AnimeSuki Forums

Register Forum Rules FAQ Members List Social Groups Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Go Back   AnimeSuki Forum > General > General Chat

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2013-01-03, 18:23   Link #21
ZGoten
Custom User Title
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Germany
Age: 24
Send a message via ICQ to ZGoten
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nightbat®
So,... how would determinism calculate dreams?

Will I eat vanilla, or chocolate icecream as dessert?
make me scratch that itch or decide that it'll go down by itself?
Not determinsm would calculate those things, science would. Determinsim is just the principle that says it's possible to do so. Science, however, would probably start by analyzing your neural network when it comes to dreams. Whatever else happens after this, I obviously can't tell you. But there are certain causes and effects in your brain that can be observed and calculated even today. Science today can tell you what you will think a few seconds before you actually do so. Watch the above video, it's very interesting.

@willx

I agree with you mostly. It doesn't have an impact on one's personal life, but that mild distraction you are talking about is reason enough for me to bring it up. But in its extreme form, one has to wonder, if it would really be dangerous, or actually enlightening. The answer to that, we will never know, though, which again brings us to the mild distraction.
__________________
Truth is elusive to those who refuse to see with both eyes.
ZGoten is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-01-03, 19:44   Link #22
Qilin
Romanticist
 
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Age: 23
From my perspective, Determinism is really no different from Solipsism as a means of viewing the universe.

Both claims are unverifiable, and both rely on a particular set of arbitrary premises. Of course, if I put it that way, just about any metaphysical position would also apply, and that's exactly what I'm getting at. It all boils down to personal preference for a particular theory if it's better or not. There is no better or worse. Arguments can only be held when both parties have a set of shared concepts to discuss on equal terms, but when it comes to metaphysics, I'm afraid that there no limit to how reality can be deconstructed.
__________________
Damaged Goods
"There’s an up higher than up, but at the very top, down is all there is."
Qilin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-01-04, 02:07   Link #23
Solace
(ノಠ益ಠ)ノ彡┻━┻
*AnimeSuki Site Staff
*Moderator
 
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Quote:
A being knowledgable enough to know the properties and positions of all particles in the universe at a given time would be able to exactly predict the future.
YouTube
Sorry; dynamic content not loaded. Reload?
__________________
Solace is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-01-04, 02:33   Link #24
erneiz_hyde
Indifferent
 
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: InterWebs
Quote:
Originally Posted by Qilin View Post
From my perspective, Determinism is really no different from Solipsism as a means of viewing the universe.

Both claims are unverifiable, and both rely on a particular set of arbitrary premises. Of course, if I put it that way, just about any metaphysical position would also apply, and that's exactly what I'm getting at. It all boils down to personal preference for a particular theory if it's better or not. There is no better or worse. Arguments can only be held when both parties have a set of shared concepts to discuss on equal terms, but when it comes to metaphysics, I'm afraid that there no limit to how reality can be deconstructed.
I'll just have to stress this here.


Quote:
Originally Posted by ZGoten
You ask me, what it matters to me, am I correct? You ask me what it means 'aside from pure, implacable philosophical curiosity'. The answer is nothing. I have a genuine interest in philosophy. Determinsim does not impact my life whatsoever, though. Still, I'm allowed to tackle those questions to satisfy my curiosity, am I not?
And I think I can understand what ZGoten is going through right now because I went through a similar phase my self, and that's not so long ago. And I can understand the "excitement" of these philosophical thinking. But as you can see, some people who have probably delved deeper into the society or working force view this (not "this" specific determinism, but philosophical matters in general) as "distraction" because indeed it brings little to no impact to their life.

