there are still many laggards who prefer the ancient superstitious explanation to what science has revealed. What does "science [show]" that supports free will, given that you have balked at even defining what 'free will' actually is, much less what the shortcomings of the deterministic model of behaviour are which call for the superimposition of an unwieldly, nebulously defined and unparsimonious explanation such as 'free will'. I understand that you desperately need it to be so for your faith, all the more understandable given the distressing ordeals you've had with it. But there is no "explanation" as of yet, just description and conjecture. And then of course there's your "analysis". ![(Emojipedia 5.0) Crazy Face](https://s26.postimg.org/p3lh61a61/emojipedia_grinning-face-with-one-large-and-one-.png) Everything having precursors is irrelevant, as we're all in and part of the same process, and we do have what we experience nonstop. Regardless of what the actual situation is, what's unavoidable is the glaring derangement of simultaneously believing you can choose to get other people to choose differently when you believe choice doesn't actually exist. And your desperation to grossly over- and mis-state the science (and of course willingness to commit mass-homicide as well as greatly increase both the volume and duration of overall suffering) just hammers home your frantic need-driven actions all the more (un) soundly. On that note, you've also called me "deranged", which is the mental illness equivalent of "n*****"
|
|
|
Post by Xcalatë on Dec 17, 2017 17:21:41 GMT
www.stuff.co.nz/life-style/parenting/88842957/The-parent-trap-Why-child-free-people-are-happierMoreover, you should be proud of the fact that you haven't imposed a risky, unneeded and unasked for existence on someone, and aren't going to further contribute towards the degradation of the ecosystem. I suppose it's difficult to overcome the emotional desire for children, but try to realise intellectually that your yearning is just your genetic programming trying to trick you. this.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 17, 2017 23:17:20 GMT
The fact that there have never been any reliably documentation of consciousness being observed to operate outside of a brain, in addition to the many indisputable correlations that are observed between brain health and behaviour confirm the fact that consciousness does not exist independently of a brain. That's lousy reasoning. No non-terrestrial lifeforms have ever been observed on Earth. Does this mean they do not exist? No human was ever observed walking on the Moon before 1969. Does this mean that travel to the Moon wasn't physically possible until 1969? No consciousness has ever existed outside of a brain. Yet. As far as we know. What if a powerful AI becomes self-conscious? It hasn't happened yet; but it does not mean it never will. Consciousness has to be created by some kind of matter. And using the example that I gave of Alzheimer's patients, we know that when people's brain matter decays, they lose their sense of self. It's not possible to prove a negative, as you've pointed out (and same can be used for God and the flying teapot), but everything that has been observed about conscious behaviour and its relationship to the brain bears out that the brain is needed for consciousness; and the unhealthier the brain, the more dysfunctional the consciousness. If conscious AI ever develops, then it will have a 'brain' of sorts. It will have circuitry which is producing consciousness; it's consciousness will not be produced by fairy dust, or an immortal soul.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 17, 2017 23:20:20 GMT
tpfkar Subjective experience, when closely analysed, supports determinism. People don't make random decisions without precursors. Free will is the nebulous explanation that was devised to explain behaviour in the infancy of humankind. And there are still many laggards who prefer the ancient superstitious explanation to what science has revealed. What does "science [show]" that supports free will, given that you have balked at even defining what 'free will' actually is, much less what the shortcomings of the deterministic model of behaviour are which call for the superimposition of an unwieldly, nebulously defined and unparsimonious explanation such as 'free will'. I understand that you desperately need it to be so for your faith, all the more understandable given the distressing ordeals you've had with it. But there is no "explanation" as of yet, just description and conjecture. And then of course there's your "analysis". ![(Emojipedia 5.0) Crazy Face](https://s26.postimg.org/p3lh61a61/emojipedia_grinning-face-with-one-large-and-one-.png) Everything having precursors is irrelevant, as we're all in and part of the same process, and we do have what we experience nonstop. Regardless of what the actual situation is, what's unavoidable is the glaring derangement of simultaneously believing you can choose to get other people to choose differently when you believe choice doesn't actually exist. And your desperation to grossly over- and mis-state the science (and of course willingness to commit mass-homicide as well as greatly increase both the volume and duration of overall suffering) just hammers home your frantic need-driven actions all the more (un) soundly. On that note, you've also called me "deranged", which is the mental illness equivalent of "n*****"There's no logical way that effect could ever precede cause, and there's no evidence to support that the causal chain is reversed in the human brain. Everything that has been observed about human behaviour is completely compatible and consistent with deterministic causation. The only people who believe otherwise are either too obtuse to understand basic logic, or those who are terrified of the implications that they are mere organic puppets. The only science which is available on the subject is that which supports determinism, so at least I have provided scientific evidence.
