Author Topic: Is the future already written?  (Read 1737 times)

Offline SGOS

Re: Is the future already written?
« Reply #210 on: October 07, 2018, 09:03:44 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
To luckswallows:  Are there any other meaningless word games you want to play, or do you understand me now?
Yes, there is.  He uses semantics to make mountains out of molehills.  It makes for pointless exchanges that resemble debate, except that after the word analysis is completed, you find that there wasn't anything that warranted discussion in the first place.

Offline Cavebear

Re: Is the future already written?
« Reply #211 on: October 07, 2018, 10:00:40 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Yes, there is.  He uses semantics to make mountains out of molehills.  It makes for pointless exchanges that resemble debate, except that after the word analysis is completed, you find that there wasn't anything that warranted discussion in the first place.

I am reminded of one scene in the Foundation series where an diplomat visited a planet and seemed to make solid promises.  But semantic analysis basically concluded "promises: none".

For that same reason, I expect Luckswallowsall will fade away soon.
Atheist born, atheist bred.  And when I die, atheist dead!

Offline Mr.Obvious

Re: Is the future already written?
« Reply #212 on: October 07, 2018, 10:20:54 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Are you arguing from what you actually think, or just for the sake of pushing an arguement?  Because I'm not.  I'm serious here. 

You argue that "the number they decide in that moment and that situation is determined by accumulated stimuli they never even registered as they took them in throughout their entire lives, their whole basic biological make-up and the situation they've been placed in at that moment".  That is nonsensical.  If you are arguing that I somehow know that the number my friend would guess, let us say he asks and neighbor who asks a neighbor, etc to name the number.  Eventually, some level of uncaring guesses has to make the number outside of my influence.

All you are saying is that some number used in our game was predestined.  You'll have to prove that, and you haven't yet.

Your argument about the looks of a woman I might be attracted to is not relevant.  I have no physical preference.  For what it is worth, I think attitude and interests matter more, but as I remain single through preference, even THAT doesn't matter.

Even my cats have been random, by happenstance.  I doubt if there is any normal color of cat I haven't had and didn't love dearly.  You really don't understand that people can make random choices do you.  You just assume it as part of the belief structure.  I don't have patterns.

I have some favorite colors, if that helps you any.  Dark green is nice.  Dark Red is also nice.  I like black.  I also like celery, light bamboo, and Robin Egg Blue.  Rouge is interesting.  Does that mean anything?

I note your arguemnet that all my decisions go back to the singularity.  Congrats, you are a Universal Deist...

I'm not arguing for the sake of pushing an argument. I'm arguing because I am fully serious as well, just about a point of view different from yours. And I would hope you know me well enough to  at least know that.

I'm not arguing that you know what number your friend would guess. That would be impossible. After all, I also said you couldn't actively control such a thing. But such control is not necessary for my deterministic point of view. Actualy, it has nothing to do with it whatsoever. And I've repeated that multiple times throughout our exchange now.
The amount of people you'd ask and which people you'd ask has nothing to do with making it more or less deterministic. Because the people you'd ask and who'd they ask in return would be just as determined by everything that came before in these people's lives. Every choice they make is just as determined. Just as influenced into it's entirety. and no, not by you. But by everything that has come before and has had any influence on their lives. Because that's the core idea; that's how the world works. YOU don't have any control over this influence, and just like everything in this universe you and I are influenced entirely.
Even if you were to become an omnipotent, omniscient being, you wouldn't be free from this influence on you. Because even if you were to figure out how everyone and everything is influenced by every aspect that came before, you learning this is just as predetermined as any of those things. Even then you'd be predetermined to learn to understand this predetermination and everything you did with that knowledge would be predetermined.
The idea is that it's inescapable. Like evolution for living creatures. Inescapable. You can't say one animal is more or less evolved than another. Saying such a thing is none-sensicle. You can't be 'more' evolved. Just differently evolved. Nor can you be more or less predetermined or have a happenstance  be more or less predetermined. Just because you don't understand how your particular evolution works up to the finest detail possible and lead to 'you', doesn't mean evolution does not happen and did not result in you or me or your cats.  And just because you can't  understand and pinpoint exactly how every finest detail in the world lead person A down path X doesn't mean it doesn't do that.

The preference of type of woman is an example to point something out. If you want me to turn it into favorite food or favorite car, I can do that too. Hell, I could turn it into your preference to stay single. Or my preference not to. Or the colors you just listed. But it's only going to make sense to you if you manage to decouple the notion that there is any control or intent behind everything in the present and future being determined by everything that came before.

And I don't think it's that I don't understand that people can make random choices. It's that I think it's that making truly random choices is impossible. Only choices that for all intents and purposes seem random, from our limited points of view. I could just as easily say 'you really don't understand that people can't make random choices', but that would not get us any further.

And no. I'm not a universal Deist. I'm a materialist. I don't know how the laws of physics came into being. (Nor what, if anything, came before.) And I'm not claiming to. All I'm saying is that everything, EVERYTHING, that we have right now became that way because of the laws of physics being exactly the way they are. Without there being any deeper meaning behind it, nor implying that the universe was created.
Kind of like how the fact that if the earth had been a few millions of kilometers closer to the sun, we wouldn't be here to have this discussion, doesn't mean we were intended to be here having this discussion.
« Last Edit: October 07, 2018, 10:23:06 AM by Mr.Obvious »
"If we have to go down, we go down together!"
- Your mum, requesting 69 last night.

Offline Baruch

Re: Is the future already written?
« Reply #213 on: October 07, 2018, 11:38:53 AM »
For a materialist, at large scale and small speeds ... reality is Newtonian.  All hale Newton!  Worship his Calculus!!  Except there is chaos theory, and most practical things (not a toy situation) are chaotic.  Though fractals can be pretty.

