A4E

I have more respect for Bill Clinton, than a muslim scholar who is too cowardly to do Jihadi according to the Quran himself, and is instead brainwashing young people to do it for him, which he knows is going to end their lives, and/or destroy any positive development within the families involved, and contribute to making all areas inhabited by muslims the most hellish places on earth. And so what?

It does not look like you are treating Erwin as your equal here. If its ok for you to call Erwin a misogynist and a xenophobic. Can we call a muslim individual that if it is true?

A real determinist would never say that. People criticizing determinism can include that line of thinking. A person can think, evaluate, theorize, sleep on it, use drugs, hit his head with a hammer or implant microchips in his brain, but it wouldn't change that any of those things and the rest of his life is determined in a determined universe. I have a simple explanation for philosophy revolving around a true hardcore, outside of laws, free will. Which is that we humans generally are so full of ourselves that we think we might as well be above the rules of the universe, or 'special' for sure. All determinists would agree that humans are a very advanced life form. But there are a lot of advanced life forms on this planet. Being advanced in itself does not give us anything extra that somehow makes us able to defy the laws of the universe. Removing agency as a philosophic foundation might be timely right now, because criminal "refugees" are often excused because they "come from a war torn country". That won't work in a society that has accepted that no one has agency. People there would just kick criminals out at the first opportunity. Or kill them if need be (if they resist or whatever). Because everyone there agree that they need a peaceful society. They don't need to cater to bad people.

What about in muslim countries?

This is what we have done in western civilization for some time. But their teachers in their mosques do not care about that. How do you feel that the teachers in their mosques spit at your posts?

Almost everything we do throughout our lives, minus the earliest years, is predicated on our brains being able to predict what happens with whatever we are doing. Animal and human brains are all designed to be able to sufficiently predict immediate surroundings in a deterministic world. Ie, a cat jumping over a fence is predicting its own motion, and also predicting that the fence is going to stay where it is. A bird landing on a branch has likely already predicted that the branch is going to give some way, so that they will have to bend their feet or body to stay stable for their eyes to be focused. Bigger birds like seagulls who make use of updrafts of air, are predicting how those will work. When they build their nests, they are predicting that the structural integrity of it will hold if they do it the right way. The amount of predicting humans make everyday and in their line of work is staggering. A baker is predicting how his baked goods is going to turn out, An engineer is predicting how a building is going to withstand weather and weight of the materials or whatever. A taxi driver is predicting how he will have to drive to get to a specific place. Almost everything we do, excluding playing dice or things like playing the lottery, is based on us staying alive or achieving goals within a world that can be predicted. It is all encompassing, even when we brush our teeth we are using predicted models that our brains have stored to easily and quickly get it over with. All animal brains have accepted that the world is determined, and trust that it will stay that way, since all of them plan accordingly. Brains accept a deterministic world as a given. They do not accept sidestepping the machinery of the world. We do not enter our bathrooms and try to brush our teeth by touching the toothbrush with a knee. Its nice to imagine that we are flying, but our brains will not accept an attempt to jump off a tall building to start flying. It won't allow you to do that because it has accepted a deterministic world where rules apply. It wants to stay alive, and it knows how to do that because it has been a part of a predictable world for quite some time, and as such can predict what actions are needed in order to proceed, and is usually fully aware of what to avoid, though all brains make mistakes that they normally learn from. But in a human philosophy forum, this major thing that is a part of almost all of our lives, and all brains rely up to a 100% on, is looked down upon by many. Not only that. It is more important to promote and base a lot of philosophy on something that may or may not exist, and that brains do not have any specific, or no relation to, when dealing with the world, and which in its hardcore form directly opposes the most prevalent and all encompassing existential element that we all are a part of. I have already solved contrived societal problems people have with determinism. That is why accepting determinism is no big deal for me. I have a sense that civilization would do better without agency, because we do not need it to create a peaceful society, but I am likely only a small catalyst for such a transformation, if it would ever happen. But this is one reason why I want to continue talking about this topic. But I expend very little time on it in general because I want to do many other things. I work almost all hours of every day or am busy with something, sleep excepted. This forum is more for relaxation and exercising my brain talking to all of you, since I don't think there is any better place to do just that.

No. You made a point supporting determinism. And I think I recall that you posted something similar in an older determinism thread, since you talk about repeating patterns.

Survive and procreate. Gathering and storing sense data. Then try to put different sense data together, and applying the results into the world. Repeat process. The gears of a watch moves the hands on the watch, to make a shape that would not have been there had it not been for the gears. I think I know what you are trying to convey. That being 'creative' is some mystical thing that just can not happen in a determined universe. I know this is a popular conviction, but it goes back to what people see as random. Just what they do not know how came to be.

