Philosophy Now Forum

Sculptor wrote: ↑Fri Nov 12, 2021 12:10 pm

bahman wrote: ↑Thu Nov 11, 2021 8:43 pm

Sculptor wrote: ↑Thu Nov 11, 2021 7:57 pm
JUST DOES IT???
That is your argument?

What do you expect? When the situation is clear for you, by knowing available options, making the proper judgment about options, assessment of options, and weighing up the pros and cons, then you are left by the decision.

Sculptor wrote: ↑Thu Nov 11, 2021 11:38 am
Completely capricious? No judgement? No assessment? No weighing up the pros and cons??
Really?

These are prior to the decision.

Sculptor wrote: ↑Thu Nov 11, 2021 11:38 am I know your thinking is not as sharp as some, but this might explain why you never make sense.

Does the thing make sense now?

Sculptor wrote: ↑Thu Nov 11, 2021 11:38 am
So. No. In fact is does not "Just do it"
In fact the decsion is effected by weighing the causes. The mind literally determines the answer by the examination of all the options?
This is a "process".

Examining the options is prior to the decision.

Yes, the conditions cause the decision. QED that is the conditions determine the decision.

No, conditions define the situation. The decision comes after. You can choose vanilla ice cream instead of chocolate one in spite of liking chocolate one much more. QED therefore you are free.

I want to say something to user AGE. Please note that "Choice and Determinism" is a classic question of philosophers which historically belongs to at least 13 centuries ago. There are many many people that have written books about this issue. There have been believers of all three forms: all choice, all determinism, and some choice and some determinism. Including Newton and Einstein who believed in all determinism.

It is obvious to you and to me, that there is some choice. But there are many people who believe other things besides some choice and some determinism.

So don't call some choice as obvious to everyone. Those who call themselves Determinists, more or less believe in all determinism. And it is a matter to discuss whether choice exists or not.

bahman wrote: ↑Fri Nov 12, 2021 4:19 pm

Sculptor wrote: ↑Fri Nov 12, 2021 12:10 pm

bahman wrote: ↑Thu Nov 11, 2021 8:43 pm
What do you expect? When the situation is clear for you, by knowing available options, making the proper judgment about options, assessment of options, and weighing up the pros and cons, then you are left by the decision.


These are prior to the decision.


Does the thing make sense now?


Examining the options is prior to the decision.

Yes, the conditions cause the decision. QED that is the conditions determine the decision.

No, conditions define the situation. The decision comes after. You can choose vanilla ice cream instead of chocolate one in spite of liking chocolate one much more. QED therefore you are free.

No, because no matter what you choose you haev reasons for doing so and that is necessarily determined by who and what you are. You cannot escape that no matter who you try to fudge it.
We are all "free" to the degree that we can act to our own will.
But we cannot be free or ourselves. We can do as we will, but we are not free to will as we will.
If we were so free that we were free of oursleves then we would just be making random choices of no relevance or unimportance.
That would be a very different world.

K1Barin wrote: ↑Fri Nov 12, 2021 9:15 pm I want to say something to user AGE. Please note that "Choice and Determinism" is a classic question of philosophers which historically belongs to at least 13 centuries ago. There are many many people that have written books about this issue. There have been believers of all three forms: all choice, all determinism, and some choice and some determinism. Including Newton and Einstein who believed in all determinism.

It is obvious to you and to me, that there is some choice. But there are many people who believe other things besides some choice and some determinism.

Yes there is choice. We all know that. But the world would be an absurd place if we were free of ourselves. WE are in fact necessarily determined by who and what we are, ever changing, but capable of making choices that mean something.

So don't call some choice as obvious to everyone. Those who call themselves Determinists, more or less believe in all determinism. And it is a matter to discuss whether choice exists or not.

All determinists beleive in choice.

bahman wrote: ↑Fri Nov 12, 2021 4:07 pm

Age wrote: ↑Thu Nov 11, 2021 10:43 pm

bahman wrote: ↑Thu Nov 11, 2021 10:17 pm
No, you cannot have both in a system. This is against the definition of determinism and free.

LOL
LOL
LOL

When will 'you', human beings, GROW UP and LEARN that what is 'the definition' of some thing to one of 'you' is NOT necessarily 'the definition' of the same thing, to "another" one of 'you'?