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on Dec 17, 2017 23:38:58 GMT
tpfkar I understand that you desperately need it to be so for your faith, all the more understandable given the distressing ordeals you've had with it. But there is no "explanation" as of yet, just description and conjecture. And then of course there's your "analysis". ![(Emojipedia 5.0) Crazy Face](https://s26.postimg.org/p3lh61a61/emojipedia_grinning-face-with-one-large-and-one-.png) Everything having precursors is irrelevant, as we're all in and part of the same process, and we do have what we experience nonstop. Regardless of what the actual situation is, what's unavoidable is the glaring derangement of simultaneously believing you can choose to get other people to choose differently when you believe choice doesn't actually exist. And your desperation to grossly over- and mis-state the science (and of course willingness to commit mass-homicide as well as greatly increase both the volume and duration of overall suffering) just hammers home your frantic need-driven actions all the more (un) soundly. On that note, you've also called me "deranged", which is the mental illness equivalent of "n*****"There's no logical way that effect could ever precede cause, and there's no evidence to support that the causal chain is reversed in the human brain. Everything that has been observed about human behaviour is completely compatible and consistent with deterministic causation. The only people who believe otherwise are either too obtuse to understand basic logic, or those who are terrified of the implications that they are mere organic puppets. The only science which is available on the subject is that which supports determinism, so at least I have provided scientific evidence. We're all part and parcel of it, whatever "it" is. No "effect precede cause" nor "causal chain reversed" is even contemplated. That's only more babble in there with choosing to get people to choose when you don't believe choice exists and supporting Trump in the hopes of murdering billions. Speaking of overt obtuseness / derangement. ![(Apple) Face With Stuck-Out Tongue & Winking Eye](https://s26.postimg.org/5pkn6cipl/apple_face-with-stuck-out-tongue-and-winking-eye.png) "Determinism" as cause and effect is simple truism, and not in any way incompatible with us making choices, regardless of your faith-needed schizophrenic belief/disbelief driven by your distressing ordeals with it. ![](https://s26.postimg.org/gf93ycxax/giveup.gif) Not at all, because it's better for me to suffer than for a greater number of people to suffer.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 17, 2017 23:46:47 GMT
tpfkar There's no logical way that effect could ever precede cause, and there's no evidence to support that the causal chain is reversed in the human brain. Everything that has been observed about human behaviour is completely compatible and consistent with deterministic causation. The only people who believe otherwise are either too obtuse to understand basic logic, or those who are terrified of the implications that they are mere organic puppets. The only science which is available on the subject is that which supports determinism, so at least I have provided scientific evidence. We're all part and parcel of it, whatever "it" is. No "effect precede cause" nor "causal chain reversed" is even contemplated. That's only more babble in there with choosing to get people to choose when you don't believe choice exists and supporting Trump in the hopes of murdering billions. Speaking of overt obtuseness / derangement. ![(Apple) Face With Stuck-Out Tongue & Winking Eye](https://s26.postimg.org/5pkn6cipl/apple_face-with-stuck-out-tongue-and-winking-eye.png) "Determinism" as cause and effect is simple truism, and not in any way incompatible with us making choices, regardless of your faith-needed schizophrenic belief/disbelief driven by your distressing ordeals with it. ![](https://s26.postimg.org/gf93ycxax/giveup.gif) Not at all, because it's better for me to suffer than for a greater number of people to suffer. If you didn't believe that human decisions allowed for effects to precede cause, then at most, your cavil would be a semantical one, and you certainly wouldn't take issue with my proferred interpretation of the results of the Libet experiment, and others.
