Do you believe in Free will? Determinism?

[popeye1945]

Simple physical systems are determined by their physical states, extremely complex electrochemical systems have not been shown to be determined by their physical states. They may be in the future, which will prove Determinism (in the realm of decision making), until then, that is, currently, it is unknown, but behaves as if Free Will exists, though it may (someday) be proven not to.re influenced

There is no such thing as a naturally closed system. There is also the fact that there is no such thing as an independent existence. Extremely complex electrochemical systems are both enabled and limited by their lower-level relations. The system is its relations. If there is no such thing as independent existence, even with apparent spontaneity, it is governed by layered independent causes. Systems are reactionary by their first conditions.

[Belinda]

I'm really curious where you all stand!

I was reading "Determined" by Sapolsky. He says most people fall into the category of believing in determinism AND free will, but he and I believe in determinism and not free will. Although I think chaos theory does introduce a practical limit on determinism, and quantum randomness even more so.

Where do you lie? And why?

The people that believe in determinism exclusively, usually only do so for a "get out of jail free card" for all the immoral crap they do. They can just blame all their evil doings on determinism. So you know those are all on the political right, obviously.

In courts of law, the judge takes into account on behalf of the accused mitigating circumstances . Mitigating circumstances are deterministic----the accused is less guilty due to mitigating circumstances.

The above scenario maps on to everyday life. When we know more about the circumstances that determined the individual' s misbehaviour then we are more inclined to forgive her.

Poverty, for instance--- few choose poverty. Poverty often determines minor crime such as stealing food. Left wing people understand this and it is Right wing people who claim individuals have the sort of libertarian 'Free Will' that overrides all deterministic causes.

BTW the board game Monopoly is morally disquieting. Its use should come with a health warning.

[SpheresOfBalance]

So? Explain, this is a philosophy forum, I am all ears.

I don't want to disturb anyone with a poped eye with my rhetoric, but I do feel sorry for cartoons with poped eyes. Did you know that back in the day, probably before you were born that, that was a derogatory thing to say to someone that had the defect. Good choice!

This is the place for disturbing people's rhetoric. What is your purpose here? Popeye to me just represented a cartoon character.

It doesn't have to be disturbing, I mean people can actually agree.

[SpheresOfBalance]

I'm really curious where you all stand!

I was reading "Determined" by Sapolsky. He says most people fall into the category of believing in determinism AND free will, but he and I believe in determinism and not free will. Although I think chaos theory does introduce a practical limit on determinism, and quantum randomness even more so.

Where do you lie? And why?

The people that believe in determinism exclusively, usually only do so for a "get out of jail free card" for all the immoral crap they do. They can just blame all their evil doings on determinism. So you know those are all on the political right, obviously.

In courts of law, the judge takes into account on behalf of the accused mitigating circumstances . Mitigating circumstances are deterministic----the accused is less guilty due to mitigating circumstances.
Who said there weren't many words in the English/American language that supported delusions of grandeur? The human animal has created many concepts that are contradictory. Many of them are about control through confusion. Many support self delusion. I would argue that often mitigating circumstances were choices of free will that the judge allowed because he knew how vindictive some people can be. And how society has been formed to serve power as the illusory money has been made to do through free will, so as to afford the, so called, freedom to have more than others. It was not created through determinism, it was made to be the case through free will as seen as being powerful, when it was really all about ignorance and the fear of death. Just ask the people in the stands at the coliseum in Rome as the gladiators fought and those in charge threw free bread into the crowd.

The above scenario maps on to everyday life. When we know more about the circumstances that determined the individual' s misbehaviour then we are more inclined to forgive her. or him
Now you're talking about sympathy and empathy, which is also free will, as some don't have any.

Poverty, for instance--- few choose poverty. Poverty often determines minor crime such as stealing food.
It can, but not necessarily, (Free Will).

Left wing people understand this
That it 'can' be so, yes (free Will)

and it is Right wing people who claim individuals have the sort of libertarian 'Free Will' that overrides all deterministic causes.
First of all we're getting into groupism, which is a fallacy as no particular, so called, group necessarily have members that agree 100% about everything. But if I would generalize/stereotype as you are trying to do, I would say that right wing people, for the most part, are the most selfish people on the face of the planet. So I can see them falsely using the "free will" card as an out.


BTW the board game Monopoly is morally disquieting. Its use should come with a health warning.
Hey I don't like it's philosophical viewpoint either, but the card just came in handy.