For some people though, just thinking these matters in general can indeed be "fun", and I can relate to that. And I think that's the whole point of "Philosophy" (lit. Love to to think). But sadly it's because of this that Philosophy nowadays (seemingly) often gets the "Math treatment" of "it has no use in life so why do it".
__________________
erneiz_hyde is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-01-04, 03:41   Link #25
Qilin
Romanticist
 
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Age: 23
Quote:
Originally Posted by erneiz_hyde View Post
For some people though, just thinking these matters in general can indeed be "fun", and I can relate to that. And I think that's the whole point of "Philosophy" (lit. Love to to think). But sadly it's because of this that Philosophy nowadays (seemingly) often gets the "Math treatment" of "it has no use in life so why do it".
Agreed. Philosophy, to begin with, is an exercise of playing around with ideas. It's a matter of being aware of the interactions of these ideas, deconstructing these into their component parts, and then rebuilding them into something else entirely. I can understand how this might not appeal to many people, but I feel that much of the prejudice is due to a simple misunderstanding of the nature of the field.

One thing I always like to say to people is that philosophy is not so much a body of knowledge as it is a method.
__________________
Damaged Goods
"There’s an up higher than up, but at the very top, down is all there is."
Qilin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-01-04, 08:57   Link #26
willx
Nyaaan~~
 
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Age: 30
^^

It's funny, there are ads in the subway that say, "What is the meaning of life Philosophy?" for a "School of Philosophy.". I think everyone needs to take basic Philo 101 courses for "Knowledge & Reality" and "Critical Thinking"

Anyways, my "mild distraction" point is similar to the "method of thinking" concept espoused above and is similar to how law school works. I have taken a bunch of philosophy courses before, am relatively critical about the universe and am (relatively) thoughtful and logical .. So what now? It's like asking a bunch of lawyers to sit around discussing historical case law for amusement.

My view: You've been trained to think, so think, rather than talk about thinking
__________________
Nyaaaan~~
willx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-01-04, 09:31   Link #27
SaintessHeart
Ehh? EEEEHHHHHH?
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Age: 25
Can a mod please change the title's spelling error? In the last 3 letters, "I" comes before "S", not the other way round. [/grammarnazi]

No, the existence of grammar nazis cannot be determined. They exist, and they do not.
__________________

When three puppygirls named after pastries are on top of each other, it is called Eclair a'la menthe et Biscotti aux fraises avec beaucoup de Ricotta sur le dessus.
Most of all, you have to be disciplined and you have to save, even if you hate our current financial system. Because if you don't save, then you're guaranteed to end up with nothing.
SaintessHeart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-01-04, 09:36   Link #28
ZGoten
Custom User Title
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Germany
Age: 24
Send a message via ICQ to ZGoten
There is actually another spelling error, so I did a terrible job there.
It does have nothing to do with grammar, though.^^
__________________
Truth is elusive to those who refuse to see with both eyes.
ZGoten is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-01-04, 09:39   Link #29
SaintessHeart
Ehh? EEEEHHHHHH?
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Age: 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZGoten View Post
There is actually another spelling error, so I did a terrible job there.
It does have nothing to do with grammar, though.^^
Yes. "Philosophy" is spelt wrongly.

Grammar is a structural set of rules for construction of words and sentences, so technically speaking, spelling errors should fall under grammar.
__________________

When three puppygirls named after pastries are on top of each other, it is called Eclair a'la menthe et Biscotti aux fraises avec beaucoup de Ricotta sur le dessus.
Most of all, you have to be disciplined and you have to save, even if you hate our current financial system. Because if you don't save, then you're guaranteed to end up with nothing.
SaintessHeart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-01-04, 09:50   Link #30
ZGoten
Custom User Title
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Germany
Age: 24
Send a message via ICQ to ZGoten
I'm afraid they don't. Grammar operates on the level of individual words in the case of morphology. Say if you falsely use the word dog instead of dogs in a contruction that requires the plural, you are missing the morpheme s, wich indicates it. The spelling of individual morphemes is entirely a matter of orthography.
__________________
Truth is elusive to those who refuse to see with both eyes.
ZGoten is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-01-04, 09:56   Link #31
willx
Nyaaan~~
 
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Age: 30
^ He is technically correct. The only case where there could be slight confusion of overlap is the misspelling of individual words that are homophones. This amused me to no end with regards to coding errors being "syntax errors" when they were clearly "spelling errors" .. yes I'm a nerd.
__________________
Nyaaaan~~
willx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-01-04, 10:01   Link #32
NoemiChan
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Philippines
Age: 26
Send a message via Yahoo to NoemiChan Send a message via Skype™ to NoemiChan
The only thing I believe is:

"Everything is affected by the other and that everything in the universe is connected with each other.".

