#209079 - 01/16/13 02:35 AM
Re: Determinism
[Re: maverick]
|
addict
Registered: 06/05/10
Posts: 618
Loc: Lower Aberdeen, Mississippi
|
A fancy modern sciencey retelling of an old word: fatalism. but I would say that, wouldn't I, given the existing conditions...?  Ah but remember, Maverick, you only think in terms of a purposeless existence. But Lo, with the Big Bang came purpose. We might not know our purpose. How could we? We are only deterministic. But think about it. Whatever the Big Bang was all about... that is our purpose. 
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#209087 - 01/16/13 12:32 PM
Re: Determinism
[Re: jenny jenny]
|
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 06/23/08
Posts: 5287
Loc: Land of the Flat Water
|
Fatalism?
Can you be more specific, please.
Edited by LukeJavan8 (01/16/13 12:33 PM)
_________________________
----please, draw me a sheep----
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#209091 - 01/16/13 01:31 PM
Re: Determinism
[Re: Buffalo Shrdlu]
|
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 06/23/08
Posts: 5287
Loc: Land of the Flat Water
|
I see. Thanks. Some study is needed on my part. Appreciate it.
_________________________
----please, draw me a sheep----
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#209092 - 01/16/13 02:44 PM
Re: Determinism
[Re: Buffalo Shrdlu]
|
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 04/03/00
Posts: 10463
Loc: this too shall pass
|
see esp. fatalism for a contrast of determinism, fatalism and predeterminism.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#209094 - 01/16/13 04:56 PM
Re: the preterite & the elect
[Re: tsuwm]
|
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 08/13/05
Posts: 3269
Loc: R'lyeh
|
Sheep go to heaven and goats go to hell.
_________________________
Ceci n'est pas un seing.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#209099 - 01/16/13 07:51 PM
Re: Determinism
[Re: BranShea]
|
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 12/01/00
Posts: 13653
|
My at one time 17 year old son tried to convince me that as soon as all data about everything would be known and collected we would be able to completely control the course of events. He was quite certain this would happen. I don't know, they still can't get the weather forcast totally right.
The only problem is that we will never know all the data about anything.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#209110 - 01/17/13 08:40 AM
Re: Determinism
[Re: Jackie]
|
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 12/01/00
Posts: 13653
|
we will never know all the data about anything. What about the multiplication table? Fine. Why does 2x2=4?
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#209112 - 01/17/13 11:19 AM
[Re: Faldage]
|
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 08/13/05
Posts: 3269
Loc: R'lyeh
|
Why does 2x2=4?
Is the answer to "why" data? Or is it "theory".
I figure that 2x2=4 is axiomatic. Same as those "parallel lines that never meet" sort of thing.
A good book to read about why the weather forecasts often are incorrect is James Gleick's Chaos: Making a New Science.
_________________________
Ceci n'est pas un seing.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#209232 - 01/24/13 12:45 AM
Re:
[Re: Jackie]
|
addict
Registered: 06/05/10
Posts: 618
Loc: Lower Aberdeen, Mississippi
|
"Everything is determined, the beginning as well as the end, by forces over which we have no control. It is determined for the insect as well as the star. Human beings, vegetables, or cosmic dust, we all dance to a mysterious tune, intoned in the distance by an invisible piper."
- Albert Einstein
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#209255 - 01/25/13 11:06 PM
Re: Mumbo Jumbo
[Re: BranShea]
|
addict
Registered: 06/05/10
Posts: 618
Loc: Lower Aberdeen, Mississippi
|
"Nothing in education is so astonishing as the amount of ignorance it accumulates in the form of inert facts."
_______________________________ Henry Brooks Adams(1838-1918)historian
Branshe and Jackie; Determinism is not something we understand with words. We understand determinism through our interactions with the world about us. The crocodile silently waits [progressive time] until a tasty antelope stops at the water's edge for a quick drink [cause] SNAP! [effect].
And so it is with every event that we humans and lowly bugs, etc. have observed with our senses since senses began.
And words and systems of words can't change that fact.
Unless, that is, we come to understand words in a new light.