ALSO, and by the way, 'the definition' of 'determinism' AND 'free will' MEANS that they BOTH exist, and play parts in the WHOLE, of 'the system' of thee Universe, Itself.

Now, EITHER what you say and claim is ACTUALLY True, Right, AND Correct, or it is NOT, and let us NOT forget that 'you', human beings, have been 'arguing' this 'determinism' OR 'free will' discussion for thousands of years WITHOUT ANY logical conclusion BEING FOUND/UNCOVERED.

So, to me, this FURTHER PROVES that what I SEE and SAY could be thee ACTUAL Truth here is thee ACTUAL Truth, in the end. After all, this view fits in PERFECTLY with EVERY thing else, forming One completely WHOLE, COMPATIBLE UNIFIED view of things.

Believe in what you like.

Here is FURTHER PROOF of just HOW MUCH the adult human beings, in the days when this was being written, were just NOT LISTENING. Even when the WORDS are CLEARLY WRITTEN DOWN in front of them, and so, literally, 'spelled out for them' in CLEARLY WRITTEN WORDS, they STILL could NOT HEAR what was being said.

So, how MANY TIMES do I have to INFORM 'you', "bahman", that I NEITHER believe NOR disbelieve ANY thing, before this SINKS IN and you can comprehend and understand this Fact?

Saying, "Believe in what you like", besides being a Truly ILLOGICAL statement is NO REAL WAY to 'try to' counter what I POINTED OUT and SHOWED here.

bahman wrote: ↑Fri Nov 12, 2021 4:07 pm

Age wrote: ↑Thu Nov 11, 2021 10:03 pm

bahman wrote: ↑Thu Nov 11, 2021 10:17 pm Determinism is about a chain of events. Free means that your decision is not biased by options. An option is a phenomenon when a chain of events is about to fork. You decide at the moment of fork, choose one path and leave another.

Which FURTHER MAKES what I am SEEING and SAYING even MORE true, right, AND correct.

But only until you STOP BELIEVING what you do now, will you BEGIN to be ABLE to LOOK AT and SEE things, from ANOTHER perspective.

But carry on the way you are and keep EXPRESSING your BELIEFS. That way I keep EXPOSING HOW and WHY HOLDING ONTO BELIEFS only CLOSES 'you' OFF to thee ACTUAL Truth of things.

As I have expressed to 'you' previously "bahman" A LOT of what you are thinking and believing is ACTUALLY VERY CLOSE to thee ACTUAL Truth of things, BUT because you have and are HOLDING ONTO these BELIEFS of yours BEFORE you KNOW what thee One and ONLY Truth ACTUAL IS, you are NOT YET able to SEE HOW nor WHY your views are so close to being Correct. And, when ANY one CHALLENGES or QUESTIONS you on your BELIEFS, you FAIL MISERABLY in your so-called "explanations". As SHOWN and PROVEN by your response to "sculptor's" request to, or expectation of, you, which was; Explain how your mind makes a choice... Take us through the steps!

Your "explanation" was illogical nonsense.

I just gave the definitions for determinism and free will. They are two different things.

Are you AWARE that IT IS POSSIBLE for two different things to BOTH exist in the EXACT SAME Universe?

If yes, then BOTH 'free will' AND 'determinism' EXIST in this One and ONLY Universe.

But, ONCE AGAIN, this ALL depends on how one OBSERVES, and DEFINES, 'things'.

bahman wrote: ↑Fri Nov 12, 2021 4:07 pm

Age wrote: ↑Thu Nov 11, 2021 10:03 pm

bahman wrote: ↑Thu Nov 11, 2021 10:17 pm
Fly like a crow?

Do you even think or IMAGINE that it is POSSIBLE for a human being to fly, "like a crow"?

If yes, then HOW?

But if no, then WHY AGAIN say something so ABSURD, ILLOGICAL, AND NONSENSICAL?

This, after all, is a philosophical discussion forum, and NOT ANY of the other discussion forums available, to you.

So you cannot fly.

Here is ANOTHER GREAT EXAMPLE of WHEN and HOW these adult human beings QUICKLY JUMP to ASSUMPTIONS and CONCLUSIONS, based on absolutely NOTHING AT ALL other than their OWN DISTORTED thinking.

