An Answer to the problem of "Choice or Determinism"

[Age]

If you can NOT understand that, then, in other words, if you want some specific thing, then just ask for the ACTUAL specific thing that you want. Do you understand now?



LOL

You asked me: Do you mind explaining how you could have options when the future is uniquely determined by the past?

And I responded: No. Which MEANS that 'No I do NOT mind explaining how you could have options when the future is uniquely determined by the past.

BUT, you JUMPED to the CONCLUSION that I do NOT know what I am talking about. Which MEANS that either you had ALREADY CONCLUDED that NO one could know what they were talking about if what they were to talk about the OPPOSITE of what you WHOLEHEARTEDLY BELIEVE is true, BEFORE you even asked the APPARENT clarifying question, or, you JUMPED to YOUR CONCLUSION on seeing my responding answer.

LOOK, I KNOW what I have to talk about AND I can CLEARLY explain what I have to talk about.

CONSIDER the Fact that there is NO POSSIBLE way that you could CONCLUDE that I do NOT know what I am talking about when you have NOT YET even HEARD what I have to talk about.

Here is ANOTHER EXAMPLE of how the BELIEF-system within these human beings will NOT even allow them to just consider absolutely ANY thing that OPPOSES the BELIEFS they have.

How could you have choices when the future is uniquely defined by the past?

Bahman, are you trying to draw some sense out of Age, or do you genuinely not know the answer to your question?

Do you "belinda" KNOW what THE answer is to "bahman's" question here?

If yes, then what is THE answer, to you?

[Age]

How could you have choices when the future is uniquely defined by the past?

Bahman, are you trying to draw some sense out of Age, or do you genuinely not know the answer to your question?

Her answer is wrong.

LOL

What answer had I supposedly provided, up to when you wrote this?

For you to KNOW that MY ANSWER IS WRONG, you would FIRST have to KNOW MY ANSWER. SO, what IS MY ANSWER?

If you do NOT provide MY ANSWER, then YOUR CLAIM that MY ANSWER IS WRONG, is so absolutely ABSURD that YOUR CLAIM is beyond ridiculous.

If the past uniquely defines the future then there is always one choice and not many. I think that is simple to understand.

If you BELIEVE that there is ALWAYS one choice ONLY, then WHY ask the question, on the pretense that you are asking a CLARIFYING QUESTION?

If you BELIEVE that, or ANY thing else, then just say you do, and then I will ask you to PROVIDE the ACTUAL PROOF for the CLAIM.

By the way, once you learn what I said above, then you WILL SEE and UNDERSTAND that while one is in the human being stage of evolution, then there is ONLY one choice ONLY for them. But, once one evolves past the human being stage, then that One can is ABLE to CHOOSE between choices/options.

This is because that One KNOWS what is WANTED, what is being Created, and what WILL BE ACHIEVED.

[Belinda]

How could you have choices when the future is uniquely defined by the past?

Bahman, are you trying to draw some sense out of Age, or do you genuinely not know the answer to your question?

Her answer is wrong. If the past uniquely defines the future then there is always one choice and not many. I think that is simple to understand.

Thanks for clearing that up.
All creatures that can learn from past events do in fact choose. Choosing is what people and animals do. I have watched a spider choose to run to a a dark hidey hole.
What you mean by 'choice! is that choices originate in the world of nature and not in some invisible and inexplicable part of a man.

I too am a determinist. I too believe the past defines the future, although I must emphasise there is a lot more to determinism than simple causal chains.

Despite that the past defines the future we cannot know the uniquely best choice that we may make. This is because we do not fully recall the past which is too vast and too mysterious for human intelligence to get to grips with.

Bahman and Age are at odds with each other because they don't use the best terminology appropriate to a discussion of determinism. Bahman and Age use the word 'choice' to serve different and contradictory purposes.

[Age]

Bahman, are you trying to draw some sense out of Age, or do you genuinely not know the answer to your question?

Her answer is wrong. If the past uniquely defines the future then there is always one choice and not many. I think that is simple to understand.

Thanks for clearing that up.
All creatures that can learn from past events do in fact choose.

But "bahman" BELIEVES that NO creature can 'choose', AND correct me if this is NOT right "bahman".

Choosing is what people and animals do. I have watched a spider choose to run to a a dark hidey hole.

But what "bahman" is 'trying to' get to is that although there APPEARS to be 'choices', there is IN FACT NO 'choices' available AT ALL. This is because "bahman" BELIEVES that there is ONLY one 'choice' that could be and WILL BE made. AGAIN, correct me if there is ANY thing wrong here "bahman".

What you mean by 'choice! is that choices originate in the world of nature and not in some invisible and inexplicable part of a man.