No. You get peace when everyone has a gun. Or none. But people who do not care about your plea for peace, will most certainly have a gun, so then only the first option is realistic. Animals are smart, and they have various weapons or ways to defend themselves, because their predators don't care about their plea to let them be.

@Soulfire Appeasing violent people does not work. They will always have a reason to be violent.

Just because humans have not been able to accurately measure things, or be able to know how the universe works, should not be any conclusive evidence that the universe can not be predicted from start to finish. I know there is more to these sciences than I can describe at the moment, and I know they are highly regarded and so forth, but I would like to give an example. We are simulating characters/life in games today. We will for sure continue to do that, and at some point in the future they will probably (or hypothetically) have a programmed/evolved enough intelligence and curiosity to try to check out how their world is built. It will not be a surprise to us that they will inherently be unable to do so, since they are infused into their world so much that any building blocks or laws or methods used to process them will always seem 'out of reach' to them. What I am trying to say is that if humans are in a simulated universe, which determinism could be a symptom of, then humans failing to see the mechanics underlying our universe would be as obvious as it is for the simulated characters/life in the games we make. Again, just because we do not understand something, does not mean it can not be calculated. When people see something they do not understand, they are quick to label it 'random'. But in a determined world with unbreakable laws, 'random' never occurs. 'chaos' is another way to say 'random', and it sounds more powerful and out of our hands, which is the whole point. The authors of this, I am inclined to say, do not want to admit that they do not understand it. It is easier and more prestigious to put a label on it. Please define what you mean by random. Because random means different things to different people. Random for most people is when they do not understand how something came to be. Random for me means outside of the laws of the universe. If you are using my definition, then that kind of random can not happen in a determined universe. But perhaps you are talking about the sciences, in which case just ignore this paragraph. Not quit sure what you mean. But pretty sure I agree. Here you are treating the sciences as absolute truths, and making conclusions based on them. And you would have to do that in order to be so sure that the universe can not be predicted. If I understand that correctly, you are saying that evolution would not make a human brain if the universe was predictable/determined. And also you are claiming that you know how to do the job evolution does, better than evolution itself, even though you are a product of evolution. That is quite a standpoint to have. To the best of my knowledge, the brains first evolutionary function was to provide a command centre for controlling muscles, because standalone muscles would not have much ability to work together with other muscles without such a command centre. A reflex is usually defined as something controlled locally around a muscle, so as to be able to act at a greater speed than if the information was first sent to the command centre. So reflex is surely not the best word to use for your argumentation. Instinct would be better. But perhaps you can clear that up. But I suspect your point is that evolution would not create a thinking brain if the universe was determined, because then preprogrammed, or instinctual methods would be sufficient. But this claim holds no ground whatsoever, because lifeforms with brains use their brains to adapt and change their behaviour, and comes up with all sorts of creative things to survive and procreate, of which a purely preprogrammed 'brain' would be wholly inadequate to quickly adapt to various changing circumstances. Smart, adaptive, and creative animals flourish. This would be true in any type of universe. The other things you wrote made much more sense than this line. This line just throws me off the rails.

I am starting to get a headache from the knowledge <-> free will link you have going on that I still don't understand, but I would like to reply to the above. You are talking about a hypothetical machine, so I assume we agree that it is just about, or is, impossible to make. What you are saying in the above paragraph is something like if the machine predicts that you will stand still for 1 minute, you would be able to then jump after 30 seconds to show that machine how wrong it is. But it makes absolute no sense to claim that you can do this, because you said the machine predicts at 100% accuracy, and a determined universe is typically a closed system. So no, you would not be able to jump after 30 seconds if the machine predicts that you will stand still for 1 minute. Absolutely not. (maybe you would start thinking about something, and forgot about the time, or got paralyzed by all the people watching your experiment, or whatever). It is basic 2+2=4 math, because everything in the universe and you are determined in a determined universe. The reason you think you can, is that you are injecting the mythical free will into the mix. I think neeeel made it clear much more directly that you are again assuming to be able to step out of the determined universe with free will.

I am thinking it is a response to Trumps speech in Saudi Arabia.

Although there is certainly respect in science, this is sort of like saying its wrong because this book, and that book said so. You can trust those departments of science. But that is not how I want to operate nowadays. I have definitely looked at a lot from quantum physics. And it is very engulfing, but I don't rest my head on it. Maybe you could mention what part of quantum physics or chaos theory that convinced you that 'determined till the end' is definitely wrong? I don't quite understand this paragraph. And how does this 'chance' work in detail?

Interesting. Please explain.

In a deterministic universe, humans feel what they are determined to feel. It makes no sense to try to inject futility, or anything else, into a closed system. You might as well be shouting at a movie.

