Philosophy Now Forum

attofishpi wrote:

Hobbes' Choice wrote:

thedoc wrote:
Robots do not choose, they can only do what their human programmers have directed them to do.

Wrong. Robots are capable of autonomous action which is based on programs.

Robots can only ever choose what their algorithms permit, so to that extent thedoc is correct.

No. Choosing is only EVER doing what the algorithm demands. That is exactly what we do every moment. That is what a choice is. It varies with the conditions.

10 Input "your Age"; x
20 IF x= 10 then print 'fuck off you need to think things through. '
30 IF x>10 then Print "you are still wrong": x=x+1: REM GROW UP A BIT
40 IF x< 10 then PRINT "you are wrong because you age is"; X; " and so do not know any better": END
50 Goto 10

Calculations like these are present in robots, and we have every right to think that biological analogues of these sorts of processes take place in the brain. Neuroscience supports this, and finds that brains automatically make decisions before the conscious mind is aware of it.

Hobbes' Choice wrote:

attofishpi wrote:

Hobbes' Choice wrote: Wrong. Robots are capable of autonomous action which is based on programs.

Robots can only ever choose what their algorithms permit, so to that extent thedoc is correct.

No. Choosing is only EVER doing what the algorithm demands. That is exactly what we do every moment. That is what a choice is. It varies with the conditions.

Calculations like these are present in robots, and we have every right to think that biological analogues of these sorts of processes take place in the brain. Neuroscience supports this, and finds that brains automatically make decisions before the conscious mind is aware of it.

Sure - i dont disagree that we (our brains) are in effect a series complex algorithms - but robots are so far more simple and pretty much only capable with any degree of certainty on objective matters, not to the extent that the human mind can comprehend with all the subjective nature of reality... and lets fold into the equation the notion of emotions - something a robot has zero capability of.

Ergo. "you are still wrong": x=x+1: REM GROW UP A BIT

"Greatest":

There are answers to your questions. However, understanding them would require at least a modicum of openness to discussion, and if I am assessing the situation fairly, I'd have to say it does not appear to exist with you at the present moment, given the wording in which the questions are being posed. The point seems rather to take the opportunity to vent spleen against God, so far as I can tell.

Now, we all know (or should know) that abusive language does not conduce to intelligence at any time. However, I honestly don't care a fig what anybody says about me. After all, what does it matter? It's not just that we are disembodied voices communicating by email, and that we will likely never meet; it's that to insult a mere man does not have any particularly bad consequences.

And hey, some criticisms are warranted. Who am I to say which ones are true of me? I am not my own judge.

But for you, it gets worse: that's because when directed at God, that same sort of speech severely imperils the soul of the speaker, making him eternally accountable for the words of his own lips. As the Bible says, "Do not be deceived, God is not mocked; whatever a man sows, that he shall also reap." (Gal. 6:7).

"God is not mocked": that's a good general principle to keep in mind. Ultimately, this means mocking God is hatred of one's own soul. God does not lose these battles. For the present, God allows mankind's free will -- not least in that men are allowed to say whatever they want to, even blasphemy. But an accounting is coming: people who heap abuse on God and refuse to repent of it are writing a cheque with their mouths that their souls cannot cash.

But even this sin can be forgiven, if repentance of it is forthcoming. It won't always be available, but it's available now.

Unfortunately, our present situation is this: to protract a discussion while you insist on abusive language would be to encourage you to do more damage to yourself. That would be disastrously unkind of me. And this leaves me in a perplexing situation. On the one hand, I would like to answer, and to discuss the issues in hand with you. On the other, to do so would potentially incite you to more of this self-destructive behaviour. And as a Christian, I am obligated to do what is best for you, regardless of your disposition.

This is your current situation. Make of it what you will.

attofishpi wrote:

Immanuel Can wrote: For the present, God allows mankind's free will

Well praise the LOD for that cos 'He' would be a pretty bored if He didnt.

Now just hand on an attominute - who are you actually talking to in you above speech?

attofishpi wrote:Now just hand on an attominute - who are you actually talking to in you above speech?

"Hand on"?

It was sent to the specific attention of the one who calls himself "Greatest." He knows.

Immanuel Can wrote:

attofishpi wrote:Now just hand on an attominute - who are you actually talking to in you above speech?

"Hand on"?

It was sent to the specific attention of the one who calls himself "Greatest." He knows.

Ah, well then i'll take my hand off - i was already done after the attosecond ne ways.

attofishpi wrote:

Immanuel Can wrote:

attofishpi wrote:Now just hand on an attominute - who are you actually talking to in you above speech?

"Hand on"?

It was sent to the specific attention of the one who calls himself "Greatest." He knows.

Ah, well then i'll take my hand off - i was already done after the attosecond ne ways.

Small alteration made to clarify, as above.