I do NOT think that this is what "bahman" means AT ALL. BUT, I could be completely and utterly WRONG here.

I will WAIT for "bahman" to CLARIFY.

I too am a determinist. I too believe the past defines the future, although I must emphasise there is a lot more to determinism than simple causal chains.

What else is there to determinism, to you?

Despite that the past defines the future we cannot know the uniquely best choice that we may make. This is because we do not fully recall the past which is too vast and too mysterious for human intelligence to get to grips with.

Bahman and Age are at odds with each other because they don't use the best terminology appropriate to a discussion of determinism.

Have you "belinda" used the BEST terminology appropriate to a discussion of determinism?

If yes, then all I have noticed is you saying you BELIEVE "the past defines the future" and that "there is a lot more to determinism than simple causal chains", which I find VERY LOOSE terminology in a discussion of determinism.

In fact you seem to believe that you are actually able to choose between different choices/options, which OBVIOUSLY would be a complete IMPOSSIBILITY in a Truly and ONLY 'deterministic' Universe.

Bahman and Age use the word 'choice' to serve different and contradictory purposes.

LOL

Provide examples.

If you do NOT, then you are just CLAIMING some thing that you are not even able to back up and prove.

How do you even envision or ASSUME I use the word 'choice'?

[bahman]

You asked if I mind explaining ....?

I said, 'No' (I do not mind).

How did you MISINTERPRET that?

See, here is ANOTHER EXAMPLE of just how quickly the human beings, in the days when this was being written, would JUMP to ASSUMPTIONS and CONCLUSIONS. Even when they ask the clarifying question and I provide them with the very SPECIFIC and very CLEAR answer, they are STILL able to MISINTERPRET it and make Wrong ASSUMPTIONS. Even when just a one word answer was provided.

You asked a very specific question. I provided you with the very specific answer. Now, if what you want/ed was something else, then I suggest you SPECIFICALLY ask for 'that'.

Now, if you want to KNOW how there are options, when the future is uniquely determined by the past, then just ask for 'that', specifically. Understood?

No.

If you can NOT understand that, then, in other words, if you want some specific thing, then just ask for the ACTUAL specific thing that you want. Do you understand now?

You don't know what you are talking about.

LOL

You asked me: Do you mind explaining how you could have options when the future is uniquely determined by the past?

And I responded: No. Which MEANS that 'No I do NOT mind explaining how you could have options when the future is uniquely determined by the past.

BUT, you JUMPED to the CONCLUSION that I do NOT know what I am talking about. Which MEANS that either you had ALREADY CONCLUDED that NO one could know what they were talking about if what they were to talk about the OPPOSITE of what you WHOLEHEARTEDLY BELIEVE is true, BEFORE you even asked the APPARENT clarifying question, or, you JUMPED to YOUR CONCLUSION on seeing my responding answer.

LOOK, I KNOW what I have to talk about AND I can CLEARLY explain what I have to talk about.

CONSIDER the Fact that there is NO POSSIBLE way that you could CONCLUDE that I do NOT know what I am talking about when you have NOT YET even HEARD what I have to talk about.

Here is ANOTHER EXAMPLE of how the BELIEF-system within these human beings will NOT even allow them to just consider absolutely ANY thing that OPPOSES the BELIEFS they have.

Again, if the past defines the future then there can be only one option at any given time. You cannot choose when there is only an option.

[bahman]

Bahman, are you trying to draw some sense out of Age, or do you genuinely not know the answer to your question?

Her answer is wrong.

LOL

What answer had I supposedly provided, up to when you wrote this?

For you to KNOW that MY ANSWER IS WRONG, you would FIRST have to KNOW MY ANSWER. SO, what IS MY ANSWER?

If you do NOT provide MY ANSWER, then YOUR CLAIM that MY ANSWER IS WRONG, is so absolutely ABSURD that YOUR CLAIM is beyond ridiculous.

If the past uniquely defines the future then there is always one choice and not many. I think that is simple to understand.

If you BELIEVE that there is ALWAYS one choice ONLY, then WHY ask the question, on the pretense that you are asking a CLARIFYING QUESTION?

If you BELIEVE that, or ANY thing else, then just say you do, and then I will ask you to PROVIDE the ACTUAL PROOF for the CLAIM.

By the way, once you learn what I said above, then you WILL SEE and UNDERSTAND that while one is in the human being stage of evolution, then there is ONLY one choice ONLY for them. But, once one evolves past the human being stage, then that One can is ABLE to CHOOSE between choices/options.

This is because that One KNOWS what is WANTED, what is being Created, and what WILL BE ACHIEVED.