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on Dec 17, 2017 23:56:32 GMT
tpfkar We're all part and parcel of it, whatever "it" is. No "effect precede cause" nor "causal chain reversed" is even contemplated. That's only more babble in there with choosing to get people to choose when you don't believe choice exists and supporting Trump in the hopes of murdering billions. Speaking of overt obtuseness / derangement. ![(Apple) Face With Stuck-Out Tongue & Winking Eye](https://s26.postimg.org/5pkn6cipl/apple_face-with-stuck-out-tongue-and-winking-eye.png) "Determinism" as cause and effect is simple truism, and not in any way incompatible with us making choices, regardless of your faith-needed schizophrenic belief/disbelief driven by your distressing ordeals with it. ![](https://s26.postimg.org/gf93ycxax/giveup.gif) Not at all, because it's better for me to suffer than for a greater number of people to suffer. If you didn't believe that human decisions allowed for effects to precede cause, then at most, your cavil would be a semantical one, and you certainly wouldn't take issue with my proferred interpretation of the results of the Libet experiment, and others. The Libet experiment is horribly flawed as noted by countless, without even reaching past the bars to your "proferred interpretation". Effects preceding cause is as much nonsense as your stipulation of "must choose what you want to choose" turtle recurse to infinity and beyond, but not as absolutely loopy as your "choose to get others to choose when I don't believe in choice" shattered process, nor as reprehensible as your psychopathic posted urge to murder countless. And then there's your rank unabashed dishonesty, as what you cough about here with "if" has been related to you a multitude of times since the beginning. On that note, you've also called me "deranged", which is the mental illness equivalent of "n*****"
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 17, 2017 23:58:58 GMT
tpfkar If you didn't believe that human decisions allowed for effects to precede cause, then at most, your cavil would be a semantical one, and you certainly wouldn't take issue with my proferred interpretation of the results of the Libet experiment, and others. The Libet experiment is horribly flawed as noted by countless, without even reaching past the bars to your "proferred interpretation". Effects preceding cause is as much nonsense as your stipulation of "must choose what you want to choose" turtle recurse to infinity and beyond, but not as absolutely loopy as your "choose to get others to choose when I don't believe in choice" shattered process, nor as reprehensible as your psychopathic posted urge to murder countless. And then there's your rank unabashed dishonesty, as what you cough about here with "if" has been related to you a multitude of times since the beginning. On that note, you've also called me "deranged", which is the mental illness equivalent of "n*****"Whether that's the case or not, you would accept the conclusion (as I have interpreted it) as obvious, if you did not believe that human consciousness allowed for a suspension or overriding of causality.
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on Dec 18, 2017 0:05:13 GMT
tpfkar The Libet experiment is horribly flawed as noted by countless, without even reaching past the bars to your "proferred interpretation". Effects preceding cause is as much nonsense as your stipulation of "must choose what you want to choose" turtle recurse to infinity and beyond, but not as absolutely loopy as your "choose to get others to choose when I don't believe in choice" shattered process, nor as reprehensible as your psychopathic posted urge to murder countless. And then there's your rank unabashed dishonesty, as what you cough about here with "if" has been related to you a multitude of times since the beginning. On that note, you've also called me "deranged", which is the mental illness equivalent of "n*****"Whether that's the case or not, you would accept the conclusion (as I have interpreted it) as obvious, if you did not believe that human consciousness allowed for a suspension or overriding of causality. Nope, not even close. Because it's shattered thinking with blatant baked in self-contradictions, and not solely because you're fundamentally dishonest based on your need and regardless of how traumatized your were by your distressing crisis of faith ordeals. Not at all, because it's better for me to suffer than for a greater number of people to suffer.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 18, 2017 0:18:54 GMT
tpfkar Whether that's the case or not, you would accept the conclusion (as I have interpreted it) as obvious, if you did not believe that human consciousness allowed for a suspension or overriding of causality. Nope, not even close. Because it's shattered thinking with blatant baked in self-contradictions, and not solely because you're fundamentally dishonest based on your need and regardless of how traumatized your were by your distressing crisis of faith ordeals. Not at all, because it's better for me to suffer than for a greater number of people to suffer. So you think that conscious decisions have been made before the brain has engaged in the necessary activity to produce the decision? And we're aware of these decisions before our brain has had the chance to actively produce the awareness of the decision having been made?
