Philosophy Now Forum

Atla wrote: ↑Tue Aug 19, 2025 4:42 am

peacegirl wrote: ↑Mon Aug 18, 2025 8:53 pm Yes, the system holds people accountable when they do something that is considered wrong by others as a deterrent, but it is only a partial deterrent. He was just taking it a step further by saying that if we knew for a fact that this person could not have done otherwise, can we blame him? Just desert is different than rehabilitation. A person who is a determinist would be much more compassionate in how he would view the perpetrator. This discovery takes it further and actually prevents the desire to hurt others, so there would be no need for punishment or rehabilitation.

Yes, we can blame people even if we know that they couldn't have done otherwise. Being compassionate to perpetrators must have its limits. Malignant people usually remain malignant even if they understand determinism, their desire to hurt others usually doesn't go away, you would just enable them to hurt others more so you should be blamed for that imo.

Please don't be sarcastic. Why do you respond that way? It was a rhetorical question, and a fair one.

Atla wrote:It shows that you have no connection to the real world, or pretend not to have one in order to sell something.

If that's what you think, then let's not communicate.

I'm not the author. I'm the compiler and you are wrong. Why are you coming to so many premature conclusions when this is what he urged people not to do? We won't get very far at the rate we're going. Why can't you contain your skepticism enough to really try to understand what this man has written instead of dismissing his 30 year work so quickly?

Atla wrote:I'm right and my conclusions aren't premature. If you reveal that great realization about death, it will of course turn out to be a feel-good speculation, not a fact. Come on, this is a philosophy forum where some people have actually thought about such issues. And we're used to people who want to sell books that will change the world.

You are making comparisons without even attempting to understand what this knowledge is about. You're jumping to conclusions because you don't believe it's possible to have a true, genuine discovery. This is not fair. The author spent 30 years thinking about such issues. Let me repeat: If you think this is just to sell books, then there's no point in us talking.

Atla wrote: ↑Mon Aug 18, 2025 6:04 pm
And I'm a determinist who thinks that not holding people responsible because determinism is true, is just another form of "evil". Of course you have to hold people responsible. Responsibility doesn't have to be based on libertarian free will. We held people responsible throughout history, and societies will collapse if we stop doing so.

Atla wrote:LOL 'Societies will collapse'.

Once people are stopped from 'being held' responsible, then this is actually when societies thrive and prosper. But, please do not let the actual and irrefutable Facts, in Life, get in the way of your own already obtained beliefs, "atla".

Atla wrote:Now, as always, if any one would like to have a discussion about 'my claim', here, then let 'us' continue.

You want people to get away with any crime, naturally crime will explode and societies will collapse. You're an idiot, God.

FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Tue Aug 19, 2025 5:01 pm Nobody is buying this book.

peacegirl wrote: ↑Tue Aug 19, 2025 6:05 pm That's a horrible way to judge what hasn't even been discussed.

FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Tue Aug 19, 2025 6:13 pm

peacegirl wrote: ↑Tue Aug 19, 2025 6:05 pm That's a horrible way to judge what hasn't even been discussed.

What hasn't been discussed can't be discussed because it's all secrets that you hope people will buy access to.

peacegirl wrote: ↑Tue Aug 19, 2025 7:02 pm

FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Tue Aug 19, 2025 6:13 pm

peacegirl wrote: ↑Tue Aug 19, 2025 6:05 pm That's a horrible way to judge what hasn't even been discussed.

What hasn't been discussed can't be discussed because it's all secrets that you hope people will buy access to.

Wrong.

FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Tue Aug 19, 2025 8:44 pm

peacegirl wrote: ↑Tue Aug 19, 2025 7:02 pm

FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Tue Aug 19, 2025 6:13 pm
What hasn't been discussed can't be discussed because it's all secrets that you hope people will buy access to.

Wrong.

What is the second discovery? It's not a difficult question.

peacegirl wrote: ↑Tue Aug 19, 2025 9:11 pm

FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Tue Aug 19, 2025 8:44 pm

peacegirl wrote: ↑Tue Aug 19, 2025 7:02 pm

Wrong.

What is the second discovery? It's not a difficult question.