As I said previously, if I can fly or not depends on the situation, and what EXACTLY is classed as 'fly/flying'.

Just because I, OBVIOUSLY, can NOT fly like a crow does NOT mean that I cannot fly.

bahman wrote: ↑Fri Nov 12, 2021 4:07 pm Therefore you fall which is constraint by laws of nature no matter if you are free or not.

And here is A GREAT EXAMPLE of how these adult human beings will say just about ANY thing, in order to 'try to' argue for their currently HELD ONTO BELIEFS.

bahman wrote: ↑Fri Nov 12, 2021 4:15 pm

Age wrote: ↑Thu Nov 11, 2021 11:04 pm

bahman wrote: ↑Thu Nov 11, 2021 10:21 pm
Of course, my mind is not affected by anything.

LOL
LOL
LOL

I will say this AGAIN, there is NO such thing as a "your mind". UNLESS, OF COURSE, ANY one of 'you', human beings, even after thousands of years EVER "decides" to EXPLAIN, with PROOF, of WHAT one IS, EXACTLY, and how 'it' ACTUALLY WORKS, EXACTLY.

Until then I will REMAIN OPEN, and follow what I KNOW is ACTUALLY True, Right, AND Correct.

There are many minds. Your picture of one mind is false.

Okay. If this is REALLY the CLAIM you want to make, then back it up and support it with PROOF of what these "many minds" ARE EXACTLY.

Also, fit your view that there are "MANY minds" with your other BELIEFS like about how YOUR "mind" existed BEFORE you came into existence.

Furthermore, and REMEMBER I CLAIM I can back up and support my views and claims WITH ACTUAL IRREFUTABLE PROOF. Are you able to do that?

bahman wrote: ↑Fri Nov 12, 2021 4:15 pm

Age wrote: ↑Thu Nov 11, 2021 11:04 pm

bahman wrote: ↑Thu Nov 11, 2021 10:21 pm It is uncased-cause of everything that you experienced and what you have not experienced yet.

HOW, EXACTLY, could "your mind" be the cause of EVERY thing that I have experienced and what I have not experienced yet", especially WHEN "your mind" only came into existence WHEN or AFTER 'you' came into existence?

Or, are you saying that 'you' AND "your mind" have ALWAYS EXISTED?

If yes, then 'I' think that 'you' will be VERY SADLY MISTAKEN. But, then again, who AND what EXACTLY are 'you', to you?

Look, ONCE AGAIN, 'you' are VERY CLOSE to thee One and ONLY irrefutable Truth here, which EVERY one else, in this forum, is ALSO, (so this is no great thing), BUT 'the way' you are expressing things is only taking 'you' and "others" FURTHER AWAY from thee One and ONLY ACTUAL Truth of things.

My mind right now is causing what you read, my thoughts.

LOL 'you' are coming across as though 'you' are in control.

1. Who and/or what is 'you', which possesses/owns "a mind"?

2. How does "your mind" cause 'you' to put "your thoughts" into readable form?

3. You STILL can NOT YET SEE that saying, "my mind" causes 'you' to do things, like write "your thoughts" down is EXTREMELY CONTRADICTORY, ILLOGICAL, AND NONSENSICAL.

4. 'you' can NOT logically OWN some thing, which then has CONTROL over 'you'.

5. When thee ACTUAL Truth is UNDERSTOOD it is also NEITHER "your thoughts". This is because of what 'thoughts' REALLY ARE.

bahman wrote: ↑Fri Nov 12, 2021 4:15 pm There are other minds in control of causing other things.

You have also said something like matter cannot move without "minds" BUT NEVER was able to back up NOR support this BELIEF of YOURS.

bahman wrote: ↑Fri Nov 12, 2021 4:15 pm

Age wrote: ↑Thu Nov 11, 2021 11:04 pm

bahman wrote: ↑Thu Nov 11, 2021 10:21 pm
It depends on how do you define a system.

I am ONLY COPYING your use of those words, that is WHY they are in quotation marks.

I have PREVIOUSLY ASKED you, for HOW you define 'a system' or 'the system', depending on which way YOU write 'it'.

Ok.