[popeye1945]

I don't want to disturb anyone with a poped eye with my rhetoric, but I do feel sorry for cartoons with poped eyes. Did you know that back in the day, probably before you were born that, that was a derogatory thing to say to someone who had the defect. Good choice!

This is the place for disturbing people's rhetoric. What is your purpose here? Popeye to me just represented a cartoon character.

It doesn't have to be disturbing, I mean, people can actually agree.

Back in your day, I doubt you've got more years on you than I. This is a place to test your ideas out. Everyone has a certain amount of emotion attached to their ideas. It is best to try to behave with a little class; we are all in this together.

[SpheresOfBalance]

This is the place for disturbing people's rhetoric. What is your purpose here? Popeye to me just represented a cartoon character.

It doesn't have to be disturbing, I mean, people can actually agree.

Back in your day, I doubt you've got more years on you than I. This is a place to test your ideas out. Everyone has a certain amount of emotion attached to their ideas. It is best to try to behave with a little class; we are all in this together.

You seemingly lacked CLASS when you used the pseudonym Popeye, seemingly without knowing that it's considered a derogatory remark. It comes from Poped-Eye which is a condition where a persons eyes are bulged, Popeye the cartoon character, has one squinty eye. Back in those days, the 30's, it was more common for stupid inconsiderate people, usually males, to make fun of peoples afflictions. My wife lost her eye at the age of 4yo by her sister of 8yo with a loaded BB gun whom placed an apple on her head and tried to play "William Tell", without the bow and arrow. All because her father allowed an 8yo to "play" around with a loaded BB gun UNSUPERVISED. And she had to put up with her, not quite, peers making fun of the aftermath of such a careless act. There's your EMOTION, now where's your CLASS.

REMEMBER, this forum is about MAKING POINTS of CONTENTION. I'm not saying that you did so deliberately, but whether unknowingly or not, still my point stands, as a moral issue that stems from consideration for your fellow human. What say you, older man that would feign wisdom, maybe???

[popeye1945]

It doesn't have to be disturbing, I mean, people can actually agree.

Back in your day, I doubt you've got more years on you than I. This is a place to test your ideas out. Everyone has a certain amount of emotion attached to their ideas. It is best to try to behave with a little class; we are all in this together.

You seemingly lacked CLASS when you used the pseudonym Popeye, seemingly without knowing that it's considered a derogatory remark. It comes from Poped-Eye which is a condition where a persons eyes are bulged, Popeye the cartoon character, has one squinty eye. Back in those days, the 30's, it was more common for stupid inconsiderate people, usually males, to make fun of peoples afflictions. My wife lost her eye at the age of 4yo by her sister of 8yo with a loaded BB gun whom placed an apple on her head and tried to play "William Tell", without the bow and arrow. All because her father allowed an 8yo to "play" around with a loaded BB gun UNSUPERVISED. And she had to put up with her, not quite, peers making fun of the aftermath of such a careless act. There's your EMOTION, now where's your CLASS.

REMEMBER, this forum is about MAKING POINTS of CONTENTION. I'm not saying that you did so deliberately, but whether unknowingly or not, still my point stands, as a moral issue that stems from consideration for your fellow human. What say you, older man that would feign wisdom, maybe???

YOU NEED TO GET OUT MORE!

[Belinda]

It doesn't have to be disturbing, I mean, people can actually agree.

Back in your day, I doubt you've got more years on you than I. This is a place to test your ideas out. Everyone has a certain amount of emotion attached to their ideas. It is best to try to behave with a little class; we are all in this together.

You seemingly lacked CLASS when you used the pseudonym Popeye, seemingly without knowing that it's considered a derogatory remark. It comes from Poped-Eye which is a condition where a persons eyes are bulged, Popeye the cartoon character, has one squinty eye. Back in those days, the 30's, it was more common for stupid inconsiderate people, usually males, to make fun of peoples afflictions. My wife lost her eye at the age of 4yo by her sister of 8yo with a loaded BB gun whom placed an apple on her head and tried to play "William Tell", without the bow and arrow. All because her father allowed an 8yo to "play" around with a loaded BB gun UNSUPERVISED. And she had to put up with her, not quite, peers making fun of the aftermath of such a careless act. There's your EMOTION, now where's your CLASS.

REMEMBER, this forum is about MAKING POINTS of CONTENTION. I'm not saying that you did so deliberately, but whether unknowingly or not, still my point stands, as a moral issue that stems from consideration for your fellow human. What say you, older man that would feign wisdom, maybe???