Edited by jenny jenny (01/26/13 01:46 AM)
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#209289 - 01/28/13 07:10 AM
Re: Mumbo Jumbo
[Re: Jackie]
|
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 12/01/00
Posts: 13653
|
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#209290 - 01/28/13 09:22 AM
Re: Mumbo Jumbo
[Re: Faldage]
|
addict
Registered: 06/05/10
Posts: 618
Loc: Lower Aberdeen, Mississippi
|
Dear Jackie, please let me explain what the Faldage meant when he said "no". He said... In my few years on Earth I have never had a life experience that could be described as being transcendental.
But what difference does that make? The myriad events that constitute our reality is beyond human calculation so it is best to view the world as being absolutely chaotic.
And from this chaos we can build any logical semantical construct we please.
And it pleases us to bestow on ourselves this concept we call Free Will.Faldage, of course, would have said this in fewer words. 
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#209299 - 01/28/13 06:51 PM
Re: Mumbo Jumbo
[Re: Jackie]
|
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 12/01/00
Posts: 13653
|
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#209306 - 01/29/13 08:53 AM
Re: Determinism
[Re: BranShea]
|
journeyman
Registered: 10/22/10
Posts: 75
Loc: London, UK
|
I have spent many hours on philosophy forums discussing determinism and free will. Many people seem to have dogmatic views about these matters, but I have not yet reached any firm conclusions myself.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#209332 - 01/30/13 11:59 PM
Re: Determinism
[Re: Jackie]
|
addict
Registered: 06/05/10
Posts: 618
Loc: Lower Aberdeen, Mississippi
|
No Jackie, you don't have to LIU (look it up). I am determined to initiate here on this thread a Socratic discussion about the nature of words and human existence. Starting tomorrow. Tonight I am being entertained by a Kentucky gentleman named Evan Williams. He makes me giddy and I want to be clear-headed when I explain what Faldage won't explain because he has yet to understand what he has read. Maverick might; tsuwm might; Rubarb surely might; and AC and the BranShea and the rest of the gang surely will. See you tomorrow.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#209333 - 01/31/13 06:51 AM
Re: Determinism
[Re: jenny jenny]
|
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 12/01/00
Posts: 13653
|
I want to be clear-headed when I explain what Faldage won't explain because he has yet to understand what he has read. If I understood it right away it wouldn't have been much of a book, considering the subject matter.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#209345 - 01/31/13 11:02 PM
Re: Determinism
[Re: Faldage]
|
addict
Registered: 06/05/10
Posts: 618
Loc: Lower Aberdeen, Mississippi
|
I want to be clear-headed when I explain what Faldage won't explain because he has yet to understand what he has read. If I understood it right away it wouldn't have been much of a book, considering the subject matter. How true. And how humble for you to admit it. But I can't wait. I go now post-haste to share my keen thoughts on Determinismon in a post below.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#209349 - 02/01/13 11:28 AM
Re: Determinism
[Re: Faldage]
|
addict
Registered: 06/05/10
Posts: 618
Loc: Lower Aberdeen, Mississippi
|
DETERMINISM EXPLAINED
In the beginning was the word;
and the word was with God;
and the word was God.
Read this passage from John 1.1 closely. Then read it again. Burn it into your brain. This is important. If it wasn't I wouldn't have put it there
Was there ever a absolute void? If there was we can never comprehend it. A total absence of everything (except as an abstract) is incomprehensible simply because our sensory system for collecting information about the world around us operates within a linear frame of ever-progressive Time where cause precedes effect. In our world not even the tiniest "something" can pop into existence from a Universe of absolute nothing.
...to be continued. (posting problems)
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#209353 - 02/01/13 03:54 PM
Re: Determinism
[Re: jenny jenny]
|
addict
Registered: 06/05/10
Posts: 618
Loc: Lower Aberdeen, Mississippi
|
PAGE TWO: DETERMINISN EXPLAINED
So like science let's start in the middle (after the unknown something has already banged) and build a Universe around the last Big Bang*. Here Science is in its realm. Observation and computation and sometimes thinking are the prime investigating tools of their trade. But (like language) the tools they use give them fuzzy outlines. We will return to this later.
