logic vs feeling

1…1415171920…23

Comments

  • farfromglorified
    farfromglorified Posts: 5,700
    Ahnimus wrote:
    You didn't see the pages and pages I've written in the past on this?

    Probably not all of them, no.
    People didn't understand the complex representations I've provided before. So I simplified.

    A lot of the "complex representations" I've seen from you are links to blurbs from articles, a lot of which do more to contradict a deterministic outlook than to support one and I've gotten the distinct impression that you don't understand a lot of these things yourself. However, I'm sure I haven't seen all of what you've written on the subject and I may be unfairly categorizing you here.

    To be completely honest, I started to ignore a lot of your posts on the subject when you started telling people what they should choose to do after also telling them that everything they'd do in the future had been prescribed by their environment. Seemed kind of odd to me.
  • farfromglorified
    farfromglorified Posts: 5,700
    Ahnimus wrote:
    Same deal. It requires something. Anything that is required by something else is therefor a determinant.

    Hehe. No. You require food & water. That requirement does not determine how you will get it. Furthermore, it doesn't even actually require that you get it -- you may choose to go without (though you will die accordingly).
    No one has been able to give me an example of an effect without a cause.

    That's because there's no such thing as an effect without a cause.
    As soon as we ask "How?" we assume there is cause and effect.

    Until someone can give me a clear example of an effect that has knowingly no causes. I won't buy into free-will.

    You're looking for someone who believes that free-will is magic. Free-will isn't magic. What you're ignoring is that free-will itself can be a cause while also being an effect of the construct provided in your mind.
  • Ahnimus
    Ahnimus Posts: 10,560
    farfromglorified wrote:
    To be completely honest, I started to ignore a lot of your posts on the subject when you started telling people what they should choose to do after also telling them that everything they'd do in the future had been prescribed by their environment. Seemed kind of odd to me.

    How do we know if I misunderstood the links, or if you did?
    I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
  • Ahnimus
    Ahnimus Posts: 10,560
    farfromglorified wrote:
    You're looking for someone who believes that free-will is magic. Free-will isn't magic. What you're ignoring is that free-will itself can be a cause while also being an effect of the construct provided in your mind.

    Ok, so we've established free-will as the "effect of the construct provided in your mind." I agree with that.

    So free-will is dependent on the mind?

    How do you define mind? The brain?
    I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
  • farfromglorified
    farfromglorified Posts: 5,700
    Ahnimus wrote:
    How do we know if I misunderstood the links, or if you did?

    Probably by looking for the person who suggested what people should do, after telling them that everything they will do is predetermined. In other words, by counting the contradictions.
  • farfromglorified
    farfromglorified Posts: 5,700
    Ahnimus wrote:
    Ok, so we've established free-will as the "effect of the construct provided in your mind." I agree with that.

    Do we? You seem to think free-will doesn't exist.
    So free-will is dependent on the mind?

    Of course. Would anyone suggest that there are 6 billion minds but 100 billion wills?
    How do you define mind? The brain?

    Mind is the conscious recognition of self. In humans, that is a construct of the brain.
  • Ahnimus
    Ahnimus Posts: 10,560
    farfromglorified wrote:
    Mind is the conscious recognition of self. In humans, that is a construct of the brain.


    Ok, so, we have:

    Brain -> Mind/Conscious -> Free-will

    Ok good, we are establishing causes and effects.

    Now, what about the Brain, what causes that?

    You mentioned before that the Mind requires input and then applies will to it. However, you also say that will is a construct of the brain. Correct?
    I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
  • farfromglorified
    farfromglorified Posts: 5,700
    Ahnimus wrote:
    Ok, so, we have:

    Brain -> Mind/Conscious -> Free-will

    Ok good, we are establishing causes and effects.

    No, we're establishing relationships. A building is not the effect of the ground it stands on. A man in that building is not the effect of the building. The sky above that building is not the effect of that building.
    Now, what about the Brain, what causes that?

    Genetics, internal and external stimuli.
    You mentioned before that the Mind requires input and then applies will to it. However, you also say that will is a construct of the brain. Correct?

    Yes, though there is no "however".
  • Ahnimus
    Ahnimus Posts: 10,560
    farfromglorified wrote:
    No, we're establishing relationships. A building is not the effect of the ground it stands on. A man in that building is not the effect of the building. The sky above that building is not the effect of that building.