It has to do with the eyes. I don’t want to discuss this until his first discovery is understood, and it is far from it because no one is giving me a chance.

FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Tue Aug 19, 2025 9:57 pm

peacegirl wrote: ↑Tue Aug 19, 2025 9:11 pm

FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Tue Aug 19, 2025 8:44 pm
What is the second discovery? It's not a difficult question.

It has to do with the eyes. I don’t want to discuss this until his first discovery is understood, and it is far from it because no one is giving me a chance.

The first "discovery" was just hard determinism. Wooo determinism. Great. You seem to have some confusion where you don't think the will itself is subject to the same deterministic forces as the entire universe, leading to strange phrasings such as "Nothing can force us to do anything against our will or without our consent".... but nobody cares.

Second discovery please.

peacegirl wrote: ↑Wed Aug 20, 2025 1:23 am

FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Tue Aug 19, 2025 9:57 pm

peacegirl wrote: ↑Tue Aug 19, 2025 9:11 pm

It has to do with the eyes. I don’t want to discuss this until his first discovery is understood, and it is far from it because no one is giving me a chance.

The first "discovery" was just hard determinism. Wooo determinism. Great. You seem to have some confusion where you don't think the will itself is subject to the same deterministic forces as the entire universe, leading to strange phrasings such as "Nothing can force us to do anything against our will or without our consent".... but nobody cares.

Second discovery please.

Absolutely not. According to definition of determinism, we have no say in our choices because we are being controlled by deterministic forces. We have no say in what we choose because determinism has made those choices for us. This is what many people don't like about the idea that they have no free will. This phrase is important, and you just dismissed it with a wave of a hand. Try to understand instead of coming off like Mr. Know it all.

peacegirl wrote: ↑Tue Aug 19, 2025 12:51 pm

peacegirl wrote: ↑Fri Aug 15, 2025 2:20 pm

I'm not sure what you mean by "linear." Could you explain?



I thought it meant not just randomness but the ability to choose A or B equally without compulsion.



Evil in this context means hurting others (i.e., doing to others what they don't want done to themselves) whether it is through narcissism, hedonism, or the plain old taking advantage to gain at someone else's expense.

Eodnhoj7 wrote:One assertion leads to the next, arguments are generally linear.

Got it.

Eodnhoj7 wrote:Without a determining force the will is effectively non-deterministic, random.

That is true but by using the phrase "determining force", it is causing a lot of confusion because of the implications. Nothing can force us to do anything against our will or without our consent.

Eodnhoj7 wrote:Define hurt. Discipline hurts, does it mean it is evil?

It is not evil if disciplining someone because they have hurt someone else is necessary. For example, a child may need to be reprimanded for something he did that hurt another so that the child can understand why his behavior needs to change. Other than that, discipline could be used as power play (usually by adults) that leads to rebellion.

Eodnhoj7 wrote: Reality hurts...is this evil as well? You are equating suffering with evil and there is no standard by which this can be conceived other than subjective value placement.

The standard definition of evil (hurt) used here is anything that a person does to another that they don't want done to themselves. For example, if I don't want you to shoot me, I am placing a value on you not shooting me. If I don't care if I'm shot, then not shooting me holds no value for me. But most people value their life and don't want to be shot, which is why certain standards of "right and wrong" exist. There are always exceptions.

Eodnhoj7 wrote:Pinpoint where the will is specifically.

You can't pinpoint the will as if it has a physical location.

Eodnhoj7 wrote:Discipline is not always a power play by outside conditions. sometimes it is self applied. Pushing past ones limits hurts...is that evil?

Of course. We discipline ourselves all the time. Pushing past one's limits is not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about the hurt of theft, poverty, murder, and hatred.

Eodnhoj7 wrote:If evil is determined by inflicting pain on others that they do not want inflicted on themselves...then does that mean a suicidal person is justified in hurting others?

It isn't about being justified. Committing suicide is dissatisfaction with life to such an extent that the person sees no other way out of the pain. Sadly, leaving behind pain for his family could not be helped because life was too miserable, in his eyes, to continue on. It is man's nature to move in the direction of greater satisfaction from moment to moment, and in this case, it was more satisfying to die rather than to live, for whatever reason. This discovery prevents suicidal behavior because of the immense change in environmental conditions.