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on Dec 18, 2017 0:26:22 GMT
tpfkar So you think that conscious decisions have been made before the brain has engaged in the necessary activity to produce the decision? And we're aware of these decisions before our brain has had the chance to actively produce the awareness of the decision having been made? Such simplistic thought processes. Pre-loaded gonna-do choices and reliance on trained reflexes and biological support systems doesn't yield any of your loopy goop. And if society wants the fairest possible state of affairs, that would mean no humans and no society.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 18, 2017 1:58:48 GMT
tpfkar So you think that conscious decisions have been made before the brain has engaged in the necessary activity to produce the decision? And we're aware of these decisions before our brain has had the chance to actively produce the awareness of the decision having been made? Such simplistic thought processes. Pre-loaded gonna-do choices and reliance on trained reflexes and biological support systems doesn't yield any of your loopy goop. And if society wants the fairest possible state of affairs, that would mean no humans and no society.Whatever that means, you haven't provided any evidence for it, and is therefore likely coloured by your ongoing struggle with a crisis of faith. ![](https://s26.postimg.org/3xtq334bd/tongue.gif) ![](https://s26.postimg.org/jslxytg9l/jump1.gif) ![](https://s26.postimg.org/3xtq334bd/tongue.gif)
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on Dec 18, 2017 2:06:10 GMT
tpfkar Whatever that means, you haven't provided any evidence for it, and is therefore likely coloured by your ongoing struggle with a crisis of faith. ![](https://s26.postimg.org/3xtq334bd/tongue.gif) ![](https://s26.postimg.org/jslxytg9l/jump1.gif) ![](https://s26.postimg.org/3xtq334bd/tongue.gif) I can't help it that you need to misstate/distort the science so badly for your psychopathy. Or deny how we operate daily, constantly. And you're the one that's posted about your distressing ordeals with crises of faith. I've never had one, as I never believed in the stuff. But nice emojis of you and your attendants! ![satisfied](https://s16.postimg.org/jv3i34dsl/satisfied.png) On that note, you've also called me "deranged", which is the mental illness equivalent of "n*****"
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 18, 2017 5:25:39 GMT
tpfkar Whatever that means, you haven't provided any evidence for it, and is therefore likely coloured by your ongoing struggle with a crisis of faith. ![](https://s26.postimg.org/3xtq334bd/tongue.gif) ![](https://s26.postimg.org/jslxytg9l/jump1.gif) ![](https://s26.postimg.org/3xtq334bd/tongue.gif) I can't help it that you need to misstate/distort the science so badly for your psychopathy. Or deny how we operate daily, constantly. And you're the one that's posted about your distressing ordeals with crises of faith. I've never had one, as I never believed in the stuff. But nice emojis of you and your attendants! ![satisfied](https://s16.postimg.org/jv3i34dsl/satisfied.png) On that note, you've also called me "deranged", which is the mental illness equivalent of "n*****"Never believed in what stuff? You have faith in a concept that you can't even define, because the alternative to that nebulous concept would trigger existential angst and terror. You also have faith in the sanctity of life and that peacefully inducing non-existence in someone in distress at that person's behest is a greater harm (even though you've stated that you don't believe that they move on to a state in which they can be harmed) than having them face an indefinite future of the type of harm that was so distressing as to induce a desire to die (thus escaping the harm) in that person.
|
|
Lugh
Sophomore
![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_yellow.png)
@dcu
Posts: 848
Likes: 77
![](http://storage.proboards.com/6692551/images/CTEdkGf0wmfSETIzYiXk.gif)
|
Post by Lugh on Dec 18, 2017 9:30:36 GMT
So you think that conscious decisions have been made before the brain has engaged in the necessary activity to produce the decision? And we're aware of these decisions before our brain has had the chance to actively produce the awareness of the decision having been made? Why do you think that it isn't possible that they occur at the same time? Anyways all you are doing is advocating for biological determinism not determinism itself. Few educated people woukd disagree that our life is determined by our genotype. Even if what you say is true the part of our brain, which would make the decision before we are aware of it is still us. We are not a ghost in the machine to quote Gilbert Ryle and there is no Cartesian theater, to employ the term used by Dennett.