Age wrote: ↑Thu Nov 11, 2021 11:04 pm

bahman wrote: ↑Thu Nov 11, 2021 10:21 pm Let's define the system as the sum of mind and Qualia, Qualia is the stuff that the mind experiences and causes.

So, in other words, EVERY thing.

When you say, 'the system', do you just mean and refer to Everything?

If yes, then I suggest just saying 'Everything' instead. That way this makes it FAR EASIER and SIMPLER for "others" to SEE and UNDERSTAND what 'it' is that 'you' are talking about.

Also, when one uses words in definitions, I found it is much better if that one is able to CLARIFY the definition for ALL of the words in the definition, VERY CLEARLY.

So, if by 'qualia' you just mean the "stuff" that "the mind" experiences and causes, then 'what', EXACTLY do you mean by 'mind'?

The whole is the sum of all minds and Qualia.

Do you purposely 'try to' DEFLECT? Or, do you REALLY NOT UNDERSTAND what I am POINTING OUT and ASKING you?

Is 'the whole' EVERY thing?

bahman wrote: ↑Fri Nov 12, 2021 4:15 pm

Age wrote: ↑Thu Nov 11, 2021 9:17 pm

bahman wrote: ↑Thu Nov 11, 2021 10:21 pm
I already defined the system.

Yes, BUT ONLY in this post.

By using the word 'already' you are implying or it could be interpreted that you had done it PREVIOUSLY. Which you OBVIOUSLY had NOT.

Also, I did say, 'soundly AND validly'.

By using the 'mind' word in your definition of 'the system', to some, is NOT a 'sound AND valid' definition. This is because the complete controversy and MISUNDERSTANDING of what 'the mind' is EXACTLY.

Mind is irreducible substance with abilities to experience, decide, and cause.

What 'substance', EXACTLY

By the way, the human body is able to experience, decide, and cause. So, what caused the human body to come into Existence, with the ability to experience, decide, and cause?

Also, how MANY "minds" are there, EXACTLY? And, WHERE do ALL of these "minds" exist, EXACTLY?

Sculptor wrote: ↑Fri Nov 12, 2021 11:06 pm

bahman wrote: ↑Fri Nov 12, 2021 4:19 pm

Sculptor wrote: ↑Fri Nov 12, 2021 12:10 pm
Yes, the conditions cause the decision. QED that is the conditions determine the decision.

No, conditions define the situation. The decision comes after. You can choose vanilla ice cream instead of chocolate one in spite of liking chocolate one much more. QED therefore you are free.

No, because no matter what you choose you haev reasons for doing so and that is necessarily determined by who and what you are. You cannot escape that no matter who you try to fudge it.
We are all "free" to the degree that we can act to our own will.
But we cannot be free or ourselves. We can do as we will, but we are not free to will as we will.
If we were so free that we were free of oursleves then we would just be making random choices of no relevance or unimportance.
That would be a very different world.

The free choice which seems random is important. Otherwise, you could not decide when there was a conflict of interest. You can also decide to do what you don't like, which seems irrational, but you can do it anyway.

Age wrote: ↑Fri Nov 12, 2021 11:32 pm

bahman wrote: ↑Fri Nov 12, 2021 4:07 pm

Age wrote: ↑Thu Nov 11, 2021 10:43 pm LOL
LOL
LOL

When will 'you', human beings, GROW UP and LEARN that what is 'the definition' of some thing to one of 'you' is NOT necessarily 'the definition' of the same thing, to "another" one of 'you'?

ALSO, and by the way, 'the definition' of 'determinism' AND 'free will' MEANS that they BOTH exist, and play parts in the WHOLE, of 'the system' of thee Universe, Itself.

Now, EITHER what you say and claim is ACTUALLY True, Right, AND Correct, or it is NOT, and let us NOT forget that 'you', human beings, have been 'arguing' this 'determinism' OR 'free will' discussion for thousands of years WITHOUT ANY logical conclusion BEING FOUND/UNCOVERED.

So, to me, this FURTHER PROVES that what I SEE and SAY could be thee ACTUAL Truth here is thee ACTUAL Truth, in the end. After all, this view fits in PERFECTLY with EVERY thing else, forming One completely WHOLE, COMPATIBLE UNIFIED view of things.

Believe in what you like.

