For the discussion of all things philosophical.
https://canzookia.com/
Very true.henry quirk wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 5:56 pm No. The individual can choose (a course, an action) based on reasons he susses out for himself, informed by the past but not determined by it.
Lord, two agreements...hell might be gettin' cold.bahman wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 6:01 pmVery true.henry quirk wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 5:56 pm No. The individual can choose (a course, an action) based on reasons he susses out for himself, informed by the past but not determined by it.
Suddenly the matter that its motion determined by past decides for future! How ironic!henry quirk wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 6:03 pmLord, two agreements...hell might be gettin' cold.bahman wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 6:01 pmVery true.henry quirk wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 5:56 pm No. The individual can choose (a course, an action) based on reasons he susses out for himself, informed by the past but not determined by it.
What you believe is of no importance.bahman wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 5:54 pmThat is your reality. In my point of view, the experience is a property of mind. In yours, it emerges from motion of matter. I have an argument against emergence. I have an argument in necessity of mind.Sculptor wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 5:47 pmAccording to you, yes, humans are all magical creatures who can act in spite of themselves outside the laws of nature.
So that no matter what their life has been, their education, their situation, their needs, desires and wants, they can magically ignore all that and randomly pick a course of action out of thin air like taking a rabbit from a hat.
What I am trying to tell you is that the rabbit was already in the hat.
Have you ever been in a situation when you want your options equally or when you are unsure about the outcome of your decision in the future? A mechanical system simply fails to overcome such a situation, therefore, it halts. You won't halt, therefore, you are free. This is the use of free will in two different situations to the best of my knowledge.Sculptor wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 10:43 pmWhat you believe is of no importance.bahman wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 5:54 pmThat is your reality. In my point of view, the experience is a property of mind. In yours, it emerges from motion of matter. I have an argument against emergence. I have an argument in necessity of mind.Sculptor wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 5:47 pm
According to you, yes, humans are all magical creatures who can act in spite of themselves outside the laws of nature.
So that no matter what their life has been, their education, their situation, their needs, desires and wants, they can magically ignore all that and randomly pick a course of action out of thin air like taking a rabbit from a hat.
What I am trying to tell you is that the rabbit was already in the hat.
Unless you can account for your idea that humans are outside physics you have nothing.
Your idea not only fails practically, but also logically.
"free" will has no use whatever. In any given set of conditions, acting otherwise negates your will.
No it does not.bahman wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 11:42 pmHave you ever been in a situation when you want your options equally or when you are unsure about the outcome of your decision in the future? A mechanical system simply fails to overcome such a situation, therefore, it halts.Sculptor wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 10:43 pmWhat you believe is of no importance.
Unless you can account for your idea that humans are outside physics you have nothing.
Your idea not only fails practically, but also logically.
"free" will has no use whatever. In any given set of conditions, acting otherwise negates your will.
You won't halt, therefore, you are free. This is the use of free will in two different situations to the best of my knowledge.
Because neither you nor him have anything but wishes. No argument. No reason.
Run away!
He's one of the enlightened ones. To folks like him: all is mechanical and the human individual is just a bright ape variant. To folks like him: we're nuthin' but Roombas. Ain't nuthin' you can say will move him. Hell, his own sense of self-direction and -efficacy doesn't move him (or any anti-free type).
It does halt. It seems to me that you have never written a program. Have you?Sculptor wrote: ↑Fri Nov 01, 2019 1:57 pmNo it does not.bahman wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 11:42 pmHave you ever been in a situation when you want your options equally or when you are unsure about the outcome of your decision in the future? A mechanical system simply fails to overcome such a situation, therefore, it halts.Sculptor wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 10:43 pm
What you believe is of no importance.
Unless you can account for your idea that humans are outside physics you have nothing.
Your idea not only fails practically, but also logically.
"free" will has no use whatever. In any given set of conditions, acting otherwise negates your will.You won't halt, therefore, you are free. This is the use of free will in two different situations to the best of my knowledge.
Yes I have written a program. Several in fact.bahman wrote: ↑Fri Nov 01, 2019 7:04 pmIt does halt. It seems to me that you have never written a program. Have you?
If you have written a program then you know that the program halts if there are two outputs that both have equal weight. In simple word, there is no algorithm which can resolve such a situation when outputs have equal weight. You can try it.Sculptor wrote: ↑Sun Nov 03, 2019 12:13 amYes I have written a program. Several in fact.
I also have a solution to Buridan's Ass.
And ... BTW
https://www.nature.com/news/2008/080411 ... 8.751.html