These are exciting times for xplanet astrometry. As of last month 26 planets have been found circling other stars. New xplanets are being found almost daily but so far no one xplanet has been seen, rather, they have been inferred by the gravitation wobble they cause as they circle their Sun. So far about one in six stars are found to have a planet. To extrapolate there are probably 26,000,000,000,000 planets in this Universe.
*Of coure, we don't know how many times our Universe has exploded and contracted or how many Universes if any, are beyond our own.
Note: I have to chop up my points here on AWAD because there is a limit to what you can see as you write.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#209354 - 02/01/13 04:11 PM
Re: Determinism
[Re: jenny jenny]
|
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 04/03/00
Posts: 10463
Loc: this too shall pass
|
so write it offline in an editor (e.g., Notepad) and paste it in your little post box, viz.:
Determinism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This article is about the general notion of determinism in philosophy. For other uses, see Determinism (disambiguation).
Not to be confused with Fatalism, Predeterminism, or Predictability.
Determinism is a metaphysical philosophical position stating that for everything that happens there are conditions such that, given those conditions, nothing else could happen. "There are many determinisms, depending upon what pre-conditions are considered to be determinative of an event."[1] Determinism throughout the history of philosophy has sprung from diverse considerations, some of which overlap. Some forms of determinism can be tested empirically with ideas stemming from physics and the philosophy of physics. The opposite of determinism is some kind of indeterminism (otherwise called nondeterminism). Determinism is often contrasted with free will.[2]
Determinism often is taken to mean simply causal determinism, that is, basing determinism upon the idea of cause-and-effect. It is the concept that events within a given paradigm are bound by causality in such a way that any state (of an object or event) is completely determined by prior states. This meaning can be distinguished from other varieties of determinism mentioned below.
The introduction of "cause-and-effect" introduces unnecessary complications related to what is meant by a 'cause' and how the presence of a 'cause' might be established, the interpretation of which varies from one physical theory to another. These complications are avoided by a more general formulation based upon connections between 'events' supplied by a theory:
"a theory is deterministic if, and only if, given its state variables for some initial period, the theory logically determines a unique set of values for those variables for any other period."[3]
—Ernest Nagel, Alternative descriptions of physical state p. 292
This quote replaces the idea of 'cause-and-effect' with that of 'logical implication' according to one or another theory that connects events. In addition, an 'event' is related by the theory itself to formalized states described using the parameters defined by that theory. Thus, the details of interpretation are placed where they belong, fitted to the context in which the chosen theory applies.
Other debates often concern the scope of determined systems, with some maintaining that the entire universe (or multiverse) is a single determinate system and others identifying other more limited determinate systems. For example, using the definition of physical determinism above, the limitations of a theory to some particular domain of experience also limits the associated definition of 'determinism' to that same domain.
There are numerous historical debates involving many philosophical positions and varieties of determinism. They include debates concerning determinism and free will, technically denoted as compatibilistic (allowing the two to coexist) and incompatibilistic (denying their coexistence is a possibility).
Determinism should not be confused with self-determination of human actions by reasons, motives, and desires. Determinism rarely requires that perfect prediction be practically possible – merely predictable in theory.
Many philosophical theories of determinism frame themselves with the idea that reality follows a sort of predetermined path
Causal determinism is "the idea that every event is necessitated by antecedent events and conditions together with the laws of nature".[4] However, causal determinism is a broad enough term to consider that "one's deliberations, choices, and actions will often be necessary links in the causal chain that brings something about. In other words, even though our deliberations, choices, and actions are themselves determined like everything else, it is still the case, according to causal determinism, that the occurrence or existence of yet other things depends upon our deliberating, choosing and acting in a certain way".[5] Causal determinism proposes that there is an unbroken chain of prior occurrences stretching back to the origin of the universe. The relation between events may not be specified, nor the origin of that universe. Causal determinists believe that there is nothing uncaused or self-caused. Historical determinism (a sort of path dependence) can also be synonymous with causal determinism.
