|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Jan 22, 2018 16:31:48 GMT
Some of neuroscience is coming to the view that, no, we don't (at least in the sense that it understands it). This is based on the significant finding of modern studies that a person's brain seems to commit to certain decisions before the person becomes aware of having made them. It is fair to say though that the jury is still, very much, out. For one thing 'free will' is defined in different ways by different people. But modern thinking would tie in to the suggestion that consciousness itself is a form of illusion, as in a device evolved to help complex organisms work best together.
A considered overview can be found here: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuroscience_of_free_will If science were to come to the conclusion that consciousness is an illusion, would that mean that there would no longer be any moral dilemmas arising from the use of torture (since if consciousness is illusory, so is pain)? This is probably a question for moral philosophers to answer rather than scientists. They can only report on what has been discovered empirically rather than on the existence (or not) of good and evil. I think the moral dilemmas would still exist, not least since torture is patently real enough to warrant censure.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 22, 2018 17:28:26 GMT
No. Omniscience and free will exist simultaneously. It's not even a difficult thing to understand how.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 23, 2018 1:28:10 GMT
No. Omniscience and free will exist simultaneously. It's not even a difficult thing to understand how. It's impossible to imagine how free will could operate (in any meaningful sense, and in the way it is most commonly understood) regardless of whether it's being overseen by an omniscient consciousness. But if the omniscient being could predict exactly how events would unfold, that also would mean that the universe is deterministic.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 23, 2018 16:31:01 GMT
No. Omniscience and free will exist simultaneously. It's not even a difficult thing to understand how. It's impossible to imagine how free will could operate (in any meaningful sense, and in the way it is most commonly understood) regardless of whether it's being overseen by an omniscient consciousness. But if the omniscient being could predict exactly how events would unfold, that also would mean that the universe is deterministic. It's not "predicting" per se. It's that God is not ruled by time. All things - past, present and future - are existing all at once from his perspective. Why is free will hard to imagine? For that matter, why the need to even imagine it? You're experiencing it every moment of your life, are you not? I certainly am.
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on Jan 23, 2018 18:10:39 GMT
tpfkar No. Omniscience and free will exist simultaneously. It's not even a difficult thing to understand how. It's impossible to imagine how free will could operate (in any meaningful sense, and in the way it is most commonly understood) regardless of whether it's being overseen by an omniscient consciousness. For those who supposedly don't believe real choice exists yet are ever choosing to frantically try to get peeps to choose to change their outlook to embrace ridiculous morbidity, that kind of incredulity figures. And that's still light-eons before sinking to getting your man in the WH to nuke the world. 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 Jan 24, 2018 0:55:31 GMT
It's impossible to imagine how free will could operate (in any meaningful sense, and in the way it is most commonly understood) regardless of whether it's being overseen by an omniscient consciousness. But if the omniscient being could predict exactly how events would unfold, that also would mean that the universe is deterministic. It's not "predicting" per se. It's that God is not ruled by time. All things - past, present and future - are existing all at once from his perspective. Why is free will hard to imagine? For that matter, why the need to even imagine it? You're experiencing it every moment of your life, are you not? I certainly am. In what sense are you experiencing free will? If you mean that you're experiencing free will in the sense that your actions are not deterministic, then how could this possibly work? Do you think about what thoughts your going to think before thinking them (and think about what thoughts you're going to think about thinking, before you think them, and so on ad infinitum)? If you aren't choosing which thoughts to think before thinking them, you cannot be operating with free will in the most traditionally and commonly accepted sense.