Here is FURTHER PROOF of just HOW MUCH the adult human beings, in the days when this was being written, were just NOT LISTENING. Even when the WORDS are CLEARLY WRITTEN DOWN in front of them, and so, literally, 'spelled out for them' in CLEARLY WRITTEN WORDS, they STILL could NOT HEAR what was being said.

So, how MANY TIMES do I have to INFORM 'you', "bahman", that I NEITHER believe NOR disbelieve ANY thing, before this SINKS IN and you can comprehend and understand this Fact?

Saying, "Believe in what you like", besides being a Truly ILLOGICAL statement is NO REAL WAY to 'try to' counter what I POINTED OUT and SHOWED here.

I know that you believe in the mind.

Age wrote: ↑Fri Nov 12, 2021 11:32 pm

bahman wrote: ↑Fri Nov 12, 2021 4:07 pm

Age wrote: ↑Thu Nov 11, 2021 10:03 pm Which FURTHER MAKES what I am SEEING and SAYING even MORE true, right, AND correct.

But only until you STOP BELIEVING what you do now, will you BEGIN to be ABLE to LOOK AT and SEE things, from ANOTHER perspective.

But carry on the way you are and keep EXPRESSING your BELIEFS. That way I keep EXPOSING HOW and WHY HOLDING ONTO BELIEFS only CLOSES 'you' OFF to thee ACTUAL Truth of things.

As I have expressed to 'you' previously "bahman" A LOT of what you are thinking and believing is ACTUALLY VERY CLOSE to thee ACTUAL Truth of things, BUT because you have and are HOLDING ONTO these BELIEFS of yours BEFORE you KNOW what thee One and ONLY Truth ACTUAL IS, you are NOT YET able to SEE HOW nor WHY your views are so close to being Correct. And, when ANY one CHALLENGES or QUESTIONS you on your BELIEFS, you FAIL MISERABLY in your so-called "explanations". As SHOWN and PROVEN by your response to "sculptor's" request to, or expectation of, you, which was; Explain how your mind makes a choice... Take us through the steps!

Your "explanation" was illogical nonsense.

I just gave the definitions for determinism and free will. They are two different things.

Are you AWARE that IT IS POSSIBLE for two different things to BOTH exist in the EXACT SAME Universe?

If yes, then BOTH 'free will' AND 'determinism' EXIST in this One and ONLY Universe.

But, ONCE AGAIN, this ALL depends on how one OBSERVES, and DEFINES, 'things'.

Mind for example cannot be free and determined. THe whole universe is a mix of things.

Age wrote: ↑Thu Nov 11, 2021 10:03 pm

bahman wrote: ↑Fri Nov 12, 2021 4:07 pm

Age wrote: ↑Thu Nov 11, 2021 10:03 pm Do you even think or IMAGINE that it is POSSIBLE for a human being to fly, "like a crow"?

If yes, then HOW?

But if no, then WHY AGAIN say something so ABSURD, ILLOGICAL, AND NONSENSICAL?

This, after all, is a philosophical discussion forum, and NOT ANY of the other discussion forums available, to you.

So you cannot fly.

Here is ANOTHER GREAT EXAMPLE of WHEN and HOW these adult human beings QUICKLY JUMP to ASSUMPTIONS and CONCLUSIONS, based on absolutely NOTHING AT ALL other than their OWN DISTORTED thinking.

As I said previously, if I can fly or not depends on the situation, and what EXACTLY is classed as 'fly/flying'.

Just because I, OBVIOUSLY, can NOT fly like a crow does NOT mean that I cannot fly.

bahman wrote: ↑Fri Nov 12, 2021 4:07 pm Therefore you fall which is constraint by laws of nature no matter if you are free or not.

And here is A GREAT EXAMPLE of how these adult human beings will say just about ANY thing, in order to 'try to' argue for their currently HELD ONTO BELIEFS.

Can you fly or not? Yes or no?

Age wrote: ↑Fri Nov 12, 2021 11:54 pm

bahman wrote: ↑Fri Nov 12, 2021 4:15 pm

Age wrote: ↑Thu Nov 11, 2021 11:04 pm LOL
LOL
LOL

I will say this AGAIN, there is NO such thing as a "your mind". UNLESS, OF COURSE, ANY one of 'you', human beings, even after thousands of years EVER "decides" to EXPLAIN, with PROOF, of WHAT one IS, EXACTLY, and how 'it' ACTUALLY WORKS, EXACTLY.