Nomological determinism (sometimes called 'scientific' determinism, although that is a misnomer) is the most common form of causal determinism. It is the notion that the past and the present dictate the future entirely and necessarily by rigid natural laws, that every occurrence results inevitably from prior events. Quantum mechanics and various interpretations thereof pose a serious challenge to this view. Nomological determinism is sometimes illustrated by the thought experiment of Laplace's demon.[6]
Physical determinism holds holds that all physical events occur as described by physical laws.[7][8] Depending upon definitions, there is some room here for the view that not everything in the universe must be tied to some physical state, but that view is not usually emphasized by adherents of physical determinism because of the widely accepted scientific view that the operation of all physical systems (often unnecessarily taken to mean everything) can be explained entirely in physical terms, the assumed causal closure of physics.
Necessitarianism is very related to the causal determinism described above. It is a metaphysical principle that denies all mere possibility; there is exactly one way for the world to be. Leucippus claimed there were no uncaused events, and that everything occurs for a reason and by necessity.[9]
Predeterminism is the idea that all events are determined in advance.[10][11] The concept of predeterminism is often argued by invoking causal determinism, implying that there is an unbroken chain of prior occurrences stretching back to the origin of the universe. In the case of predeterminism, this chain of events has been pre-established, and human actions cannot interfere with the outcomes of this pre-established chain. Predeterminism can be used to mean such pre-established causal determinism, in which case it is categorised as a specific type of determinism.[10][12] It can also be used interchangeably with causal determinism - in the context of its capacity to determine future events.[10][13] Despite this, predeterminism is often considered as independent of causal determinism.[14][15] The term predeterminism is also frequently used in the context of biology and hereditary, in which case it represents a form of biological determinism.[16]
Fatalism is normally distinguished from "determinism".[17] Fatalism is the idea that everything is fated to happen, so that humans have no control over their future. Fate has arbitrary power, and need not follow any causal or otherwise deterministic laws.[18] Types of Fatalism include hard theological determinism and the idea of predestination, where there is a God who determines all that humans will do. This may be accomplished either by knowing their actions in advance, via some form of omniscience[19] or by decreeing their actions in advance.[20]
Theological determinism is a form of determinism which states that all events that happen are pre-ordained, or predestined to happen, by a monotheistic deity, or that they are destined to occur given its omniscience. Two forms of theological determinism exist, here referenced as strong and weak theological determinism.[21] The first one, strong theological determinism, is based on the concept of a creator deity dictating all events in history: "everything that happens has been predestined to happen by an omniscient, omnipotent divinity".[22] The second form, weak theological determinism, is based on the concept of divine foreknowledge - "because God's omniscience is perfect, what God knows about the future will inevitably happen, which means, consequently, that the future is already fixed".[23] There exist slight variations on the above categorisation. Some claim that theological determinism requires predestination of all events and outcomes by the divinity (i.e. they do not classify the weaker version as 'theological determinism' unless libertarian free will is assumed to be denied as a consequence), or that the weaker version does not constitute 'theological determinism' at all.[24] With respect to free will, "theological determinism is the thesis that God exists and has infallible knowledge of all true propositions including propositions about our future actions", more minimal criteria designed to encapsulate all forms of theological determinism.[25] Theological determinism can also be seen as a form of causal determinism, in which the antecedent conditions are the nature and will of God.[5]
Logical determinism or Determinateness is the notion that all propositions, whether about the past, present, or future, are either true or false. Note that one can support Causal Determinism without necessarily supporting Logical Determinism and vice versa (depending on one's views on the nature of time, but also randomness). The problem of free will is especially salient now with Logical Determinism: how can choices be free, given that propositions about the future already have a truth value in the present (i.e. it is already determined as either true or false)? This is referred to as the problem of future contingents.
