at Canzookia.com
https://canzookia.com/
Can't blame people for punishing wrong doers either. If he kills me, then someone else might take heed and lock him up or kill him before he kills more people.Impenitent wrote: ↑Tue Apr 14, 2026 5:35 pm no moral responsibility
can't blame him, it was predetermined that he was going to kill you
-Imp
How do you know I will do it if I haven't done it? And if I did do it once, wouldn't preventing me from doing it again be a reasonable decision by others?Impenitent wrote: ↑Tue Apr 14, 2026 5:52 pm with no justification?
you will do this (especially if you haven't) so you must be punished
-Imp
I don't know, I don't need to know...Gary Childress wrote: ↑Tue Apr 14, 2026 6:05 pmHow do you know I will do it if I haven't done it? And if I did do it once, wouldn't preventing me from doing it again be a reasonable decision by others?Impenitent wrote: ↑Tue Apr 14, 2026 5:52 pm with no justification?
you will do this (especially if you haven't) so you must be punished
-Imp
So if you were told that we have no free will, you would kill people (just in case they were intending to kill you first)? Is that correct?Impenitent wrote: ↑Tue Apr 14, 2026 6:39 pmI don't know, I don't need to know...Gary Childress wrote: ↑Tue Apr 14, 2026 6:05 pmHow do you know I will do it if I haven't done it? And if I did do it once, wouldn't preventing me from doing it again be a reasonable decision by others?Impenitent wrote: ↑Tue Apr 14, 2026 5:52 pm with no justification?
you will do this (especially if you haven't) so you must be punished
-Imp
all that must be done is the prevention of your doing anything
I can't stop that which was predestined nor take responsibility for doing it
as if the falling object can artificially alter the rate of descent...
now if you could actually contain the rate of descent, the skunks wouldn't be so malodorous...
-Imp
lolGary Childress wrote: ↑Tue Apr 14, 2026 7:01 pmSo if you were told that we have no free will, you would kill people (just in case they were intending to kill you first)? Is that correct?Impenitent wrote: ↑Tue Apr 14, 2026 6:39 pmI don't know, I don't need to know...Gary Childress wrote: ↑Tue Apr 14, 2026 6:05 pm
How do you know I will do it if I haven't done it? And if I did do it once, wouldn't preventing me from doing it again be a reasonable decision by others?
all that must be done is the prevention of your doing anything
I can't stop that which was predestined nor take responsibility for doing it
as if the falling object can artificially alter the rate of descent...
now if you could actually contain the rate of descent, the skunks wouldn't be so malodorous...
-Imp
It would seem so.Impenitent wrote: ↑Tue Apr 14, 2026 10:28 pm but it is obvious that you were predetermined not to be able to comprehend autonomy
-Imp
I'm sorry...this is just too dumb a debate to be had. It's really stupid.popeye1945 wrote: ↑Thu Apr 16, 2026 5:26 am As I have stated so many times before, there is no such thing as human action; there is only human reaction, and those reactions are causes to humanity's outer world.
So Immanuuel, you have all the answers for us. How wonderful! Perhaps you could start by explaining how something that is motivated is an action and not a reaction. Changing one's mind is the same process as the initial idea; the same causal loop is involved. I believe your type of thinking really arises from a belief that you and the world are separated entities. You believe in free will; you are an agent in the world. I propose to you that mare presents is cause, and the larger reality for us is the presence of the Earth as cause, and reality itself is the result of reciprocal causation. You come into this world as a plastic constitution, ready to be shaped. You have no identity. The environmental contexts that you inhabit in your journey through this life will define you, and those contexts are the world, the primary cause of causes, without considering the cosmos or the creative field of the universe that produced you. I think you should ponder this a little deeper. All organisms are reactive creatures; if this were not so, evolutionary adaptation would be quite impossible, as our primary cause, the Earth, changes, so too must we as a species or die. We are linked to the physical world, not separate entities, but functional nodes of the Earth. It is cause to us, and through our reactions, those reactions are causes to the outside world. This is reciprocal causation. I could go on and on, but I have offered this challenge to people in general; give me an example of a human action which I cannot prove to be a reaction. Consider yourself called out.Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Thu Apr 16, 2026 5:46 amI'm sorry...this is just too dumb a debate to be had. It's really stupid.popeye1945 wrote: ↑Thu Apr 16, 2026 5:26 am As I have stated so many times before, there is no such thing as human action; there is only human reaction, and those reactions are causes to humanity's outer world.
If people cannot choose, then people cannot change their minds, either. So argumentation is pointless: the only reason you could then give for why anybody held any view was "prior material factors made it happen." So there would be no "better" or "worse" views of anything -- the total determinant would be the previous causal forces.
And arguments wouldn't work. For then, there is no mind to hear them, and no possibility of a mind being convinced of them.
So why is this OP about something the OP both requires of us, and yet demands we believe can't happen?
Too dumb for words.
If there is no free will then no one is truly responsible for the right or wrong that is done, no one. Not the Republicans, not Hitler, not Saint Francis, not Christ (if he was truly mortal), no one. We're all moral equals, we're all victims or else beneficiaries of deterministic forces. Every single one of us. That includes, you, IC and me. And if there is a God and God is also a sentient being, then does God have any other choice available to him/her/it? Can God do anything else other than what God did, does and will do? And how would God even know if God has free will or not? Does God know what is beyond what God knows? Can God know that there is nothing beyond what God knows?popeye1945 wrote: ↑Thu Apr 16, 2026 6:35 amSo Immanuuel, you have all the answers for us. How wonderful! Perhaps you could start by explaining how something that is motivated is an action and not a reaction. Changing one's mind is the same process as the initial idea; the same causal loop is involved. I believe your type of thinking really arises from a belief that you and the world are separated entities. You believe in free will; you are an agent in the world. I propose to you that mare presents is cause, and the larger reality for us is the presence of the Earth as cause, and reality itself is the result of reciprocal causation. You come into this world as a plastic constitution, ready to be shaped. You have no identity. The environmental contexts that you inhabit in your journey through this life will define you, and those contexts are the world, the primary cause of causes, without considering the cosmos or the creative field of the universe that produced you. I think you should ponder this a little deeper. All organisms are reactive creatures; if this were not so, evolutionary adaptation would be quite impossible, as our primary cause, the Earth, changes, so too must we as a species or die. We are linked to the physical world, not separate entities, but functional nodes of the Earth. It is cause to us, and through our reactions, those reactions are causes to the outside world. This is reciprocal causation. I could go on and on, but I have offered this challenge to people in general; give me an example of a human action which I cannot prove to be a reaction. Consider yourself called out.Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Thu Apr 16, 2026 5:46 amI'm sorry...this is just too dumb a debate to be had. It's really stupid.popeye1945 wrote: ↑Thu Apr 16, 2026 5:26 am As I have stated so many times before, there is no such thing as human action; there is only human reaction, and those reactions are causes to humanity's outer world.
If people cannot choose, then people cannot change their minds, either. So argumentation is pointless: the only reason you could then give for why anybody held any view was "prior material factors made it happen." So there would be no "better" or "worse" views of anything -- the total determinant would be the previous causal forces.
And arguments wouldn't work. For then, there is no mind to hear them, and no possibility of a mind being convinced of them.
So why is this OP about something the OP both requires of us, and yet demands we believe can't happen?
Too dumb for words.
That is an ad hominem.
(EDIT: Or perhaps a Red Herring, depending on how it was used.)