Until then I will REMAIN OPEN, and follow what I KNOW is ACTUALLY True, Right, AND Correct.

There are many minds. Your picture of one mind is false.

Okay. If this is REALLY the CLAIM you want to make, then back it up and support it with PROOF of what these "many minds" ARE EXACTLY.

There are at least two minds. The proof is given in here.

Age wrote: ↑Fri Nov 12, 2021 11:54 pm Also, fit your view that there are "MANY minds" with your other BELIEFS like about how YOUR "mind" existed BEFORE you came into existence.

There are at least two which I have a prove for it. It could be infinite though.

Age wrote: ↑Fri Nov 12, 2021 11:54 pm Furthermore, and REMEMBER I CLAIM I can back up and support my views and claims WITH ACTUAL IRREFUTABLE PROOF. Are you able to do that?

Where is your proof?

Age wrote: ↑Thu Nov 11, 2021 11:04 pm

bahman wrote: ↑Fri Nov 12, 2021 4:15 pm

Age wrote: ↑Thu Nov 11, 2021 11:04 pm HOW, EXACTLY, could "your mind" be the cause of EVERY thing that I have experienced and what I have not experienced yet", especially WHEN "your mind" only came into existence WHEN or AFTER 'you' came into existence?

Or, are you saying that 'you' AND "your mind" have ALWAYS EXISTED?

If yes, then 'I' think that 'you' will be VERY SADLY MISTAKEN. But, then again, who AND what EXACTLY are 'you', to you?

Look, ONCE AGAIN, 'you' are VERY CLOSE to thee One and ONLY irrefutable Truth here, which EVERY one else, in this forum, is ALSO, (so this is no great thing), BUT 'the way' you are expressing things is only taking 'you' and "others" FURTHER AWAY from thee One and ONLY ACTUAL Truth of things.

My mind right now is causing what you read, my thoughts.

LOL 'you' are coming across as though 'you' are in control.

1. Who and/or what is 'you', which possesses/owns "a mind"?

I am a human being, a mind and a body.

Age wrote: ↑Thu Nov 11, 2021 11:04 pm 2. How does "your mind" cause 'you' to put "your thoughts" into readable form?

My mind just causes thoughts. You are looking for a mechanism when you are asking how but there is no mechanism.

Age wrote: ↑Thu Nov 11, 2021 11:04 pm 3. You STILL can NOT YET SEE that saying, "my mind" causes 'you' to do things, like write "your thoughts" down is EXTREMELY CONTRADICTORY, ILLOGICAL, AND NONSENSICAL.

What? If it is not your mind then what it is?

Age wrote: ↑Thu Nov 11, 2021 11:04 pm 4. 'you' can NOT logically OWN some thing, which then has CONTROL over 'you'.

Of course, I own my thoughts.

Age wrote: ↑Thu Nov 11, 2021 11:04 pm 5. When thee ACTUAL Truth is UNDERSTOOD it is also NEITHER "your thoughts". This is because of what 'thoughts' REALLY ARE.

Ahan.

Age wrote: ↑Thu Nov 11, 2021 11:04 pm

bahman wrote: ↑Fri Nov 12, 2021 4:15 pm There are other minds in control of causing other things.

You have also said something like matter cannot move without "minds" BUT NEVER was able to back up NOR support this BELIEF of YOURS.

bahman wrote: ↑Fri Nov 12, 2021 4:15 pm

Age wrote: ↑Thu Nov 11, 2021 11:04 pm

I am ONLY COPYING your use of those words, that is WHY they are in quotation marks.

I have PREVIOUSLY ASKED you, for HOW you define 'a system' or 'the system', depending on which way YOU write 'it'.

Ok.

Age wrote: ↑Thu Nov 11, 2021 11:04 pm

So, in other words, EVERY thing.

When you say, 'the system', do you just mean and refer to Everything?

If yes, then I suggest just saying 'Everything' instead. That way this makes it FAR EASIER and SIMPLER for "others" to SEE and UNDERSTAND what 'it' is that 'you' are talking about.