Adequate determinism focuses on the fact that, even without a full understanding of microscopic physics, we can predict the distribution of 1000 coin tosses
Often synonymous with Logical Determinism are the ideas behind Spatio-temporal Determinism or Eternalism: the view of special relativity. J. J. C. Smart, a proponent of this view, uses the term "tenselessness" to describe the simultaneous existence of past, present, and future. In physics, the "block universe" of Hermann Minkowski and Albert Einstein assumes that time is a fourth dimension (like the three spatial dimensions). In other words, all the other parts of time are real, like the city blocks up and down a street, although the order in which they appear depends on the driver (see Rietdijk–Putnam argument).
Adequate determinism is the idea that quantum indeterminacy can be ignored for most macroscopic events. This is because of quantum decoherence. Random quantum events "average out" in the limit of large numbers of particles (where the laws of quantum mechanics asymptotically approach the laws of classical mechanics).[26] Stephen Hawking explains a similar idea: he says that the microscopic world of quantum mechanics is one of determined probabilities. That is, quantum effects rarely alter the predictions of classical mechanics, which are quite accurate (albeit still not perfectly certain) at larger scales.[27] Something as large as an animal cell, then, would be "adequately determined" (even in light of quantum indeterminacy).
Nature and nurture interact in humans. A scientist looking at a sculpture after some time does not ask whether we are seeing the effects of the starting materials OR environmental influences.
Although some of the above forms of determinism concern human behaviors and cognition, others frame themselves as an answer to the Nature or Nurture debate. They will suggest that one factor will entirely determine behavior. As scientific understanding has grown, however, the strongest versions of these theories have been widely rejected as a single cause fallacy.[28]
In other words, the modern deterministic theories attempt to explain how the interaction of both nature and nurture is entirely predictable. The concept of heritability has been helpful to make this distinction.
Biological determinism, sometimes called Genetic determinism, is the idea that each of our behaviors, beliefs, and desires are fixed by our genetic nature.
Behaviorism is the idea that all behavior can be traced to specific causes—either environmental or reflexive. This Nurture-focused determinism was developed by John B. Watson and B. F. Skinner.
Cultural determinism or social determinism is the nurture-focused theory that it is the culture in which we are raised that determines who we are.
Environmental determinism is also known as climatic or geographical determinism. It holds the view that the physical environment, rather than social conditions, determines culture. Supporters often also support Behavioral determinism. Key proponents of this notion have included Ellen Churchill Semple, Ellsworth Huntington, Thomas Griffith Taylor and possibly Jared Diamond, although his status as an environmental determinist is debated.[29]
A technological determinist might suggest that technology like the mobile phone is the greatest factor shaping human civilization.
Other 'deterministic' theories actually seek only to highlight the importance of a particular factor in predicting the future. These theories often use the factor as a sort of guide or constraint on the future. They need not suppose that complete knowledge of that one factor would allow us to make perfect predictions.
Psychological determinism can mean that humans must act according to reason, but it can also be synonymous with some sort of Psychological egoism. The latter is the view that humans will always act according to their perceived best interest.
Linguistic determinism claims that our language determines (at least limits) the things we can think and say and thus know. The Sapir–Whorf hypothesis argues that individuals experience the world based on the grammatical structures they habitually use.
Economic determinism is the theory which attributes primacy to the economic structure over politics in the development of human history. It is associated with the dialectical materialism of Karl Marx.
Technological determinism is a reductionist theory that presumes that a society's technology drives the development of its social structure and cultural values. Media determinism, a subset of technological determinism, is a philosophical and sociological position which posits the power of the media to impact society. Two leading media determinists are the Canadian scholars Harold Innis and Marshall McLuhan.
[snip]
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#209612 - 02/17/13 11:03 PM
Re: Determinism
[Re: BranShea]
|
addict
Registered: 06/05/10
Posts: 618
Loc: Lower Aberdeen, Mississippi
|
Dear, dear, tsuwm; disarticulated facts are the stuff of idiot savants. Read here the semantic evidence for Determinism. And if after reading it you don't understand it go back and read it again because you have done a poor job of putting it together.
1) In your mind multiply the total number of atoms in the universe times their interactions with other atoms since the Big Bang exploded fifteen billion years ago.
2) Life is defined by self-replication and change.
3) Lifeforms as entities extend into the environment.
