Augustine

135

Comments

  • OutOfBreath
    OutOfBreath Posts: 1,804
    Ahnimus wrote:
    I bought these Centrios ear-buds because my other headphones are busted.

    When I watch videos or listen to sounds that have a certain range of background noise, I see strange anomolies in the environment around me, and a presence as if something is there, it first seems like a bug is flying around, but as I look around me there is nothing there. I've linked this phenomena to the new ear-buds I'm using, I also tend to submit to an alternate state of consciousness, a slightly hypnotic state, if you will. I believe this is caused by the electromagnetism from the ear-buds, unfortunately I've no way of verifying this without an EM detector.

    The ear-buds us NdFeB magnets (according to the package, which I still have). These magnets are very powerful and are used for Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation. In theory, I've discovered the source of these recent 'presences' to be the ear-buds I just purchased.

    But this is what I mean about knowledge and critical analysis. Instead of assuming that I'm being haunted or foreshadowed by God. All kinds of things affect us, and it follows that we are then a product of these influences.
    Weird stuff about the headphones.

    But what follows is not that we are the product of only our influences. It follows that influences influence us. How much it does, well that's debatable. I'd be willing to concede that a lot is dependent on our influences. I'm not as prepared to accept that we are only our influences.

    Peace
    Dan
    "YOU [humans] NEED TO BELIEVE IN THINGS THAT AREN'T TRUE. HOW ELSE CAN THEY BECOME?" - Death

    "Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
  • Ahnimus
    Ahnimus Posts: 10,560
    OutOfBreath wrote:
    Weird stuff about the headphones.

    But what follows is not that we are the product of only our influences. It follows that influences influence us. How much it does, well that's debatable. I'd be willing to concede that a lot is dependent on our influences. I'm not as prepared to accept that we are only our influences.

    Peace
    Dan

    Do you have a better explanation? Or any alternative explanation?
    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
  • OutOfBreath
    OutOfBreath Posts: 1,804
    Ahnimus wrote:
    Do you have a better explanation? Or any alternative explanation?
    Not really, other than I believe we have some ability to exert will, even if we in many if not most cases don't use it, and go along with the flow.

    Peace
    Dan
    "YOU [humans] NEED TO BELIEVE IN THINGS THAT AREN'T TRUE. HOW ELSE CAN THEY BECOME?" - Death

    "Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
  • Ahnimus
    Ahnimus Posts: 10,560
    OutOfBreath wrote:
    Not really, other than I believe we have some ability to exert will, even if we in many if not most cases don't use it, and go along with the flow.

    Peace
    Dan

    And where does this belief come from?
    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
  • OutOfBreath
    OutOfBreath Posts: 1,804
    Ahnimus wrote:
    And where does this belief come from?
    I dunno. I am just not convinced that there are no actions, just reactions. Why are you so convinced of you hard determinism stance?

    Peace
    Dan
    "YOU [humans] NEED TO BELIEVE IN THINGS THAT AREN'T TRUE. HOW ELSE CAN THEY BECOME?" - Death

    "Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
  • Ahnimus
    Ahnimus Posts: 10,560
    OutOfBreath wrote:
    I dunno. I am just not convinced that there are no actions, just reactions. Why are you so convinced of you hard determinism stance?

    Peace
    Dan

    There is no evidence to the contrary and everything is evidence for determinism.
    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
  • OutOfBreath
    OutOfBreath Posts: 1,804
    Ahnimus wrote:
    There is no evidence to the contrary and everything is evidence for determinism.
    Arguably, if one interpret them exactly your way. I see evidence for influences on our actions, yes. I see no hard determinism, making evrything we do mere reactions (which begs the question about initial action, leading to god, which you dont like), from what you have presented here alone. We are easily fooled, certainly. Are we suggestible? Most definitely. (and this should actually necessitate having a long critical look on our science as well)

    Is evrything we do pre-determined and decided from now and to eternity? I dont think we are, and I base that mostly on gut-feeling, everyday experience of exerting will (might be illusional, certainly), and no conclusive evidence on the subject. Not without one particular perspective from the outset anyway.

    Peace
    Dan
    "YOU [humans] NEED TO BELIEVE IN THINGS THAT AREN'T TRUE. HOW ELSE CAN THEY BECOME?" - Death

    "Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
  • Ahnimus
    Ahnimus Posts: 10,560
    OutOfBreath wrote:
    Arguably, if one interpret them exactly your way. I see evidence for influences on our actions, yes. I see no hard determinism, making evrything we do mere reactions (which begs the question about initial action, leading to god, which you dont like), from what you have presented here alone. We are easily fooled, certainly. Are we suggestible? Most definitely. (and this should actually necessitate having a long critical look on our science as well)

    Is evrything we do pre-determined and decided from now and to eternity? I dont think we are, and I base that mostly on gut-feeling, everyday experience of exerting will (might be illusional, certainly), and no conclusive evidence on the subject. Not without one particular perspective from the outset anyway.