Also, when one uses words in definitions, I found it is much better if that one is able to CLARIFY the definition for ALL of the words in the definition, VERY CLEARLY.

So, if by 'qualia' you just mean the "stuff" that "the mind" experiences and causes, then 'what', EXACTLY do you mean by 'mind'?

The whole is the sum of all minds and Qualia.

Do you purposely 'try to' DEFLECT? Or, do you REALLY NOT UNDERSTAND what I am POINTING OUT and ASKING you?

Is 'the whole' EVERY thing?

I already defined the mind 1000 times to you. That was just the definition of the whole.

Age wrote: ↑Thu Nov 11, 2021 9:17 pm

bahman wrote: ↑Fri Nov 12, 2021 4:15 pm

Age wrote: ↑Thu Nov 11, 2021 9:17 pm Yes, BUT ONLY in this post.

By using the word 'already' you are implying or it could be interpreted that you had done it PREVIOUSLY. Which you OBVIOUSLY had NOT.

Also, I did say, 'soundly AND validly'.

By using the 'mind' word in your definition of 'the system', to some, is NOT a 'sound AND valid' definition. This is because the complete controversy and MISUNDERSTANDING of what 'the mind' is EXACTLY.

Mind is irreducible substance with abilities to experience, decide, and cause.

What 'substance', EXACTLY

A substance is something that exists and can affect reality.

Age wrote: ↑Thu Nov 11, 2021 9:17 pm By the way, the human body is able to experience, decide, and cause. So, what caused the human body to come into Existence, with the ability to experience, decide, and cause?

Your body does not have abilities to experience, decide and cause.

Age wrote: ↑Thu Nov 11, 2021 9:17 pm Also, how MANY "minds" are there, EXACTLY? And, WHERE do ALL of these "minds" exist, EXACTLY?

At least two, probably infinite.

bahman wrote: ↑Sat Nov 13, 2021 2:42 pm

Sculptor wrote: ↑Fri Nov 12, 2021 11:06 pm

bahman wrote: ↑Fri Nov 12, 2021 4:19 pm
No, conditions define the situation. The decision comes after. You can choose vanilla ice cream instead of chocolate one in spite of liking chocolate one much more. QED therefore you are free.

No, because no matter what you choose you haev reasons for doing so and that is necessarily determined by who and what you are. You cannot escape that no matter who you try to fudge it.
We are all "free" to the degree that we can act to our own will.
But we cannot be free or ourselves. We can do as we will, but we are not free to will as we will.
If we were so free that we were free of oursleves then we would just be making random choices of no relevance or unimportance.
That would be a very different world.

The free choice which seems random is important. Otherwise, you could not decide when there was a conflict of interest. You can also decide to do what you don't like, which seems irrational, but you can do it anyway.

Word salad.

Sculptor wrote: ↑Sat Nov 13, 2021 3:52 pm

bahman wrote: ↑Sat Nov 13, 2021 2:42 pm

Sculptor wrote: ↑Fri Nov 12, 2021 11:06 pm

No, because no matter what you choose you haev reasons for doing so and that is necessarily determined by who and what you are. You cannot escape that no matter who you try to fudge it.
We are all "free" to the degree that we can act to our own will.
But we cannot be free or ourselves. We can do as we will, but we are not free to will as we will.
If we were so free that we were free of oursleves then we would just be making random choices of no relevance or unimportance.
That would be a very different world.

The free choice which seems random is important. Otherwise, you could not decide when there was a conflict of interest. You can also decide to do what you don't like, which seems irrational, but you can do it anyway.

Word salad.

I blacked of a bit of Bahman's post as copied by Sculptor.

Deciding where there is a conflict of interest is not free choice but is caused by the subject's reasoning ability and grasp of facts, and these in turn are caused by his human heritage and then by his education and inherent ability to reason.

If you decide to do what you don't like you will be caused to do this by your desire to prove something,or because you like to make yourself suffer, or because you enjoy gambling on a chance, or because you are a slave to mind altering drugs. There is nothing in the world that is not caused i.e. since miracles went out of fashion.