4) Thoughts and words are physical extentions of lifeforms.
5) Nothing can't beget something.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#209619 - 02/18/13 03:36 PM
Re: Determinism
[Re: olly]
|
addict
Registered: 06/05/10
Posts: 618
Loc: Lower Aberdeen, Mississippi
|
So, before the big bang there was something???
Just physically extending Yes olly, you extend physically very well.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#209621 - 02/18/13 04:26 PM
Re: Determinism
[Re: jenny jenny]
|
old hand
Registered: 11/13/11
Posts: 1029
Loc: Lancaster, UK
|
But, it you believe in an omnipresent and ompnipotent god, all that is necessary is the (mind; will; existence? pick what you want) of god. Surely, that is what St John was saying? The universe was made extant by the Word.
[personally, I don't believe any of the above, but I think it is a viable argument]
PS And te Word of God is not of us, though with us, and is, therefore, not a pre-existing condition!
Edited by Rhubarb Commando (02/18/13 04:29 PM)
_________________________
I'm immortal until proven otherwise
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#209623 - 02/18/13 10:26 PM
Re: Determinism
[Re: Faldage]
|
addict
Registered: 06/05/10
Posts: 618
Loc: Lower Aberdeen, Mississippi
|
The concept of an omniscient God who is outside of time and the concept of free-will seem to me to be mutually exclusive. But that's why we try not to talk about religion here. What, Faldage? You got a mouse in your pocket? WE here can discuss whatever we please as long as WE are not rude or vulgar. RC, Olly, BranShe, you, and me, are not talking religion, we are talking Determinism so stay on point. Now listen closely... In the begining was the Word. And the word was God and the word was with God.Which translates deterministically as... Inherent with the Big Bang were all events to follow.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#209631 - 02/19/13 08:58 AM
Re: Determinism
[Re: olly]
|
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 08/13/05
Posts: 3269
Loc: R'lyeh
|
So, before the big bang there was something???
So, think some cosmologists. There are theories of multiple big bangs. Multiple universes, too. Not everybody agrees.
_________________________
Ceci n'est pas un seing.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#209632 - 02/19/13 10:00 AM
Re: Determinism
[Re: Faldage]
|
addict
Registered: 06/05/10
Posts: 618
Loc: Lower Aberdeen, Mississippi
|
I ain't sayin' nothin' no mo'. Thank you, Faldage. A lesser man would not have made an announcement. Back to Determinism: Each person if honest can prove to himself that he (or she) is a robot by simple introspection. Sex, food and drink are biological directives not options. The experincing organism -meaning you- perceives the lack of these biological imperatives as displeasure and their realization as pleasure. We all know this but pretend that we are in charge.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#209640 - 02/19/13 01:23 PM
Re: Determinism
[Re: zmjezhd]
|
addict
Registered: 06/05/10
Posts: 618
Loc: Lower Aberdeen, Mississippi
|
So, before the big bang there was something???
So, think some cosmologists. There are theories of multiple big bangs. Multiple universes, too. Not everybody agrees. I agree, zmjezhd. Cosmologies are suspect because there are so many of them. Oscillating and multiverse constructs seem rooted in mumbo-jumbo math otherwise someone would outshine Einstein.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#209646 - 02/19/13 06:03 PM
Re: Determinism
[Re: BranShea]
|
addict
Registered: 06/05/10
Posts: 618
Loc: Lower Aberdeen, Mississippi
|
5) Nothing can't beget something.
Even nothing is something, we cannot imagine 'nothing' nor the end of ends. BranShe, you agree and disagree with me in the same post, and strangely I end up agreeing with both. 
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#209662 - 02/20/13 09:07 AM
Re: fatalism
[Re: jenny jenny]
|
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 08/13/05
Posts: 3269
Loc: R'lyeh
|
Oscillating and multiverse constructs seem rooted in mumbo-jumbo math otherwise someone would outshine Einstein.