    Genetics, internal and external stimuli.

    Yes, though there is no "however".

    I'm sorry, I misinterpreted your use of the word "construct".

    Ok, let's back up. Where does free-will occur? In the mind? But the mind doesn't cause free-will, so what does?
    I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
  • Ahnimus
    Ahnimus Posts: 10,560
    farfromglorified wrote:
    Probably by looking for the person who suggested what people should do, after telling them that everything they will do is predetermined. In other words, by counting the contradictions.

    I'm sorry what did I suggest people do?

    As I recall I suggested people subject themselves to specific inputs.

    Let's forget about predeterminism for now, because I'm trying to quantify it for you.
    I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
  • farfromglorified
    farfromglorified Posts: 5,700
    Ahnimus wrote:
    I'm sorry, I misinterpreted your use of the word "construct".

    Ok, let's back up. Where does free-will occur?

    In humans, free-will occurs in the mind, which occurs in the brain, which occurs in the body, which occurs in the environment.
    In the mind? But the mind doesn't cause free-will, so what does?

    The existence of the mind makes free-will possible. What causes free-will is your recognition of yourself and of me and of everything around you as a distinct object. That recognition is a direct effect of the mind's construction. Furthermore, that recognition and that construction allows you to examine the inputs into your mind and evaluate them using reason.
  • farfromglorified
    farfromglorified Posts: 5,700
    Ahnimus wrote:
    I'm sorry what did I suggest people do?

    You suggested they make "better" "choices".
    As I recall I suggested people subject themselves to specific inputs.

    And how would they do that, without the ability to freely choose? And why would they do that, without any moral standard?
  • Ahnimus
    Ahnimus Posts: 10,560
    farfromglorified wrote:
    In humans, free-will occurs in the mind, which occurs in the brain, which occurs in the body, which occurs in the environment.

    The existence of the mind makes free-will possible. What causes free-will is your recognition of yourself and of me and of everything around you as a distinct object. That recognition is a direct effect of the mind's construction. Furthermore, that recognition and that construction allows you to examine the inputs into your mind and evaluate them using reason.

    Exactly!

    Environment -> Genetics -> Body <-> Brain <-> Mind
    <-> Consciousness <-> Free-will

    Where -> is one-way and <-> is two-way.

    Also Environment <-> Body and Environment -> Brain

    That's our cause and effect model, Correct?
    I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
  • Ahnimus
    Ahnimus Posts: 10,560
    farfromglorified wrote:
    You suggested they make "better" "choices".

    And how would they do that, without the ability to freely choose? And why would they do that, without any moral standard?

    They would or wouldn't do it based on my suggestion and their determination of it. However, they are less likely to gather that input without my suggestion or otherwise becoming aware of it.
    I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
  • farfromglorified
    farfromglorified Posts: 5,700
    Ahnimus wrote:
    Exactly!

    Environment -> Genetics -> Body <-> Brain <-> Mind
    <-> Consciousness <-> Free-will

    Where -> is one-way and <-> is two-way.

    Also Environment <-> Body and Environment -> Brain

    That's our cause and effect model, Correct?

    No. First, you should have no one-way paths there. A receding path from choice, action, will, consciousness, mind, brain and body can affect either genetics or your environment. Secondly, you're trying to boil every relationship down to cause and effect which makes no sense because all relationships are not defined in a causal manner. As I said before, a building is not the "effect" of the ground it's built on. For example, consciousness is certainly an effect of the mind. But mind is not necessarily an effect of the brain. Something could arguably be self-aware without a human brain.
  • farfromglorified
    farfromglorified Posts: 5,700
    Ahnimus wrote:
    They would or wouldn't do it based on my suggestion and their determination of it.

    What determination?
    However, they are less likely to gather that input without my suggestion or otherwise becoming aware of it.

    Are you sure? It seems like they're less likely after you said something, considering the responses you've seen.