    Peace
    Dan

    Causality does not lead to God that's a fallacy of Creationism. It suggests that the chain of causality ends with a causeless force. But that is a presupposition, presupposing the chain continues for infinity is another fallacy. However, we do not exist at the begining of time, we exist somewhere within causality, that much is apparent. Speculating about the 'begining' is not a good argument either way, IMO.
    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
  • OutOfBreath
    OutOfBreath Posts: 1,804
    Ahnimus wrote:
    Causality does not lead to God that's a fallacy of Creationism. It suggests that the chain of causality ends with a causeless force. But that is a presupposition, presupposing the chain continues for infinity is another fallacy. However, we do not exist at the begining of time, we exist somewhere within causality, that much is apparent. Speculating about the 'begining' is not a good argument either way, IMO.
    Probably not, but it does leave the door wide open for god or something of the kind at the start. Something you're usually loathe to do. Every theory on how the universe is, requires presuppositions.
    Presupposing neverending (or just really long ones) closed causality chains does indeed stimulate speculation as to what the initial action we are still reacting to was. Like it or not. And it is an observation, not necessarily a counter-argument in this.

    But I dont view the evidence as supporting hard determinism necessarily. Soft determinism, perhaps.

    Peace
    Dan
    "YOU [humans] NEED TO BELIEVE IN THINGS THAT AREN'T TRUE. HOW ELSE CAN THEY BECOME?" - Death

    "Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
  • Ahnimus
    Ahnimus Posts: 10,560
    OutOfBreath wrote:
    Probably not, but it does leave the door wide open for god or something of the kind at the start. Something you're usually loathe to do. Every theory on how the universe is, requires presuppositions.
    Presupposing neverending (or just really long ones) closed causality chains does indeed stimulate speculation as to what the initial action we are still reacting to was. Like it or not. And it is an observation, not necessarily a counter-argument in this.

    But I dont view the evidence as supporting hard determinism necessarily. Soft determinism, perhaps.

    Peace
    Dan

    What is the evidence for dualism? How can A determine what A is?
    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
  • OutOfBreath
    OutOfBreath Posts: 1,804
    Ahnimus wrote:
    What is the evidence for dualism? How can A determine what A is?
    Dualism? Where have I claimed to have evidence for, or even argumented for dualism in this thread, or elsewhere for that matter? Are you attributing me as your opposite again?

    My point with the god thing was drawing the conclusion of what you said. I am not arguing god, certainly not the christian, nor will I ever speak up for dualism in the traditional sense.

    And I thought we were on about determinism now. Of what consequence is dualism to that debate?

    Peace
    Dan
    "YOU [humans] NEED TO BELIEVE IN THINGS THAT AREN'T TRUE. HOW ELSE CAN THEY BECOME?" - Death

    "Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
  • Ahnimus
    Ahnimus Posts: 10,560
    OutOfBreath wrote:
    Dualism? Where have I claimed to have evidence for, or even argumented for dualism in this thread, or elsewhere for that matter? Are you attributing me as your opposite again?

    My point with the god thing was drawing the conclusion of what you said. I am not arguing god, certainly not the christian, nor will I ever speak up for dualism in the traditional sense.

    And I thought we were on about determinism now. Of what consequence is dualism to that debate?

    Peace
    Dan

    Dualism is the belief in a determinst universe but also the existence of free-will, or what you called soft-determinism.

    It's very important.

    Ok, I'm not trying to prove God does not exist, or that he does exist. I'm saying in the absence of either belief, there is still no God. Rationally speaking, the best hypothesis is that their is neither God nor Free-will.
    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
    http://youtube.com/watch?v=zJNkc4EF4_M
    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
  • OutOfBreath
    OutOfBreath Posts: 1,804
    Ahnimus wrote:
    Dualism is the belief in a determinst universe but also the existence of free-will, or what you called soft-determinism.

    It's very important.
    OK, I misunderstood the term dualism. I interpreted it as soul/body exclusively. Upon reading up on it, I might just be claiming some kind of dualism, or I at least see how soft determinism can be considered dualistic.
    I don't have anything you would consider evidence to support my gut feeling and intuitive understanding of how things work. But, to apply your reasoning below, since I dont see anything conclusive about neither free-will or hard determinism, it is reasonable to think that none of them exist, or that reality is somewhere in between.