Immanuel Can wrote:"Greatest":

There are answers to your questions. However, understanding them would require at least a modicum of openness to discussion, and if I am assessing the situation fairly, I'd have to say it does not appear to exist with you at the present moment, given the wording in which the questions are being posed. The point seems rather to take the opportunity to vent spleen against God, so far as I can tell.

Now, we all know (or should know) that abusive language does not conduce to intelligence at any time. However, I honestly don't care a fig what anybody says about me. After all, what does it matter? It's not just that we are disembodied voices communicating by email, and that we will likely never meet; it's that to insult a mere man does not have any particularly bad consequences.

And hey, some criticisms are warranted. Who am I to say which ones are true of me? I am not my own judge.

But for you, it gets worse: that's because when directed at God, that same sort of speech severely imperils the soul of the speaker, making him eternally accountable for the words of his own lips. As the Bible says, "Do not be deceived, God is not mocked; whatever a man sows, that he shall also reap." (Gal. 6:7).

"God is not mocked": that's a good general principle to keep in mind. Ultimately, this means mocking God is hatred of one's own soul. God does not lose these battles. For the present, God allows mankind's free will -- not least in that men are allowed to say whatever they want to, even blasphemy. But an accounting is coming: people who heap abuse on God and refuse to repent of it are writing a cheque with their mouths that their souls cannot cash.

But even this sin can be forgiven, if repentance of it is forthcoming. It won't always be available, but it's available now.

Unfortunately, our present situation is this: to protract a discussion while you insist on abusive language would be to encourage you to do more damage to yourself. That would be disastrously unkind of me. And this leaves me in a perplexing situation. On the one hand, I would like to answer, and to discuss the issues in hand with you. On the other, to do so would potentially incite you to more of this self-destructive behaviour. And as a Christian, I am obligated to do what is best for you, regardless of your disposition.

This is your current situation. Make of it what you will.

Thanks for showing us what kind of mind you have.

Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people. Eleanor Roosevelt

Regards
DL

Greatest I am wrote: Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people. Eleanor Roosevelt

Regards
DL

So that is why you are always discussing other members of this forum, and most other members are trying to discuss the ideas presented.

thedoc wrote:

Greatest I am wrote: Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people. Eleanor Roosevelt

Regards
DL

So that is why you are always discussing other members of this forum, and most other members are trying to discuss the ideas presented.

Not usually but do if their morals are being discussed.

Thanks for not quoting what you could not find.

Regards
DL

Greatest I am wrote: Thanks for not quoting what you could not find.

Regards
DL

What makes you think I couldn't find it if I wanted to? Eleanor Roosevelt was not the end all and be all of sophistication, she just happened to be the first lady of the US for a time. Great minds discuss whatever they want, and you are a fool.

Greatest I am wrote:
Thanks for showing us what kind of mind you have.

Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people. Eleanor Roosevelt

Regards
DL

I told you before: I don't care a fig what anyone says about me. Hey, maybe I deserve it.

But since you prefer not to talk about people at all, here's an idea for you.. It's by someone generally recognized as far, far wiser than Eleanor Roosevelt could ever hope to be..

It goes, "...by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned.” (Matthew 12:37)

Immanuel Can wrote:

Greatest I am wrote:
Thanks for showing us what kind of mind you have.

Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people. Eleanor Roosevelt

Regards
DL

I told you before: I don't care a fig what anyone says about me. Hey, maybe I deserve it.

But since you prefer not to talk about people at all, here's an idea for you.. It's by someone generally recognized as far, far wiser than Eleanor Roosevelt could ever hope to be..

It goes, "...by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned.” (Matthew 12:37)

Gosh - nearly as good as Shakespeare, but not in this case.
WS was wiser than anyone of the Bible writers, and more consistent.

It avoids such contradictions as "Ye shall be judged, not by your words but by your deeds"

You should read his canon and stop wasting your time on all that Jewish/Greek stuff.
WS does not require you to be a servile idol worshiper.

Immanuel Can wrote:

Greatest I am wrote:
Thanks for showing us what kind of mind you have.

Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people. Eleanor Roosevelt

Regards
DL

I told you before: I don't care a fig what anyone says about me. Hey, maybe I deserve it.

But since you prefer not to talk about people at all, here's an idea for you.. It's by someone generally recognized as far, far wiser than Eleanor Roosevelt could ever hope to be..

It goes, "...by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned.” (Matthew 12:37)

Exactly my point.

Note that that applies more to issues than people.

Regards
DL

Greatest I am wrote:

Immanuel Can wrote:

Greatest I am wrote:
Thanks for showing us what kind of mind you have.

Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people. Eleanor Roosevelt

Regards
DL

I told you before: I don't care a fig what anyone says about me. Hey, maybe I deserve it.

But since you prefer not to talk about people at all, here's an idea for you.. It's by someone generally recognized as far, far wiser than Eleanor Roosevelt could ever hope to be..

It goes, "...by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned.” (Matthew 12:37)

Exactly my point.

Note that that applies more to issues than people.

Regards
DL

People speak and write words, so if you are discussing ideas, you are discussing the thoughts of people.