    Now, how about addressing the why in my post? I'm going to get really bored with this if you keep ignoring the majority of my posts.
  • Ahnimus
    Ahnimus Posts: 10,560
    farfromglorified wrote:
    No. First, you should have no one-way paths there. A receding path from choice, action, will, consciousness, mind, brain and body can affect either genetics or your environment. Secondly, you're trying to boil every relationship down to cause and effect which makes no sense because all relationships are not defined in a causal manner. As I said before, a building is not the "effect" of the ground it's built on. For example, consciousness is certainly an effect of the mind. But mind is not necessarily an effect of the brain. Something could arguably be self-aware without a human brain.

    Can something be self-aware without a mammalian brain or a device designed to allow for self-awareness?

    As you said "a building is not the "effect" of the ground it's built on"

    A building is in part an effect of the ground it is built on. It's not a sufficient cause, but a required one. A sufficient cause would be ground, material, motion, something driving the motion, like a person and the reason for it.

    What is sufficient cause for free-will? Consciousness? What is sufficient cause for Consciousness?

    Please try to explain the construct. Nothing exists simply because it exists. If a building exists it is because someone built it.
    I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
  • Ahnimus
    Ahnimus Posts: 10,560
    farfromglorified wrote:
    What determination?

    Are you sure? It seems like they're less likely after you said something, considering the responses you've seen.

    Now, how about addressing the why in my post? I'm going to get really bored with this if you keep ignoring the majority of my posts.

    I'm sorry, what why?

    I'm trying to quantify will with you. The rest of the topic is quite irrelevant if we can't determine where free-will comes from.

    If free-will is a construct of the brain, then the brain determines what free-will is. The brain is a machine with various determinants. These determinants when perturbed alter free-will and consciousness. Therefor free-will and consciousness are sufficiently caused by their neural a biochemical correlates. Whatever determines those determines how they cause free-will and consciousness.

    Are you trying to say that a will, brain, consciousness interaction is self-determinant?

    E.g. X = Y = Z = X?
    I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
  • farfromglorified
    farfromglorified Posts: 5,700
    Ahnimus wrote:
    Can something be self-aware without a mammalian brain or a device designed to allow for self-awareness?

    To the former, yes. To the latter, doubtful. It's certainly possible for a computer to be self-aware using the constructs of a processor and memory. I'm not sure it would be possible for something to be self-aware without an underlying construct, however. I don't believe in God, nor do I believe that Nature has a will. But neither can necessarily be disproven.
    As you said "a building is not the "effect" of the ground it's built on"

    A building is in part an effect of the ground it is built on. It's not a sufficient cause, but a required one. A sufficient cause would be ground, material, motion, something driving the motion, like a person and the reason for it.

    Good.
    What is sufficient cause for free-will? Consciousness? What is sufficient cause for Consciousness?

    The sufficient cause for Consciousness is an evolutionary need for an animal to make self-aware choices as opposed to instinctual reactions, along with all the concomittant genetic modifications to get there.
    Please try to explain the construct. Nothing exists simply because it exists. If a building exists it is because someone built it.

    Something certainly built your will. That something is millions of years of evolution, dictated by the path of nature. It's a big part of why you're here to have this discussion.
  • farfromglorified
    farfromglorified Posts: 5,700
    Ahnimus wrote:
    I'm sorry, what why?

    You suggested they make "better" "choices".

    And how would they do that, without the ability to freely choose? And why would they do that, without any moral standard?
    I'm trying to quantify will with you. The rest of the topic is quite irrelevant if we can't determine where free-will comes from.

    We already have determined where free-will comes from. It comes from your mind.
    If free-will is a construct of the brain, then the brain determines what free-will is.

    Yes, it determines the attributes of what free-will is. It does not, however, determine everything free-will does.
    The brain is a machine with various determinants. These determinants when perturbed alter free-will and consciousness. Therefor free-will and consciousness are sufficiently caused by their neural a biochemical correlates. Whatever determines those determines how they cause free-will and consciousness.

    Yes. Now, why are you ignoring that those perturberations can be self-contained, meaning that they happen only in your own brain, interpreted in your own mind, without additional external stimuli?
    Are you trying to say that a will, brain, consciousness interaction is self-determinant?

    The purpose of your consciousness is self-examination through reason. So if you mean "self-determinant" as a situation wherein an individual's will determines an individual's actions, yes, that is what I'm saying. However, if you're still trying to make the unseen leap from these relationships to a point wherein the will has no option to take multiple paths for the direction of self, no, that's not what I'm saying.

Categories