Eodnhoj7 wrote:A percieved identity can force one to go against there will.

One cannot move against one's will, because it is one's will --- or what one ultimately decides to do --- that will either give one the permission to act or not.

Eodnhoj7 wrote:If the will cannot be pinpointed empirically, where can it be pinpointed in abstraction?

Just because will cannot be pinpointed in a physical way, does not mean we cannot observe, in a metaphysical way, whether our will is free or not.

Eodnhoj7 wrote:Theft, poverty, murder and hatred are interpretations, many who commit such acts do not view them as such things.

It isn't about the people who commit such acts who think it's okay. It's how the people who are hurt by these acts that define "hurt." Remember, the definition of hurt is doing something to someone that they don't want done to themselves. If someone steals my life savings, I am hurt. If I don't have enough sustenance to live, I am hurt. If someone shoots me, I am hurt.

Eodnho wrote:If justification is not necessary than providing a justification as why to percieve reality in a "better way" is null.

You don't have to perceive reality in another way if you don't want to, but most of us want to, because people want to find answers to a world where many people are hurting. I am not sure where a "justification" in regard to suicide is necessary unless you are trying to justify to doctors why you want to do this, so you can get the meds from them to finish the job. Justification is usually needed when you are contemplating something that could hurt others by your actions. We also try to justify our actions when we have made a promise that we broke, such as going off our diet, etc..

FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Wed Aug 20, 2025 1:39 am

peacegirl wrote: ↑Wed Aug 20, 2025 1:23 am

FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Tue Aug 19, 2025 9:57 pm
The first "discovery" was just hard determinism. Wooo determinism. Great. You seem to have some confusion where you don't think the will itself is subject to the same deterministic forces as the entire universe, leading to strange phrasings such as "Nothing can force us to do anything against our will or without our consent".... but nobody cares.

Second discovery please.

Absolutely not. According to definition of determinism, we have no say in our choices because we are being controlled by deterministic forces. We have no say in what we choose because determinism has made those choices for us. This is what many people don't like about the idea that they have no free will. This phrase is important, and you just dismissed it with a wave of a hand. Try to understand instead of coming off like Mr. Know it all.

FlashDangerpants wrote:Nobody here should find determinism confusing or difficult and what you are writing is old stuff.

It's not old stuff FlashDAangerpants. It's new stuff but you won't know what this new stuff is if you keep up with this attitude that you already know.

FlashDangerpants wrote:Please explain the second discovery, perhaps it will be interesting or new or something.

No, sorry.

peacegirl wrote: ↑Wed Aug 20, 2025 11:27 am

FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Wed Aug 20, 2025 1:39 am

peacegirl wrote: ↑Wed Aug 20, 2025 1:23 am

Absolutely not. According to definition of determinism, we have no say in our choices because we are being controlled by deterministic forces. We have no say in what we choose because determinism has made those choices for us. This is what many people don't like about the idea that they have no free will. This phrase is important, and you just dismissed it with a wave of a hand. Try to understand instead of coming off like Mr. Know it all.

FlashDangerpants wrote:Nobody here should find determinism confusing or difficult and what you are writing is old stuff.

It's not old stuff FlashDAangerpants. It's new stuff but you won't know what this new stuff is if you keep up with this attitude that you already know.

FlashDangerpants wrote:Please explain the second discovery, perhaps it will be interesting or new or something.

No, sorry.

FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Wed Aug 20, 2025 12:03 pm

peacegirl wrote: ↑Wed Aug 20, 2025 11:27 am

FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Wed Aug 20, 2025 1:39 am



It's not old stuff FlashDAangerpants. It's new stuff but you won't know what this new stuff is if you keep up with this attitude that you already know.



No, sorry.

There are hundreds of prior discussions of determinism on this site. Everybody here is well familiar with the topic. I am perfectly happy to grant hard determinism for the sake of argument. It is absurd to use this as an excuse not to explain the other stuff.

The reason you won't explain the other stuff is obviously that you want to reserve it for paying customers.