I think you need to think a little. Do you believe that the past defines the future? If yes, then how could you have choices?

[Age]

No.

If you can NOT understand that, then, in other words, if you want some specific thing, then just ask for the ACTUAL specific thing that you want. Do you understand now?

You don't know what you are talking about.

LOL

You asked me: Do you mind explaining how you could have options when the future is uniquely determined by the past?

And I responded: No. Which MEANS that 'No I do NOT mind explaining how you could have options when the future is uniquely determined by the past.

BUT, you JUMPED to the CONCLUSION that I do NOT know what I am talking about. Which MEANS that either you had ALREADY CONCLUDED that NO one could know what they were talking about if what they were to talk about the OPPOSITE of what you WHOLEHEARTEDLY BELIEVE is true, BEFORE you even asked the APPARENT clarifying question, or, you JUMPED to YOUR CONCLUSION on seeing my responding answer.

LOOK, I KNOW what I have to talk about AND I can CLEARLY explain what I have to talk about.

CONSIDER the Fact that there is NO POSSIBLE way that you could CONCLUDE that I do NOT know what I am talking about when you have NOT YET even HEARD what I have to talk about.

Here is ANOTHER EXAMPLE of how the BELIEF-system within these human beings will NOT even allow them to just consider absolutely ANY thing that OPPOSES the BELIEFS they have.

Again, if the past defines the future then there can be only one option at any given time. You cannot choose when there is only an option.

Yes we KNOW that this is what you BELIEVE is true.

And, there could not possibly be ANY thing else other than what you ALREADY BELIEVE is true, correct?

When, and IF, you ever STOP BELIEVING this, then we can discuss things further, but until then enjoy YOUR BELIEF here.

[bahman]

Bahman, are you trying to draw some sense out of Age, or do you genuinely not know the answer to your question?

Her answer is wrong. If the past uniquely defines the future then there is always one choice and not many. I think that is simple to understand.

Thanks for clearing that up.
All creatures that can learn from past events do in fact choose. Choosing is what people and animals do. I have watched a spider choose to run to a a dark hidey hole.
What you mean by 'choice! is that choices originate in the world of nature and not in some invisible and inexplicable part of a man.

I too am a determinist. I too believe the past defines the future, although I must emphasise there is a lot more to determinism than simple causal chains.

Despite that the past defines the future we cannot know the uniquely best choice that we may make. This is because we do not fully recall the past which is too vast and too mysterious for human intelligence to get to grips with.

Bahman and Age are at odds with each other because they don't use the best terminology appropriate to a discussion of determinism. Bahman and Age use the word 'choice' to serve different and contradictory purposes.

I agree that we choose when there are options available. But how could we choose when the past defines the future? The answer to this question is important since if you believe in determinism then there is only one option available at any given time.

[Age]

Her answer is wrong.

LOL

What answer had I supposedly provided, up to when you wrote this?

For you to KNOW that MY ANSWER IS WRONG, you would FIRST have to KNOW MY ANSWER. SO, what IS MY ANSWER?

If you do NOT provide MY ANSWER, then YOUR CLAIM that MY ANSWER IS WRONG, is so absolutely ABSURD that YOUR CLAIM is beyond ridiculous.

If the past uniquely defines the future then there is always one choice and not many. I think that is simple to understand.

If you BELIEVE that there is ALWAYS one choice ONLY, then WHY ask the question, on the pretense that you are asking a CLARIFYING QUESTION?

If you BELIEVE that, or ANY thing else, then just say you do, and then I will ask you to PROVIDE the ACTUAL PROOF for the CLAIM.

By the way, once you learn what I said above, then you WILL SEE and UNDERSTAND that while one is in the human being stage of evolution, then there is ONLY one choice ONLY for them. But, once one evolves past the human being stage, then that One can is ABLE to CHOOSE between choices/options.

This is because that One KNOWS what is WANTED, what is being Created, and what WILL BE ACHIEVED.

I think you need to think a little. Do you believe that the past defines the future?

NO.

If yes, then how could you have choices?

Moot.

[Age]

Her answer is wrong. If the past uniquely defines the future then there is always one choice and not many. I think that is simple to understand.

Thanks for clearing that up.
All creatures that can learn from past events do in fact choose. Choosing is what people and animals do. I have watched a spider choose to run to a a dark hidey hole.
What you mean by 'choice! is that choices originate in the world of nature and not in some invisible and inexplicable part of a man.

I too am a determinist. I too believe the past defines the future, although I must emphasise there is a lot more to determinism than simple causal chains.

Despite that the past defines the future we cannot know the uniquely best choice that we may make. This is because we do not fully recall the past which is too vast and too mysterious for human intelligence to get to grips with.

