A question about Jesus.

1…6781012

Comments

  • Ahnimus
    Ahnimus Posts: 10,560
    soulsinging wrote:
    but the brain, in all practical respects, creates a uniquely functioning being and entity. so for all practical purposes, your determinism changes nothing. it just offers a different explanation than free will. instead of a soul that can't be predicted determining actions, you have a brain that can't be predicted determining actions. you cannot predict human behavior in either case. so whether you believe in free will or determinism makes absolutely no difference in how you act in the real world.

    It does make a difference. It differs on how you attribute causation. Whether the man stealing bread from you is stealing it because he is evil, or because he is hungry. It opens up crime to investigation. If we know to look at the brain, we might find an insufficiency in their orbital frontal lobe causing poor judgement. We can then use hyperstimulation to try to repair the damage and the so-called criminal can function normally in society. The alternative is to lock 'em up and throw away the key or death by lethal injection.
    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
  • soulsinging
    soulsinging Posts: 13,202
    Ahnimus wrote:
    Clarrence Darrow's book Crime its cause and treatment does an excellent job of describing how this paradigm MIGHT bennefit society.

    i capitalized the key word there: "might." it also might make no difference. determinism could be abused just as readily as religion has been.
  • Ahnimus
    Ahnimus Posts: 10,560
    soulsinging wrote:
    what same arguments?

    The same arguments you advance against determinism when applied to religious dogma uncovers an even more sadistic truth about religion.
    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
  • soulsinging
    soulsinging Posts: 13,202
    Ahnimus wrote:
    It does make a difference. It differs on how you attribute causation. Whether the man stealing bread from you is stealing it because he is evil, or because he is hungry. It opens up crime to investigation. If we know to look at the brain, we might find an insufficiency in their orbital frontal lobe causing poor judgement. We can then use hyperstimulation to try to repair the damage and the so-called criminal can function normally in society. The alternative is to lock 'em up and throw away the key or death by lethal injection.

    and who is to say that some people might not run the other way with determinism? the criminal has been wired to be a criminal and we should just kill them now to save society the trouble and cost of fixing them?
  • soulsinging
    soulsinging Posts: 13,202
    Ahnimus wrote:
    The same arguments you advance against determinism when applied to religious dogma uncovers an even more sadistic truth about religion.

    that is my point. the fact that the same arguments about misinterpretation apply to both renders them both equally susceptible to abuse.
  • Ahnimus
    Ahnimus Posts: 10,560
    soulsinging wrote:
    do you truly think that if the entire world converted to determinism overnight this would cease? instead of killing each other for god, you'd have people killing each other becos they think the other person is uncurably determined to be evil.

    Arguing from ignorance is a fallacy. Being ignorant about the effects of a society believing in determinism is not reason to the contrary.
    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
    soulsinging wrote:
    and who is to say that some people might not run the other way with determinism? the criminal has been wired to be a criminal and we should just kill them now to save society the trouble and cost of fixing them?

    I'm not saying that won't happen, but again, you are simply arguing from ignorance.
    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
  • soulsinging
    soulsinging Posts: 13,202
    Ahnimus wrote:
    Arguing from ignorance is a fallacy. Being ignorant about the effects of a society believing in determinism is not reason to the contrary.

    bullshit. you know you cannot refute my points so you insult me. you do not KNOW how determinism would be applied in a society. you only KNOW how you interpret it and how you THINK it should be applied. religious people would argue the same thing... if people did christianity the way it is "supposed" to be done, we'd have no problems with it. if you don't think determinism would be abused, then YOU are ignorant and as blind and naive as the most fervent christian.
  • soulsinging
    soulsinging Posts: 13,202
    Ahnimus wrote:
    I'm not saying that won't happen, but again, you are simply arguing from ignorance.

    really? how so? enlighten me, almighty one. since i am so simple and you are so fucking brilliant. if you admit that it could happen, then there is nothing ignorant about my hyopthetical.
  • Ahnimus
    Ahnimus Posts: 10,560
    soulsinging wrote:
    that is my point. the fact that the same arguments about misinterpretation apply to both renders them both equally susceptible to abuse.

    Not equally. Determinism has much more under it's foundation than religion does. Determinism has the entire history of the universe supporting it. It ties in quite nicely with scientific determinism and everything we observe and has predictive values.

    Religion has not a foot to stand on.

    I'm concerned with what is real, not with what may or may not happen as a result, I'm not an economist and even if the results are identical, the paradigm is more realistic.
    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
    soulsinging wrote:
    bullshit. you know you cannot refute my points so you insult me. you do not KNOW how determinism would be applied in a society. you only KNOW how you interpret it and how you THINK it should be applied. religious people would argue the same thing... if people did christianity the way it is "supposed" to be done, we'd have no problems with it. if you don't think determinism would be abused, then YOU are ignorant and as blind and naive as the most fervent christian.

    Argumentum ad ignoratium
    Argument from Ignorance
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_ignorance

    It's not an insult, it's philosophy. It seems like you are letting this get to you, and that's a bad way to have an argument about philosophy.
    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
    soulsinging wrote:
    really? how so? enlighten me, almighty one. since i am so simple and you are so fucking brilliant. if you admit that it could happen, then there is nothing ignorant about my hyopthetical.