Belinda wrote: ↑Sat Nov 13, 2021 6:45 pm

Sculptor wrote: ↑Sat Nov 13, 2021 3:52 pm

bahman wrote: ↑Sat Nov 13, 2021 2:42 pm
The free choice which seems random is important. Otherwise, you could not decide when there was a conflict of interest. You can also decide to do what you don't like, which seems irrational, but you can do it anyway.

Word salad.

I blacked of a bit of Bahman's post as copied by Sculptor.

Deciding where there is a conflict of interest is not free choice but is caused by the subject's reasoning ability and grasp of facts, and these in turn are caused by his human heritage and then by his education and inherent ability to reason.

If you decide to do what you don't like you will be caused to do this by your desire to prove something,or because you like to make yourself suffer, or because you enjoy gambling on a chance, or because you are a slave to mind altering drugs. There is nothing in the world that is not caused i.e. since miracles went out of fashion.

Do you think bahman actually knows the meaning of the phrase "conflict of interest". I avoided responding to this post as mention of this idea was at best a bit left field at worst a complete misunderstanding of the phrase, and I did not see why bahman thought it relavant.

Belinda wrote: ↑Sat Nov 13, 2021 6:45 pm

Sculptor wrote: ↑Sat Nov 13, 2021 3:52 pm

bahman wrote: ↑Sat Nov 13, 2021 2:42 pm
The free choice which seems random is important. Otherwise, you could not decide when there was a conflict of interest. You can also decide to do what you don't like, which seems irrational, but you can do it anyway.

Word salad.

I blacked of a bit of Bahman's post as copied by Sculptor.

Deciding where there is a conflict of interest is not free choice but is caused by the subject's reasoning ability and grasp of facts, and these in turn are caused by his human heritage and then by his education and inherent ability to reason.

Deciding when there is a conflict of interest is a free decision in my dictionary. How do you define free decision?

bahman wrote: ↑Sat Nov 13, 2021 2:42 pm If you decide to do what you don't like you will be caused to do this by your desire to prove something,or because you like to make yourself suffer, or because you enjoy gambling on a chance, or because you are a slave to mind altering drugs. There is nothing in the world that is not caused i.e. since miracles went out of fashion.

Have you ever been in a situation when the outcomes of options are unknown? Can't you decide and resolve such a situation?

Sculptor wrote: ↑Sat Nov 13, 2021 7:53 pm

Belinda wrote: ↑Sat Nov 13, 2021 6:45 pm

Sculptor wrote: ↑Sat Nov 13, 2021 3:52 pm

Word salad.

I blacked of a bit of Bahman's post as copied by Sculptor.

Deciding where there is a conflict of interest is not free choice but is caused by the subject's reasoning ability and grasp of facts, and these in turn are caused by his human heritage and then by his education and inherent ability to reason.

If you decide to do what you don't like you will be caused to do this by your desire to prove something,or because you like to make yourself suffer, or because you enjoy gambling on a chance, or because you are a slave to mind altering drugs. There is nothing in the world that is not caused i.e. since miracles went out of fashion.

Do you think bahman actually knows the meaning of the phrase "conflict of interest". I avoided responding to this post as mention of this idea was at best a bit left field at worst a complete misunderstanding of the phrase, and I did not see why bahman thought it relavant.

By the conflict of interest, I mean that there is tension between two desires for example.

bahman wrote: ↑Sat Nov 13, 2021 9:11 pm

Sculptor wrote: ↑Sat Nov 13, 2021 7:53 pm

Belinda wrote: ↑Sat Nov 13, 2021 6:45 pm

I blacked of a bit of Bahman's post as copied by Sculptor.

Deciding where there is a conflict of interest is not free choice but is caused by the subject's reasoning ability and grasp of facts, and these in turn are caused by his human heritage and then by his education and inherent ability to reason.

If you decide to do what you don't like you will be caused to do this by your desire to prove something,or because you like to make yourself suffer, or because you enjoy gambling on a chance, or because you are a slave to mind altering drugs. There is nothing in the world that is not caused i.e. since miracles went out of fashion.

Do you think bahman actually knows the meaning of the phrase "conflict of interest". I avoided responding to this post as mention of this idea was at best a bit left field at worst a complete misunderstanding of the phrase, and I did not see why bahman thought it relavant.

By the conflict of interest, I mean that there is tension between two desires for example.

Yes that is the bullshit I thought it was