No furthur explanation. It speaks of itself...
NoemiChan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-01-04, 10:04   Link #33
Qilin
Romanticist
 
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Age: 23
Quote:
Originally Posted by willx View Post
^^
Anyways, my "mild distraction" point is similar to the "method of thinking" concept espoused above and is similar to how law school works. I have taken a bunch of philosophy courses before, am relatively critical about the universe and am (relatively) thoughtful and logical .. So what now? It's like asking a bunch of lawyers to sit around discussing historical case law for amusement.

My view: You've been trained to think, so think, rather than talk about thinking
Hm? But it's undeniable that it has its applications in the social sciences such particularly psychology and political science, and the liberal arts. When it comes to dissecting human motives, behavior, and ideologies, the ability to pick apart ideas is pretty useful to have. It is particularly handy in debates.

But really, does it have to have a practical application in the first place? Is there simply no merit in doing it for its own sake? Like doing a crossword puzzle or a challenging math problem?
__________________
Damaged Goods
"There’s an up higher than up, but at the very top, down is all there is."
Qilin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-01-04, 18:19   Link #34
Nightbat®
Deadpan Snarker
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: The Neverlands
Age: 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZGoten View Post
Not determinsm would calculate those things, science would. Determinsim is just the principle that says it's possible to do so. Science, however, would probably start by analyzing your neural network when it comes to dreams. Whatever else happens after this, I obviously can't tell you. But there are certain causes and effects in your brain that can be observed and calculated even today. Science today can tell you what you will think a few seconds before you actually do so. Watch the above video, it's very interesting.
If determinism states that every event is 'set in stone' then decisions or even illogical brainactivity could be calculated beforehand

The problem here is with for instance my 'dessert' example:
I could choose chocolate over vanilla, because my brain desires it more
but I could decide against it because i want to savour the chocolate on a later time

For dreams, you can not predict how psychological you're impacted by them beforehand
Will your brain create more signals, will it retain more endorfines, release more adrenalin
will it make you wake up rested or restless,
And this is only 'medical' stuff, not even the freaky stuff your imagination conjures up during sleep


You can calculate untill the earth is a square, you're not gonna fine logic there


Determinism is from my PoV a pretty nihilistic idea of life
had humanity adhered to this way of thinking, we would have never evolved beyond the 'live/breed/die' state
since any effort towards 'more' would be a futile
we wouldn't have started farming, taming animals, create machinery
(and why would we, since everything would happen by itself anyway)
__________________
Nightbat® is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-01-04, 20:02   Link #35
erneiz_hyde
Indifferent
 
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: InterWebs
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nightbat® View Post
If determinism states that every event is 'set in stone' then decisions or even illogical brainactivity could be calculated beforehand

The problem here is with for instance my 'dessert' example:
I could choose chocolate over vanilla, because my brain desires it more
but I could decide against it because i want to savour the chocolate on a later time
Watch the link in OPs very first post. What you think is "free will" or whim might very well be the effects of an underlying, calculable expressions, the effects of your upbringings and past behaviours. Just because we practically can't do it yet, due to the many factors involved doesn't mean it's not possible. If you watch PsychoPass, it's the similar principle used in Sibyl System.

Since I study Earth Sciences, I can give you another example with Earthquakes. Earthquakes are, as far as practicality is concerned, unpredictable. However, in 'theory', if we can know for sure the position of all the elements in the crust how they interact with each other, then (again, in 'theory') we could predict earthquakes. But, to acquire such information would require a huge effort that which renders this impractical, and thus 'impossible'.