Not sure that "mumbo-jumbo math" has a meaning that I can glean. Math is math. Non-Euclidean geometry is still math. I'm not sure that, say, the math behind figuring out the speed of a falling object explains anything about objects or gravity, but it works and can be used for something. I'll take string theory and multiverse cosmologies over the bearded guy in the sky explanation. If nothing they are more aesthetically pleasing.
_________________________
Ceci n'est pas un seing.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#209686 - 02/21/13 09:11 AM
Re: Determinism
[Re: BranShea]
|
addict
Registered: 06/05/10
Posts: 618
Loc: Lower Aberdeen, Mississippi
|
5) Nothing can't beget something.
Even nothing is something, we cannot imagine 'nothing' nor the end of ends. BranShe, you agree and disagree with me in the same post, and strangely I end up agreeing with both. Then could you agree with me that nothing can beget something? ( which contradicts your fifth amendment?)  Now BranShea (may I call you BS?) you tease me - you well know that all "nothings" are not the same. e.g. Nothing can become something and nothing can become something are yin and yang - exact opposites. A good ear connected to a good mind will understand this.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#209696 - 02/21/13 02:38 PM
Re: fatalism
[Re: zmjezhd]
|
addict
Registered: 06/05/10
Posts: 618
Loc: Lower Aberdeen, Mississippi
|
Not sure that "mumbo-jumbo math" has a meaning that I can glean. Math is math. Non-Euclidean geometry is still math. I'm not sure that, say, the math behind figuring out the speed of a falling object explains anything about objects or gravity, but it works and can be used for something. I'll take string theory and multiverse cosmologies over the bearded guy in the sky explanation. If nothing they are more aesthetically pleasing. Yes, zmjezhd, I agree, like language math has a function. Yet math, like language, is fuzzy in outline mainly because in our Universe there are no two identical entities to add...or subtract...or muliply, even if that difference is only its unique position in time/space. And I know of no religion that believes God is a bearded or not bearded guy sitting or standing in a sky or not sky Heaven. Except symbolically.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#209702 - 02/21/13 10:59 PM
Determinism pt, 2 The secret sharer
[Re: jenny jenny]
|
addict
Registered: 06/05/10
Posts: 618
Loc: Lower Aberdeen, Mississippi
|
Since the Faldage saw fit to recuse himself from this ad hoc court I will hereby give the high points of the book he just read but refuses to review. I list the salient points below.
1) When driving and texting or listening to a ball game or just deep thinking; who is doing the driving?
2) A name you couldn't remember suddenly pops into your head. How?
3) Who is dreaming when you dream?
The answer is your undermind. You, your ego, your operating clichés, etc. are merely servo- mechanisms for the real you - your subconscious mind.
He, not you, is driving.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#209738 - 02/23/13 10:29 AM
Re: Determinism pt, 2 The secret sharer
[Re: BranShea]
|
addict
Registered: 06/05/10
Posts: 618
Loc: Lower Aberdeen, Mississippi
|
Thanks Branshe, an honest opinion makes my day especially when it comes from a fellow woman. But sometimes we must sneak up on a gestalt rather than employing the use of Socratic tricks. Naturally you are biased, after all you are the external represenative to the human and non-human world you walk through, you give out and gather information and get to taste the bitter and the sweet therein so it is no wonder you feel "top dog".
But meanwhile, while you sleep and while you are busy being a sensor, a bigger drama is talking place; a drama that takes it's dictates from a far greater imperative - your raison d'être that is and was inherent in the Big Bang.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#209757 - 02/24/13 05:28 PM
Re: Determinism pt, 2 The secret scarer
[Re: Jackie]
|
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 11/13/00
Posts: 3146
Loc: Northamptonshire, England
|
I solved a tricky programming problem in my head coming home from Bedford tonight. No gestalt, no determinism, and my eyes and subconscious were firmly on the road. This holds true for me, too, if I am talking to a passenger in the car. It doesn't hold good if I am having a phone conversation while I drive. So I don't.
Is this relevant? Probably not.
I gave up on philosophy when I realised that for every tenable philosophical theorem there is an equally tenable anti-theorem.
_________________________
The idiot also known as Capfka ...