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on Jan 24, 2018 1:29:51 GMT
tpfkar Not if He twinkles His little nose and says it doesn't. What?!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 24, 2018 2:05:08 GMT
I find the open view of the future rather compelling, and it adequately settles the "free will" debate for me.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 24, 2018 15:14:37 GMT
It's not "predicting" per se. It's that God is not ruled by time. All things - past, present and future - are existing all at once from his perspective. Why is free will hard to imagine? For that matter, why the need to even imagine it? You're experiencing it every moment of your life, are you not? I certainly am. In what sense are you experiencing free will? If you mean that you're experiencing free will in the sense that your actions are not deterministic, then how could this possibly work? Do you think about what thoughts your going to think before thinking them (and think about what thoughts you're going to think about thinking, before you think them, and so on ad infinitum)? If you aren't choosing which thoughts to think before thinking them, you cannot be operating with free will in the most traditionally and commonly accepted sense. I exhibit my free will when I choose not consider things that I consider superfluous, like whether I thought about my thought before I thought it. Perhaps I am not hip to what the traditional and commonly accepted sense of free will is. To me, free will isn't something one must be familiar with greek philosophy in order to comprehend or define. I determine my fate from the moment I am born within the confines of my starting place, which is within a world of "other." There are directions that my teachers had for me, my parents wanted for me and that God has asked me to follow. Some of those continue down the same path, others veer from one another. But every step I take is my inertia.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 24, 2018 15:16:45 GMT
tpfkar Not if He twinkles His little nose and says it doesn't. What?!Bewitched?
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on Jan 24, 2018 15:38:17 GMT
tpfkar Not if He twinkles His little nose and says it doesn't. What?!Bewitched? All the same bucket. Small People
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 24, 2018 16:08:29 GMT
Wiccans will not be pleased with this association I'm afraid.
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on Jan 24, 2018 16:15:42 GMT
tpfkar Wiccans will not be pleased with this association I'm afraid. Internecine rivalries can be a real bitch. The Angels Are Voyeurs
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 24, 2018 16:24:29 GMT
tpfkar Wiccans will not be pleased with this association I'm afraid. Internecine rivalries can be a real bitch. The Angels Are VoyeursNow you've gone too far. Samantha was not a bitch.
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on Jan 24, 2018 16:30:17 GMT
tpfkar Now you've gone too far. Samantha was not a bitch. Not sure she was a rivalry. The center of a big one, I guess. Almost Human
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 24, 2018 16:34:01 GMT
tpfkar Now you've gone too far. Samantha was not a bitch. Not sure she was a rivalry. The center of a big one, I guess. Almost HumanWell, hey, I'm not sure "rivalries" can be "a" bitch either, but I was willing to let it slide. After all, whatever I send out into the universe...
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on Jan 24, 2018 16:57:00 GMT
tpfkar Not sure she was a rivalry. The center of a big one, I guess. Almost HumanWell, hey, I'm not sure "rivalries" can be "a" bitch either, but I was willing to let it slide. After all, whatever I send out into the universe... "Internecine rivalries can be real bitches" somehow dilutes the effect. The queen may crap a cow over it I guess. I raise my hand and the world goes "boom"
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 24, 2018 17:12:16 GMT
tpfkar Well, hey, I'm not sure "rivalries" can be "a" bitch either, but I was willing to let it slide. After all, whatever I send out into the universe... "Internecine rivalries can be real bitches" somehow dilutes the effect. The queen may crap a cow over it I guess. I raise my hand and the world goes "boom"You're concerned with subject/verb agreement ruining the effect of a phrase, but not concerned about the stunning visual of a woman excreting a cow out of her anus ruining my day?
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on Jan 24, 2018 17:28:56 GMT
tpfkar You're concerned with subject/verb agreement ruining the effect of a phrase, but not concerned about the stunning visual of a woman excreting a cow out of her anus ruining my day? In both cases, effect ruled the day. I guess I don't generally explicitly visualize idioms, slang or other. Little Bonnie
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 24, 2018 18:14:52 GMT
tpfkar You're concerned with subject/verb agreement ruining the effect of a phrase, but not concerned about the stunning visual of a woman excreting a cow out of her anus ruining my day? I guess I don't generally explicitly visualize idioms, slang or other. Little BonnieYou should start. It will greatly increase the quality of your idioms, as, surely, you will begin to empathize somewhat with the recipients of said idioms. After all, anyone can "just say" something vile. If you want to truly master the ability to disrupt, you should first immerse yourself in the imaginings of those things actually "being," and if in such immersion you find yourself approving of the visual (liking it perhaps?), your idiom will have the benefit of being both incendiary and honest.
|
|