Bahman and Age are at odds with each other because they don't use the best terminology appropriate to a discussion of determinism. Bahman and Age use the word 'choice' to serve different and contradictory purposes.

I agree that we choose when there are options available. But how could we choose when the past defines the future? The answer to this question is important since if you believe in determinism then there is only one option available at any given time.

Do you believe in determinism "bahman"?

[bahman]

If you can NOT understand that, then, in other words, if you want some specific thing, then just ask for the ACTUAL specific thing that you want. Do you understand now?



LOL

You asked me: Do you mind explaining how you could have options when the future is uniquely determined by the past?

And I responded: No. Which MEANS that 'No I do NOT mind explaining how you could have options when the future is uniquely determined by the past.

BUT, you JUMPED to the CONCLUSION that I do NOT know what I am talking about. Which MEANS that either you had ALREADY CONCLUDED that NO one could know what they were talking about if what they were to talk about the OPPOSITE of what you WHOLEHEARTEDLY BELIEVE is true, BEFORE you even asked the APPARENT clarifying question, or, you JUMPED to YOUR CONCLUSION on seeing my responding answer.

LOOK, I KNOW what I have to talk about AND I can CLEARLY explain what I have to talk about.

CONSIDER the Fact that there is NO POSSIBLE way that you could CONCLUDE that I do NOT know what I am talking about when you have NOT YET even HEARD what I have to talk about.

Here is ANOTHER EXAMPLE of how the BELIEF-system within these human beings will NOT even allow them to just consider absolutely ANY thing that OPPOSES the BELIEFS they have.

Again, if the past defines the future then there can be only one option at any given time. You cannot choose when there is only an option.

Yes we KNOW that this is what you BELIEVE is true.

And, there could not possibly be ANY thing else other than what you ALREADY BELIEVE is true, correct?

When, and IF, you ever STOP BELIEVING this, then we can discuss things further, but until then enjoy YOUR BELIEF here.

So you think, under determinism, you could have options? If yes then how? Could you give an example?

[Belinda]

Age wrote:

What else is there to determinism, to you?

(I've already addressed your other points, Age. )

Besides simple causal chains in a time sequence from past events, there are also ongoing causes such as climate, the human shapers of public opinion such as the BBC or Murdoch newspapers, the force of gravity, metabolism of all living beings, and so forth.

[bahman]

Thanks for clearing that up.
All creatures that can learn from past events do in fact choose. Choosing is what people and animals do. I have watched a spider choose to run to a a dark hidey hole.
What you mean by 'choice! is that choices originate in the world of nature and not in some invisible and inexplicable part of a man.

I too am a determinist. I too believe the past defines the future, although I must emphasise there is a lot more to determinism than simple causal chains.

Despite that the past defines the future we cannot know the uniquely best choice that we may make. This is because we do not fully recall the past which is too vast and too mysterious for human intelligence to get to grips with.

Bahman and Age are at odds with each other because they don't use the best terminology appropriate to a discussion of determinism. Bahman and Age use the word 'choice' to serve different and contradictory purposes.

I agree that we choose when there are options available. But how could we choose when the past defines the future? The answer to this question is important since if you believe in determinism then there is only one option available at any given time.

Do you believe in determinism "bahman"?

Sure, yes when it comes to the way that matter behaves. But I think that the marginal state could exist when there are options in the system.

[Age]

Again, if the past defines the future then there can be only one option at any given time. You cannot choose when there is only an option.

Yes we KNOW that this is what you BELIEVE is true.

And, there could not possibly be ANY thing else other than what you ALREADY BELIEVE is true, correct?

When, and IF, you ever STOP BELIEVING this, then we can discuss things further, but until then enjoy YOUR BELIEF here.

So you think, under determinism, you could have options? If yes then how? Could you give an example?

1. I have already addressed this "bahman".

2. There is NOT just determinism. BOTH 'the ability to choose' AND 'determinism' exists. As I explained earlier.

3. 'Options' can be different from 'choices', in that 'options' are provided to you whereas you decide 'choices'.

An example of an 'option' is when you are in the water at a beach with waves. There exists the option of whether to go over the wave or to go under the wave. So, you do have options. Another example of option is if you have more than one piece of clothing, then there is an option, and if you have more than one particular type of food before you, then there exists another option.

[Age]

Age wrote:

What else is there to determinism, to you?

(I've already addressed your other points, Age. )

If you say so.

Besides simple causal chains in a time sequence from past events, there are also ongoing causes such as climate, the human shapers of public opinion such as the BBC or Murdoch newspapers, the force of gravity, metabolism of all living beings, and so forth.

ALL of which are just simple causal chains as well, correct?