Like how Einstein's equations allows for the existence of time machines but for all intents and purposes, an 'impossibility' due to the sheer impracticality.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nightbat® View Post
Determinism is from my PoV a pretty nihilistic idea of life
had humanity adhered to this way of thinking, we would have never evolved beyond the 'live/breed/die' state
since any effort towards 'more' would be a futile
we wouldn't have started farming, taming animals, create machinery
(and why would we, since everything would happen by itself anyway)
That is not the Determinism ZGoten speaks of. He was more talking about "Causality" which in itself is a form/part of Determinism.
__________________

Last edited by erneiz_hyde; 2013-01-04 at 20:19.
erneiz_hyde is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-01-05, 12:17   Link #36
ZGoten
Custom User Title
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Germany
Age: 24
Send a message via ICQ to ZGoten
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nightbat® View Post
Determinism is from my PoV a pretty nihilistic idea of life
had humanity adhered to this way of thinking, we would have never evolved beyond the 'live/breed/die' state
since any effort towards 'more' would be a futile
we wouldn't have started farming, taming animals, create machinery
(and why would we, since everything would happen by itself anyway)
That's how you might have lived your life in that case, but definitely not me and not the rest of the world either. I've heard this argument many times and it's a pretty weak one. Even if humanity accepted the idea that none of what we do impacts anything because it's not actually we who are doing things because individual "Is" and "Yous" principally don't exist, we would just act as if that weren't the case, because we can't ever know where the rails under our feet lead us anyway. Determinism can never affect our lives directly, because we can never make practical use of its core idea. It can only affect us indirectly by implying other truths about reality.

/edit: Thanks to whoever corrected the title!
__________________
Truth is elusive to those who refuse to see with both eyes.

Last edited by ZGoten; 2013-01-05 at 12:56.
ZGoten is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-01-05, 19:01   Link #37
ChainLegacy
廉頗
 
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Massachusetts, US
Age: 24
I used to be pretty confident in determinism, however, I find myself becoming an agnostic on the subject. The principle seems logical on the surface, but with recent advances in science seeming to suggest truly random and chaotic elements exist on a micro level of the universe, I am not so sure. Whether or not we live in a deterministic universe, the complexity is at such a grand and incomprehensible scale that free will, for all practical purposes, does exist.

Quote:
Originally Posted by monster View Post
I don't know about determinism, but if we're talking about worldview, then I do believe in the Biblical God, a being who knows and can and does influence the past, present, and future.

Based on that, I don't believe any being other than God is capable of absolute free will, but I do believe in free will set within God's boundaries/limitations.
If God/gods/etc know the future, does that not preclude free will from existing? What boundaries/limitations could free will exist within if he knows the future? No matter what, your decisions would be predetermined in this scenario.
ChainLegacy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-01-05, 21:31   Link #38
monster
Junior Member
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChainLegacy View Post
If God/gods/etc know the future, does that not preclude free will from existing? boundaries/limitations could free will exist within if he knows the future? No matter what, your decisions would be predetermined in this scenario.
Key words: your decisions. God foreknowing the decisions you make doesn't change the fact that you made those decisions.
monster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-01-05, 22:06   Link #39
ChainLegacy
廉頗
 
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Massachusetts, US
Age: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by monster View Post
Key words: your decisions. God foreknowing the decisions you make doesn't change the fact that you made those decisions.
I disagree, but I'll just state my stance as I don't seek to make you change your mind or anything. The way I see it: if some being knows (with certainty) you will make decisions, you never had a choice in the first place because it is already destined to occur.
ChainLegacy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-01-05, 22:31   Link #40
monster
Junior Member
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChainLegacy View Post
I disagree
That's your choice. Oh, but I knew you would, with certainty. So maybe it wasn't your choice.
monster is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
free will, philosophy

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 21:35.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
We use Silk.