    I'm saying your hypothetical is fine, but a logical possibility is not synonymous with a real possibility, and arguing that something might happen is not a reason to accept it as false.
    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
  • soulsinging
    soulsinging Posts: 13,202
    Ahnimus wrote:
    Argumentum ad ignoratium
    Argument from Ignorance
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_ignorance

    It's not an insult, it's philosophy. It seems like you are letting this get to you, and that's a bad way to have an argument about philosophy.

    clearly, you've never been to law school. your term does not apply to my argument, which never assumed anything was true. i merely said it was a possibility.
  • Ahnimus
    Ahnimus Posts: 10,560
    soulsinging wrote:
    clearly, you've never been to law school. your term does not apply to my argument, which never assumed anything was true. i merely said it was a possibility.

    What you were saying was that since it's logically possible that determinism will have the equivelant results as libertarianism or dualism, that it is therefor no better a theory. Yet, that argument does not target the facts of the thoery, it only targets the predicted effects, effects which you cannot predict because you are ignorant of all the values, as am I.

    You are essentially saying:

    "Since I cannot imagine that belief in determinism will have greater bennefits, it is either false or might as well be false."
    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
  • soulsinging
    soulsinging Posts: 13,202
    Ahnimus wrote:
    I'm saying your hypothetical is fine, but a logical possibility is not synonymous with a real possibility, and arguing that something might happen is not a reason to accept it as false.

    yours is also a hypothetical chief. it is logically possible that determinism would cause a golden age of society where everyone was happy and loved kittens and puppies. but that does not make it a real possibility and arguing that it might happen that way does not prove that my theory is false either. in fact, since you pointed to the history of the universe, i would point to the entire history of human social behavior as evidence that any belief system will inevitably be corrupted and abused to benefit the status quo.
  • Ahnimus
    Ahnimus Posts: 10,560
    soulsinging wrote:
    yours is also a hypothetical chief. it is logically possible that determinism would cause a golden age of society where everyone was happy and loved kittens and puppies. but that does not make it a real possibility and arguing that it might happen that way does not prove that my theory is false either. in fact, since you pointed to the history of the universe, i would point to the entire history of human social behavior as evidence that any belief system will inevitably be corrupted and abused to benefit the status quo.

    I'm not arguing for the predicted effects. I'm arguing for the plausibility of the opposing theories; determinism, dualism and libertarianism. If all had the very same effects than that would make my job all the more easier, since in terms of facts supporting the theories, dualism and libertarianism have none.
    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
  • soulsinging
    soulsinging Posts: 13,202
    Ahnimus wrote:
    You are essentially saying:

    "Since I cannot imagine that belief in determinism will have greater bennefits, it is either false or might as well be false."

    no, what i am saying is that since it is entirely possible and even likely that determinism will not convey any benefits exceeding those offered by current systems (be they religion, capitalism, communism, or whatever else), it has no more practical value or benefit than any other ideology.
  • soulsinging
    soulsinging Posts: 13,202
    Ahnimus wrote:
    I'm not arguing for the predicted effects. I'm arguing for the plausibility of the opposing theories; determinism, dualism and libertarianism. If all had the very same effects than that would make my job all the more easier, since in terms of facts supporting the theories, dualism and libertarianism have none.

    and im only arguing the effects. i don't care about the foundational basis. if you give me $100,000 i dont give a flying fuck if you did it out of charity, condescension or mistake. i care about the result. you're telling me determinism needs to be implemented in society. i'm not seeing why as i see no compelling reason to believe it's going to make a damn bit of difference in the lives of 99% of the world. so sure, let's all be determinism. i don't give a fuck. it doesn't make any difference if you're christian, determinist, or whatever else. the world is still going to function the same, people will still behave nice the same, and peopel will still fuck each other the same.
  • Ahnimus
    Ahnimus Posts: 10,560
    soulsinging wrote:
    no, what i am saying is that since it is entirely possible and even likely that determinism will not convey any benefits exceeding those offered by current systems (be they religion, capitalism, communism, or whatever else), it has no more practical value or benefit than any other ideology.

    Exactly, argumentum ad ignoratiam.

    "since it is entirely possible .... it has no more practical value or benefit"

    You are using something that you are ignorant about as evidence. You are using an indefinite statement to support a definite statement. You are unsure if it will have good effects, therefor is won't have good effects. Do you see the fallacy?
    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
    soulsinging wrote:
    and im only arguing the effects. i don't care about the foundational basis. if you give me $100,000 i dont give a flying fuck if you did it out of charity, condescension or mistake. i care about the result. you're telling me determinism needs to be implemented in society. i'm not seeing why as i see no compelling reason to believe it's going to make a damn bit of difference in the lives of 99% of the world. so sure, let's all be determinism. i don't give a fuck. it doesn't make any difference if you're christian, determinist, or whatever else. the world is still going to function the same, people will still behave nice the same, and peopel will still fuck each other the same.

    You may want to check out http://www.beyondbelief2006.org for actual research on the pyschological affects of religion. At some point, I hope it will become clear that determinism is superior.
    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

Categories