Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by paul babcock on March 27, 2011 at 10:03pm

Pardon my absence please. I had my lawn to mow before dark.
And too, my last two posts are misplaced in that I took so long to type them that they might appear to be in response to the incorrect post. Both of them were responding to posts on the previous page. So please pardon my slow typing as well.

Anyway, I was unaware that "predetermined" implied intent or force. If it does, then I did use the wrong word. Yeah, "determined" is sufficient as it is obvious that whatever causes there are that determine the affect are obviously there prior to the outcome.

As I see it tho you are still equating an ability to predict the outcome w it being determined. I think they are separate. In my smokers brain he will have conflicting urges, or conflicting levels of neuro/chemical signals for each. The choice is determined by which is greater at the time of the choice. The direction and speed of an eight ball is similarly determined by how it was precisely hit by the que ball. We can predict these events to varying degrees of success and precision, but again, I think our ability to predict these events to be entirely separate from it being determined.

I may well be wrong, but I have it in my head anyway, that what we are doing is more miscomunicating rather than disagreeing, except that I am not equating an ability to predict the outcome w it being determined by its causes, and I think you are.


Sure getting to the truth and precision in language are both laudable goals that I donot mean to trivialize. It is just that if my main point is something as trivial sounding as that I do think we can make free choices but these choices are already decided by existing conditions, then I think it best if I add the caveat that I admit it is semantic hair splitting ahead of time.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Park Bierbower on March 27, 2011 at 10:39pm

"I may well be wrong, but I have it in my head anyway, that what we are doing is more miscomunicating rather than disagreeing, except that I am not equating an ability to predict the outcome w it being determined by its causes, and I think you are."

 

If this is to me, let me mention that nowhere do I mention prediction.  Predetermination is in reference to deciding an outcome, not guessing it.  It also carries with it implications of consciousness (the ability to decide) and force (the ability to effect), and while it may seem like splitting hairs [which I won't technically argue with] it is still important to understand.  Communication is by far the greatest tool humanity has, and yet is in many ways still very rudimentary.  This conversation is just evidence of that.  

So while I'm not trying to perpetuate an admitted misunderstanding, there really is yet another miscommunication~ prediction and determination are in no way related, by definition.

Honestly, I think the jury was out and is now back, ruling that predetermination is, by definition alone, not possible.  If that definition was changed, or had stipulations added, then... Well, we would take it from there.  Using terminology that relates to cause and effect is much more efficient.

 

To address another point, let me quote "As I see it tho you are still equating an ability to predict the outcome w it being determined. I think they are separate."

no no no no no.  Aside from your use of "predict,"  what I am saying is that the perception of predetermination (which, aside from stipulating consciousness, also implies a chain of events and force) rests in the ability to compute knowledge.  If you still don't understand, wiki determinism vs. indeterminism.  determinism fits well into the knowledge we have of the world.  Its late, I'll address this later.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by paul babcock on March 28, 2011 at 7:04am

Park. All I wrote regarding prediction being equated w something being determined was aimed at Mr. Tricoci. We had been having our own exchange going on for a while, and it did seem to me that he was repeatadly done just that. Sorry for y confusion.

I had tho read your post about "predetermined" enabling intent, and that was what determined that I change from "predetermined" to "determined." in my usage.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by paul babcock on March 28, 2011 at 9:29am

repeatedly doing

the confusion


entailing intent, sorry

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by MCT on March 28, 2011 at 12:16am

Decided in advance, by whom? By what? Nothing. Nothing is predetermined or predecided. Only determined by preceding events and decided by weighing known information and logical plausibilities based on that information.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Phil on March 28, 2011 at 9:49am

I have to disagree. In a deterministic universe, though it may be an unhappy thought, you are the product of events, not the free spirit you'd like to think you are. The equations necessary to predict your future "choices" are unworkably large but, If you don't dwell on it, you can go with the flow and feel comfortable punishing yourself and others for moral transgressions (bad choices).

I've always thought that retribution and punishment should not be goals of a civilized society, but, instead, prevention. Isolate sociopaths, don't torture them directly or indirectly (sending them out into an exercise yard to be shanked).

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Park Bierbower on March 28, 2011 at 9:56am

Prevention and rehabilitation, education and focusing on reacclimatizing them to society, or removing them to a more structured, confined society that strips them of the responsibilities that they've proven they can't handle (such as interacting with people without stabbing them in the face when they get angry).

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Phil on March 28, 2011 at 10:02am

Exactly. Unfortunately, this mindset is incompatible with Christian morality and the requrements of other faith-based systems.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Tonya Wynn on April 8, 2011 at 1:42pm

The very fact that humans progressed to austraunats all the way from cavemen!  Humans didn't always do what was already learned.  We progressed through thinking and choosing.  The ones who don't choose (and kill and steal and mooch), I call 'animals'.  Simple.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jedi Wanderer on April 8, 2011 at 2:38pm

Ever hear of memes? Cultural evolution? But you're right, that is a simple point you've made, painfully simplistic in fact.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Laura on April 19, 2011 at 2:24pm

I've read through a portion of this discussion but not all of it, so this may have been suggested before. I really recommend the Reasonable Doubts podcast , episode 29 for anyone who wants to find out more about the free-will / determinism debate. I favor determinism myself, and *disclaimer* the hosts of the podcast also back up the deterministic outlook quite strongly. I think it's great that we can have this discussion within the non theist community and recognize that it can only be resolved through the application of reason and evidence. And nobody threatens harm or death to those who disagree with their views. Bonus! 

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 4
• 5
• 6
• Next ›
• Page