I tried to google epistemological contradiction, but did not get much useful. Could you define it for me? Are humans the only organism on this planet that has free will (the kind you are talking about)? If so, why? What is it with humans that allows for the free will you are talking about, and not for any other organism? You said that animals do not have the free will that you are talking about. So they have no point to their existence, and anything they do is futile. Is this a correct assessment?

This is not a point. Its an invalid supposition. Because you are not at liberty to change the laws of the universe, and you have not proven how there is no point to a determined universe. Knowledge that came from other people, and was created probably a fairly long time ago and likely including several people brainstorming. Which means it has a causal line to your head, and such actually a testament to determinism. After your role has ended in death, then it is continued by other actors, or it could also be continued by you through all the various immortal communication options we have today. (text / videos). So your role is not pointless. Its just determined. A wheel spinning around is not pointless. It helps a car stay on the road and move forward. A carpenter making a house is not doing something pointless, he is building something for people to stay under in exchange for money to support himself or his own family. A boat keeping afloat is not pointless, its just determined to keep afloat and be able to protect anything from the water beneath. If you are going to make a case for a deterministic universe being pointless, then explain why just because it is determined and "not up to you", how that makes it pointless. Lots of people play the lottery which people might agree is determined and "not up to you" (since there is no human brain with the mythical free will involved), so why do they play it, if it is pointless? I know we are going in circles, but I am just trying to dig for some good substance other than "just because there would be no free will." Futile how exactly? You can not change your role no, but so what? Your role might create a completely free market on the entire planet, would you call your role futile if you made that happen? A free will to make choices based on knowledge gained and thoughts created in your brain, which is completely compatible with a deterministic universe. I suspect that because most people like to be in control of their environment that the idea of determinism is especially distasteful to so many. But that does not mean it can not be true.

This statement assumes that you would have any ability to step out of a deterministic universe, or somehow manipulate its laws, but that would typically be impossible, so I'm afraid you do not have the liberty to change whether you will or will not expend effort. You and me, and everyone else will just do what has already been determined. I am still curious why you think everything is futile and pointless in a deterministic universe. Lets say our universe is 100% deterministic, if you get or have children, is your role still futile and pointless? You just created and sustained life that uses your genes, which will continue the story of your kind of life form in this universe. How is that futile and pointless? Do you watch movies? If yes, why? Everything in the movie is futile and pointless in your opinion, right? So why would you watch it?

You just contradicted yourself. If I do nothing and go limp in a deterministic universe, then I have 'controlled' the outcome of my body. And also stopped the effect my body would have on the world if I stayed alive. Why is everything futile and pointless in a deterministic universe? Here is an excerpt from my article: "If everything is already determined, then what is the point in doing anything anymore!??" A movie is a predetermined universe that will play out the same each time. When you watch people in a movie, do you shout out to them that they should not bother anymore, because it has already been determined what will happen? Everything you have done, and will do, has already been determined. If you find a way to get to the moon and back safely, and you do it, then that is what was determined for you. If you curl up in a ball and tell everyone that there is no point doing anything, then that is what you were determined to do. In a deterministic universe, we cannot change the future, as it is already written. But everything we and the universe do will play it forwards.

Your statement here is that it does not make sense to try to change someone's mind in a deterministic universe. In what way does it not make sense? I know you have posted various answers that you might think covers that, so then please allow me to ask in a different way: Your statement can be paraphrased into "If you want to change someone's mind in a deterministic universe, then it does not make sense to talk to them." Do you agree with this paraphrasing of your statement? If yes, then if I want to drive a car in a deterministic universe, does it make sense for me to start the car? If I want a dog to stop biting me in a deterministic universe, does it make sense for me to push it away? If I want to walk somewhere in a deterministic universe, does it make sense for me to put one leg in front of the other, multiple times until I get where I want? I am really just trying to understand your position, although I can sense what your line of thought is from what you have posted so far.

For every post, he is influencing your brain. Which in a deterministic universe was already determined to happen. Influencing, or controlling other people will happen all the time in a deterministic universe. Just that it is in a movie format. A movie can not change, but there is still a lot going on.

With a definition like that I believe you would find agreement with many determinists that this free will exist. Really! I don't suspect any determinists would have any objection to this kind of free will. Only that they, and I, would add that it is of course already determined what kind of seafood you will have, though its totally fine to accept this kind of free will that you defined. Its easy to understand why you put the burden of proof on determinism from that definition. In which the thought process would go something like this: Every human make choices - so choices are obvious - therefore that is the foundation - anything else will have to be proven. if op agrees with that definition of free will, then you might have to remove the 'versus', since that definition and determinism can work (well) together.

What is your definition of free will in this context?

I recommend not spending time or money or thought on this movie.