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#209770 - 02/25/13 04:42 AM
: Determinism: As a template for living your life
[Re: Capital Kiwi]
|
addict
Registered: 06/05/10
Posts: 618
Loc: Lower Aberdeen, Mississippi
|
I solved a tricky programming problem in my head coming home from Bedford tonight. No gestalt, no determinism, and my eyes and subconscious were firmly on the road. This holds true for me, too, if I am talking to a passenger in the car. It doesn't hold good if I am having a phone conversation while I drive. So I don't.
Is this relevant?
Probably not. I gave up on philosophy when I realised that for every tenable philosophical theorem there is an equally tenable anti-theorem. Good obsversations, Mister Kiwi; but maybeso your subconscious mind relieved the you of driving justso he could slip the solution to the programing problem into your obstinate forebrain with ease. And just curious; after you gave up on philosophies, what values, for God's sake, replaced them? Surely you don't live your life willy-nilly.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#209790 - 02/25/13 09:06 PM
Re: : Determinism: As a template for living your life
[Re: Faldage]
|
addict
Registered: 06/05/10
Posts: 618
Loc: Lower Aberdeen, Mississippi
|
Philosophy was OK back when it was helping us figure out how to think. When it took to defending the indefensible is when it got off the rails. I agree, Fladage. Your terse words serve as a marker to help move the discussion along. Thanks for your kind tips.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#209791 - 02/25/13 10:12 PM
Re: : Determinism: As a template for living your life
[Re: Jackie]
|
stranger
Registered: 02/25/13
Posts: 2
Loc: Viet Nam
|
I'm a Vietnamerse. My English is bad, so I need your help to improve my English. This is the first time I find your page and register. Thank you for helping.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#209795 - 02/25/13 11:32 PM
Re: : Determinism: As a template for living your life
[Re: moonlight]
|
addict
Registered: 06/05/10
Posts: 618
Loc: Lower Aberdeen, Mississippi
|
See Faldo, your pithy points serve to move the disscusion around. But no, moonlight, start your own thread to practice your English. There are hundreds of people here who might help you practice English, but it is rude of you to ask us to change the subject under discussion.
Edited by jenny jenny (02/25/13 11:35 PM)
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#209799 - 02/26/13 09:02 AM
Re: : Determinism: As a template for living your life
[Re: Jackie]
|
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 06/24/02
Posts: 7184
Loc: Vermont
|
Not so much rude as likely perplexed by how this site operates.
Welcome moonlight! Perhaps start a new topic in Q&A about Words. PLenty of people around to help!
_________________________
formerly known as etaoin...
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#209801 - 02/26/13 11:41 AM
Re: : Determinism: As a template for living your life
[Re: moonlight]
|
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 06/23/08
Posts: 5287
Loc: Land of the Flat Water
|
I'm a Vietnamerse. My English is bad, so I need your help to improve my English. This is the first time I find your page and register. Thank you for helping. Yes, WELCOME, and start a topic as Buff offered above.
_________________________
----please, draw me a sheep----
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#209836 - 02/28/13 02:20 AM
Re: : Determinism: As a template for living your life
[Re: LukeJavan8]
|
addict
Registered: 06/05/10
Posts: 618
Loc: Lower Aberdeen, Mississippi
|
Now, moving right along with what I've already said...
Biological Determinism dictates that all healthy human beings live their lives with an equal and proportional amount of perceived pleasure, ergo; the pursuit of pleasure is a bull-shitting tip.
For every unit of pleasure we experience we must undergo an equal experience of displeasure, so as to, so to speak, reset our biological clock e.g. the degree of displeasure of hunger will equal the amount of pleasure experienced when we eat. And so it goes with sex, etc. (if sex can have an etc.).
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
8424 Members
16 Forums
13686 Topics
209769 Posts
Max Online: 3341 @ 12/09/11 02:15 PM
|
|
|
0 registered (),
40
Guests and
2
Spiders online. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
31
|
|
|
|
Search
Re: a simple twist of fate [Re: BranShea]
Re: Determinism pt, 2 The secret scarer [Re: jenny jenny]
Previous Topic
Index