Don't be so bloody rude

[Belinda]

Simple physical systems are determined by their physical states, extremely complex electrochemical systems have not been shown to be determined by their physical states. They may be in the future, which will prove Determinism (in the realm of decision making), until then, that is, currently, it is unknown, but behaves as if Free Will exists, though it may (someday) be proven not to.re influenced

There is no such thing as a naturally closed system. There is also the fact that there is no such thing as an independent existence. Extremely complex electrochemical systems are both enabled and limited by their lower-level relations. The system is its relations. If there is no such thing as independent existence, even with apparent spontaneity, it is governed by layered independent causes. Systems are reactionary by their first conditions.

God is a deterministic idea. Free Will was invented by certain theologians to expedite blame while retaining God's overarching power.

Cui bono?

[Impenitent]

Simple physical systems are determined by their physical states, extremely complex electrochemical systems have not been shown to be determined by their physical states. They may be in the future, which will prove Determinism (in the realm of decision making), until then, that is, currently, it is unknown, but behaves as if Free Will exists, though it may (someday) be proven not to.re influenced

There is no such thing as a naturally closed system. There is also the fact that there is no such thing as an independent existence. Extremely complex electrochemical systems are both enabled and limited by their lower-level relations. The system is its relations. If there is no such thing as independent existence, even with apparent spontaneity, it is governed by layered independent causes. Systems are reactionary by their first conditions.

God is a deterministic idea. Free Will was invented by certain theologians to expedite blame while retaining God's overarching power.

Cui bono?

no, the ability to choose one's action is innate

crowd control methods were invented and enacted by certain theologians

-Imp

[popeye1945]

Excellent, Belinda, what would the church do without free will and thus sin?


The concept of free will has built a structure of great injustice as a mode of thought, leading to institutional oppression throughout society as a whole.
The absurdity of holding an individual totally responsible for the state of his/her psychic health at an end point marked as the individual's transgression is not only unjust, it is profoundly cruel. It is simplistic beyond imagination, and I suspect its motivation is the fear of greater complexity; the path of least resistance opens to the absurd, free will. When one comes into this world, one arrives without a sense of identity. The naked constitution only gains a sense of identity through trials and errors in dealing with the context that has been awaiting its arrival. Think of planting a flower in toxic soil. Would one expect a vital plant and for it to bloom under such conditions? No, it would be a wretched, poor thing indeed. If you have not chosen your context upon arrival, you have not chosen your identity. For context, defines by the quality of its soil, the individual's constitution twisted into a monstrosity, and now we say this flower should be punished and purged of its evil nature, and place it into even poorer soil. Some individuals actually commit a crime to go to jail because they don't have the knowledge and skills to make it on civiy street. If one's context is bad and of long duration, an individual's humanity can be destroyed, the spirit crushed, and the following reactions are predictably criminal or just plain crazy. All the lifelong deprivations and violations of the individual find expression and shock, and outrage of society.

[SpheresOfBalance]

Back in your day, I doubt you've got more years on you than I. This is a place to test your ideas out. Everyone has a certain amount of emotion attached to their ideas. It is best to try to behave with a little class; we are all in this together.

You seemingly lacked CLASS when you used the pseudonym Popeye, seemingly without knowing that it's considered a derogatory remark. It comes from Poped-Eye which is a condition where a persons eyes are bulged, Popeye the cartoon character, has one squinty eye. Back in those days, the 30's, it was more common for stupid inconsiderate people, usually males, to make fun of peoples afflictions. My wife lost her eye at the age of 4yo by her sister of 8yo with a loaded BB gun whom placed an apple on her head and tried to play "William Tell", without the bow and arrow. All because her father allowed an 8yo to "play" around with a loaded BB gun UNSUPERVISED. And she had to put up with her, not quite, peers making fun of the aftermath of such a careless act. There's your EMOTION, now where's your CLASS.

REMEMBER, this forum is about MAKING POINTS of CONTENTION. I'm not saying that you did so deliberately, but whether unknowingly or not, still my point stands, as a moral issue that stems from consideration for your fellow human. What say you, older man that would feign wisdom, maybe???

YOU NEED TO GET OUT MORE!

You're right, I'm a hermit. My one friend and confidant is my wife. I'm a couch potato that is killing himself, because I'm not taking care of my body as much as I should. A lot of it's fear based. I have lost a lot of weight though, by not eating as much as I used to. I'm not getting proper nutrition. But my point still stands. Popeye was a derogatory term back in the 30's. While I liked the cartoon, why are almost all cartoons of those days always fighting? What's violence got to do with anything good?