TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Chill Out Room
-- Cant figure out why we hate the middle east...
Pages (8): « 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 »

quote:

Originally posted by Orbax Well if there is a threshold reading for homosexuality then im sure theres a point of no return. The body isnt all 0 and 1 but Im saying why cant it just be we dont have the understanding of biology to realize why its all deterministic? Why isnt this conversation we are having guaranteed by what has happened previously.

I agree that the broad outlines are determined from what has happened previously. So the question is, our we just focusing on the broad outlines of things, or are we focusing on the broad outlines and details? Obviously what has been said before affects this conversation, but it is affected also by my interpretation your interpretation of my interpretation, my mood, your mood, the medium where the message is relayed, our historical setting, my knowledge, your knowledge, my internal predispositions and yours, my ability to use language and argue effectively and yours. I understand that this could be evaluated as being deterministic when all the information is available. My problem with that evaluation is that even evaluating changes the system. It's so dynamic you can never truly evaluate a specific moment, at the evaluation the system changes. I think we've hit an impasse on this. Maybe if you can clear up your evaluation of what is to be considered deterministic we could make headway

Im saying if we could somehow fill in that "what it takes to determine the outcome" gap...wed have determinism. Just because we dont know it now doesnt mean we wont do it later. Itll be like minority report.

Like animals...do you really think a cat has a choice? You pick it up and the Fkr bites and claws you. Its programming.

What makes us different. Complexity adds just that...complexity. It doesnt change the evolutionary nature of our genes that means programming to survive,

quote:

Originally posted by Lebezniatnikov Only because you used two communists as examples for atheists killing people. Ayn Rand was an atheist, but not a communist, and did not advocate genocide. So perhaps the correlation is with communism and not with atheism. That's what I meant to say at least.

I was just saying that the belief that "religion causes killing" could not explain non-religious killing. At most you can say "People sometimes kill each other...for a variety of reasons...none necessarily more driving than the other"

like religious murders within the US are probably quite a bit lower than "GIMME YO WATCH CRACKAAAAAA" killings.

I thought the premise to be ridiculaase

quote:

Originally posted by Orbax Im saying if we could somehow fill in that "what it takes to determine the outcome" gap...wed have determinism. Just because we dont know it now doesnt mean we wont do it later. Itll be like minority report. Like animals...do you really think a cat has a choice? You pick it up and the Fkr bites and claws you. Its programming. What makes us different. Complexity adds just that...complexity. It doesnt change the evolutionary nature of our genes that means programming to survive,

True. In the end it could be deterministic, but for the time being we don't have the information available to make such a statement. There are limitations in language and knowledge to be filled out first. I still sustain that given current evidence I would call it more of a dynamic deterministic system. Sure if you state it as 'if you have all the factors you can calculate an outcome' but is that really relevant to our lives? I forgot the original direction this debate was supposed to go in. For the time being I think that there is some determinism but there is plenty of room for change. I don't think the minimal possible deterministic outcome really has much of an impact on how we conduct ourselves.

Edit: Something I forgot about, error. The system can't be completely deterministic because error in the system can be quantified accurately. Functions in the brain are extremely diffused, therefore even if you could locate the damage to specific parts of the brain and extrapolate the possible amount of damage and then extrapolate the possible change in behavior, you could never fully account for the error that this is going to produce hence you could never fully predict the outcome of a specific set of interactions and it would not be deterministic

Dont worry I believe in Free Will and I think determinism is BS. I just wanted to hit that dead end of everything happens because of social and biological influences that was posited earlier by Psy-T.

I was trying to hit that "there must be an individual level of responsibility" thing because people CAN choose their own thing regardless of influences.

quote:

Originally posted by Orbax There was only 1 true Christian and he died a while ago.

He didn't, NRG2NFINIT only cut his hair!

quote:

Originally posted by Orbax Dont worry I believe in Free Will and I think determinism is BS. I just wanted to hit that dead end of everything happens because of social and biological influences that was posited earlier by Psy-T. I was trying to hit that "there must be an individual level of responsibility" thing because people CAN choose their own thing regardless of influences.

Cool. I hadn't really thought to deeply about it, so thanks for the opportunity hehe.

quote:

Originally posted by Orbax Well if there is a threshold reading for homosexuality then im sure theres a point of no return. The body isnt all 0 and 1 but Im saying why cant it just be we dont have the understanding of biology to realize why its all deterministic? Why isnt this conversation we are having guaranteed by what has happened previously.

because the amount of variables is infinite, and because the past isn't the only determining factor of the future.

Get back on topic you fucks.

quote:

Originally posted by Psy-T the past isn't the only determining factor of the future.

Elaborate.

quote:

Originally posted by Orbax Elaborate.

take a quantum particle for instance, let's say you know its entire history, fuck it, even the entire history of everything. can you predict the particle's next position based on that?

quote:

Originally posted by Psy-T take a quantum particle for instance, let's say you know its entire history, fuck it, even the entire history of everything. can you predict the particle's next position based on that?

I could absolutely predict it.







I wouldnt be RIGHT but I could still predict


are you saying that the quantum mechanics of this universe are what allow us to have free will?

quote:

Originally posted by Orbax are you saying that the quantum mechanics of this universe are what allow us to have free will?

nope, just demonstrating one aspect of it with their help.

Deep question:

If an omnipresent omni-observing being were to inhabit a universe...what would the ramifications be in regard to the Heisenberg Uncertainty principle.

lol i used to have a sweet bumper sticker on my car that said "Heisenburg MAY have slept here.."

NEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEERD

pfftt.. you know it.

quote:

Originally posted by Orbax Deep question: If an omnipresent omni-observing being were to inhabit a universe...what would the ramifications be in regard to the Heisenberg Uncertainty principle.

one of three things:

• that god cannot logically exist
  
• that quantum particles can not logically exist
  
• that the uncertainty principle is false

quote:

Originally posted by Psy-T one of three things: that god cannot logically exist that quantum particles can not logically exist that the uncertainty principle is false shave it with a bit of Occam, and...

That doesnt make sense
Neither does that
or that




and it was a "What if question" where all of the premises are true.

quote:

Originally posted by Orbax and it was a "What if question" where all of the premises are true.

Then it falls in the same category as questions like "What if 1=2?"

quote:

Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles Then it falls in the same category as questions like "What if 1=2?"

Not even remotely

quote:

Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles Then it falls in the same category as questions like "What if 1=2?"

gracias senor

quote:

Originally posted by Psy-T gracias senor

Now im sure you have a doctorate in particle physics, but I wouldnt say that a higher dimensional entity would necessarily contradict the existence of a lower one. Unless you understand the other dimensions a lot more than I do??????

quote:

Originally posted by Orbax Not even remotely

a hypothetical with contradictory premises contradicts itself, necessitating no argument.

and in any case it was a food for thought question because not a single person here understands quantum mechanics.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.