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on Dec 18, 2017 9:33:12 GMT
tpfkar Never believed in what stuff? You have faith in a concept that you can't even define, because the alternative to that nebulous concept would trigger existential angst and terror. You also have faith in the sanctity of life and that peacefully inducing non-existence in someone in distress at that person's behest is a greater harm (even though you've stated that you don't believe that they move on to a state in which they can be harmed) than having them face an indefinite future of the type of harm that was so distressing as to induce a desire to die (thus escaping the harm) in that person. Any of the various things you've said you've been distressed about with your crises of faith. ![](https://s26.postimg.org/gf93ycxax/giveup.gif) It's so pathetic but typical when you ultra-religious types try to project your various wet-sheet times struggling with your religions onto other people. To call religious the very straightforward noting of what's obvious from continuous experience and in no way overturned or at this point even contradicted by science, especially on the back of a crazy person's fervent religious need + patent derangements and irrationalities. Atheism's a faith too, right, wot wot. You're a homicidally insane hoot. ![(Emojipedia 5.0) Crazy Face](https://s26.postimg.org/p3lh61a61/emojipedia_grinning-face-with-one-large-and-one-.png) Not at all, because it's better for me to suffer than for a greater number of people to suffer.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 18, 2017 11:07:02 GMT
So you think that conscious decisions have been made before the brain has engaged in the necessary activity to produce the decision? And we're aware of these decisions before our brain has had the chance to actively produce the awareness of the decision having been made? Why do you think that it isn't possible that they occur at the same time? Anyways all you are doing is advocating for biological determinism not determinism itself. Few educated people woukd disagree that our life is determined by our genotype. Even if what you say is true the part of our brain, which would make the decision before we are aware of it is still us. We are not a ghost in the machine to quote Gilbert Ryle and there is no Cartesian theater, to employ the term used by Dennett. One thing has to cause the other. If they're occurring simultaneously, then the brain activity cannot be causing the decision, nor the other way around. One thing has to come first. And I never claimed that it wasn't 'us' making the decision; given that the brain is where the sense of identity develops.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 18, 2017 11:19:27 GMT
tpfkar Never believed in what stuff? You have faith in a concept that you can't even define, because the alternative to that nebulous concept would trigger existential angst and terror. You also have faith in the sanctity of life and that peacefully inducing non-existence in someone in distress at that person's behest is a greater harm (even though you've stated that you don't believe that they move on to a state in which they can be harmed) than having them face an indefinite future of the type of harm that was so distressing as to induce a desire to die (thus escaping the harm) in that person. Any of the various things you've said you've been distressed about with your crises of faith. ![](https://s26.postimg.org/gf93ycxax/giveup.gif) It's so pathetic but typical when you ultra-religious types try to project your various wet-sheet times struggling with your religions onto other people. To call religious the very straightforward noting of what's obvious from continuous experience and in no way overturned or at this point even contradicted by science, especially on the back of a crazy person's fervent religious need + patent derangements and irrationalities. Atheism's a faith too, right, wot wot. You're a homicidally insane hoot. ![(Emojipedia 5.0) Crazy Face](https://s26.postimg.org/p3lh61a61/emojipedia_grinning-face-with-one-large-and-one-.png) Not at all, because it's better for me to suffer than for a greater number of people to suffer. I've never claimed to be distressed by a crisis of faith. But I'm a very empathetic person, so can put myself in the position of holding logically incoherent beliefs (which can't even be defined as a process, much less observed in action through the relevant branches of science) which are integral to one's emotional wellbeing, then having those logically incoherent beliefs exposed to the cold and indifferent light of reason, thus precipitating a spell of existential thrashing about in angst. Which is why I was prepared to forgive, and continue to be willing to forgive, the volleys of unprovoked insults.
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on Dec 18, 2017 11:29:17 GMT
tpfkar Any of the various things you've said you've been distressed about with your crises of faith. ![](https://s26.postimg.org/gf93ycxax/giveup.gif) It's so pathetic but typical when you ultra-religious types try to project your various wet-sheet times struggling with your religions onto other people. To call religious the very straightforward noting of what's obvious from continuous experience and in no way overturned or at this point even contradicted by science, especially on the back of a crazy person's fervent religious need + patent derangements and irrationalities. Atheism's a faith too, right, wot wot. You're a homicidally insane hoot. ![(Emojipedia 5.0) Crazy Face](https://s26.postimg.org/p3lh61a61/emojipedia_grinning-face-with-one-large-and-one-.png) Not at all, because it's better for me to suffer than for a greater number of people to suffer. I've never claimed to be distressed by a crisis of faith. But I'm a very empathetic person, so can put myself in the position of holding logically incoherent beliefs (which can't even be defined as a process, much less observed in action through the relevant branches of science) which are integral to one's emotional wellbeing, then having those logically incoherent beliefs exposed to the cold and indifferent light of reason, thus precipitating a spell of existential thrashing about in angst. Which is why I was prepared to forgive, and continue to be willing to forgive, the volleys of unprovoked insults. You said you know it's a distressing ordeal. ![](https://s26.postimg.org/gf93ycxax/giveup.gif) I've got no real clue as I've not experienced one. And you've noted how you've struggled, how you're not happy, how you used to be into procreation so much that you dedicated sappy 70s songs to it. Project all you need to, but it's utterly transparent outside the fictions you've constructed in your head. And again, sorry after your safe space moans you again wail about sober estimation of your continuous irrationalities as "insult". The worst you could say if science and reason backed you up is that somebody's incredulous because they can't get beyond their actual experiences. But you're so desperate to spread the taint of your morbid purity religion, complete with your own rapture, that you project your own distress onto others. And are you now saying you don't want Trump to start an apocalypse? On that note, you've also called me "deranged", which is the mental illness equivalent of "n*****"
|
|