    I dont so much have hard contrary evidence, as I am merely unconvinced based on the evidence you have put forward so far.
    Ok, I'm not trying to prove God does not exist, or that he does exist. I'm saying in the absence of either belief, there is still no God. Rationally speaking, the best hypothesis is that their is neither God nor Free-will.
    The rational hypothesis would then be to have no opinion on God, and no opinion on free-will/determinism as it cannot be proven either way anyway. That's if you need hard evidence to make your hypothesis.
    http://youtube.com/watch?v=zJNkc4EF4_M
    Lot of big wigs claim determinism. Particularly scientists who are by definition looking for laws, and hence will not find anything but laws. Be that as it may, I have not denied the powerful impact of influences in this. I just don't as easily accept that our influences are all that we are. And it's damn hard to prove either way. But there is support for claiming that free will is not as free as we might think it is. But that doesn't automatically mean hard determinism either.

    Peace
    Dan
    "YOU [humans] NEED TO BELIEVE IN THINGS THAT AREN'T TRUE. HOW ELSE CAN THEY BECOME?" - Death

    "Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
  • Ahnimus
    Ahnimus Posts: 10,560
    Free-will is mathematically impossible.

    Perhaps that is sufficient evidence, somehow I doubt it though.
    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
  • OutOfBreath
    OutOfBreath Posts: 1,804
    Ahnimus wrote:
    Free-will is mathematically impossible.

    Perhaps that is sufficient evidence, somehow I doubt it though.
    If you say so it must be true....

    Peace
    Dan
    "YOU [humans] NEED TO BELIEVE IN THINGS THAT AREN'T TRUE. HOW ELSE CAN THEY BECOME?" - Death

    "Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
  • Ahnimus
    Ahnimus Posts: 10,560
    OutOfBreath wrote:
    If you say so it must be true....

    Peace
    Dan

    Care to give an argument for free-will, I haven't heard a reasonable one yet.

    Why should I have to prove something doesn't exist, that has never been proven to exist to begin with?
    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
  • Kann
    Kann Posts: 1,146
    Ahnimus wrote:
    Free-will is mathematically impossible.

    Perhaps that is sufficient evidence, somehow I doubt it though.

    care to share that formula? (And not "very intelligent people think that randomness isn't true but can't prove it right now, but really it's the truth".)

    And you shouldn't have to prove something doesn't exist. Science can only explain existing stuff, proving unexistence is not really important. Proving a fact or explaining nature is.
  • OutOfBreath
    OutOfBreath Posts: 1,804
    Ahnimus wrote:
    Care to give an argument for free-will, I haven't heard a reasonable one yet.

    Why should I have to prove something doesn't exist, that has never been proven to exist to begin with?
    Well that's the point, isn't it? You haven't proven anything either. What you have is a more certain position and belief on the subject than I have. You talk about the existence of proof and evidence, but never present them. Like the last one "it is mathematically impossible" for anything other than hard determinism, without anything backing it up. Why is the burden of proof on me? You are the adamant and certain one in this, while I am not persuaded on any direction and opting for a middle ground. So far you have presented things you feel support your case, whereas I am not convinced by the radical and debatable conclusion you draw from them.

    And I won't give an argument for free-will as I am not a supporter of pure free-will. I am just unconvinced by your radical hard determinism stance. And I am no supporter of hard determinism either. Being a soft determinist is not the same as being free-will. I agree with much of what you say, accept many of the sources and arguments, but do not draw the conclusions you do.

    Feel free to present me with your undenibale proof, preferably in writing as I dont really have time to watch videos these days. If you can present me with just that, undeniable proof, I might take your side after all. But frankly, I dont believe there exists authoritative undenibale proof on the subject. There are some evidence or results pointing in that general direction, and scientists may have a favorite theory on it, but I doubt there are evidence that cannot be interpreted in a different way. Prove me wrong.

    Peace
    Dan
    "YOU [humans] NEED TO BELIEVE IN THINGS THAT AREN'T TRUE. HOW ELSE CAN THEY BECOME?" - Death

    "Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
  • catefrances
    catefrances Posts: 29,003
    OutOfBreath wrote:
    I dunno. I am just not convinced that there are no actions, just reactions. Why are you so convinced of you hard determinism stance?

    Peace
    Dan

    i agree. how can there be a reaction without an initial action to react to?
    hear my name
    take a good look
    this could be the day
    hold my hand
    lie beside me
    i just need to say

Categories