So actually, Mr Obvious is simply following Thales, Pythagoras, Epicurus etc.  A useful POV if you are building a chariot,  not so much if yo are taming horses to pull the chariot, or understanding why it is important to compete in the Olympic chariot event.

Newton, on physics, is better than Aristotle.  I can give him that.  But Aristotle's greatest contribution was inventing biology.
שלום

Re: Is the future already written?
« Reply #214 on: October 07, 2018, 05:34:55 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I don't know whether a bishop and queen is better, worse, or par with a knight and queen.

It depends on how many pawns are left, and whether they are on one side of the board or both. If the latter, then the bishop is definitely better, since it's a long range piece.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
"The Republicans went from Abraham Lincoln to Sarah Palin to Donald Trump. No wonder they don't believe in evolution."
Any Borowitz

Offline Baruch

Re: Is the future already written?
« Reply #215 on: October 07, 2018, 07:47:40 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
It depends on how many pawns are left, and whether they are on one side of the board or both. If the latter, then the bishop is definitely better, since it's a long range piece.

But the knight ... fork you!
שלום

Re: Is the future already written?
« Reply #216 on: October 07, 2018, 08:26:40 PM »
Bishops also can fork, as can any piece or pawn.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
"The Republicans went from Abraham Lincoln to Sarah Palin to Donald Trump. No wonder they don't believe in evolution."
Any Borowitz

Offline trdsf

Re: Is the future already written?
« Reply #217 on: October 09, 2018, 11:45:28 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
It depends on how many pawns are left, and whether they are on one side of the board or both. If the latter, then the bishop is definitely better, since it's a long range piece.
They both had three pawns, as I recall.

So far, Stockfish has only ever opened with 1. e4, and responding with ...e5 or ...e6, and Black has never won.  Most draws have been by repetition.
Sir Terry Pratchett, on being told about the theory that the universe is a computer simulation: "If we all get out and in again, would it start to work properly this time?"

Offline Cavebear

Re: Is the future already written?
« Reply #218 on: October 10, 2018, 02:09:46 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
They both had three pawns, as I recall.

So far, Stockfish has only ever opened with 1. e4, and responding with ...e5 or ...e6, and Black has never won.  Most draws have been by repetition.

Well, Fisher always said "P-K4, best by test", but I have never thrived with that opening.  I prefer P-KB4, partly to take Black out of standard openings, but also because a non-standard board suits my style of attack.
Atheist born, atheist bred.  And when I die, atheist dead!

Offline trdsf

Re: Is the future already written?
« Reply #219 on: October 10, 2018, 07:23:31 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Well, Fisher always said "P-K4, best by test", but I have never thrived with that opening.  I prefer P-KB4, partly to take Black out of standard openings, but also because a non-standard board suits my style of attack.
It might be worth doing a second test as White giving a first move other than 1. e4 and then automating from there.  Stockfish has an Elo rating in the 3200-3300 range (the top ranked humans are in the 2800s -- I don't know if anyone's broken 2900), so I can only assume it's calculated the ever-lovin' Technicolor snot out of this and cannot find any way to make any other opening more reliable.
Sir Terry Pratchett, on being told about the theory that the universe is a computer simulation: "If we all get out and in again, would it start to work properly this time?"

Offline Cavebear

Re: Is the future already written?
« Reply #220 on: October 10, 2018, 12:06:53 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
It might be worth doing a second test as White giving a first move other than 1. e4 and then automating from there.  Stockfish has an Elo rating in the 3200-3300 range (the top ranked humans are in the 2800s -- I don't know if anyone's broken 2900), so I can only assume it's calculated the ever-lovin' Technicolor snot out of this and cannot find any way to make any other opening more reliable.
Then Black would be just White.
Atheist born, atheist bred.  And when I die, atheist dead!

Offline Baruch

Re: Is the future already written?
« Reply #221 on: October 10, 2018, 01:03:43 PM »
SJW chess ... White has an advantage (first move).  So only use Black pieces ;-)
שלום

Re: Is the future already written?
« Reply #222 on: October 10, 2018, 01:18:15 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Well, Fisher always said "P-K4, best by test", but I have never thrived with that opening.  I prefer P-KB4, partly to take Black out of standard openings, but also because a non-standard board suits my style of attack.
That's called Bird's Opening, and Wikipedia says it's ranked number 6 in opening popularity. I've used it a few times myself, but it's been a while. It does make for a different game, and can lead to some very sharp positions.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
"The Republicans went from Abraham Lincoln to Sarah Palin to Donald Trump. No wonder they don't believe in evolution."
Any Borowitz

Offline trdsf

Re: Is the future already written?
« Reply #223 on: October 10, 2018, 02:54:20 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Then Black would be just White.
No, because Black is responding to the first move, not having an unfettered free choice.

I suppose the reason for the eternal 1. e4 is because the one thing a computer program can't do is play a psychological game.  It can't independently go out and research its opponents and go "A-ha, Smith never does well against the English Opening, so 1. c4" unless its programmers go out and do that research for it and tell it to take a less standard opening line.
Sir Terry Pratchett, on being told about the theory that the universe is a computer simulation: "If we all get out and in again, would it start to work properly this time?"

Offline Cavebear

Re: Is the future already written?
« Reply #224 on: October 10, 2018, 03:02:09 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
No, because Black is responding to the first move, not having an unfettered free choice.

I suppose the reason for the eternal 1. e4 is because the one thing a computer program can't do is play a psychological game.  It can't independently go out and research its opponents and go "A-ha, Smith never does well against the English Opening, so 1. c4" unless its programmers go out and do that research for it and tell it to take a less standard opening line.

Well P-K4 works mostly because of attacking possibilities in the center; I prefer the side swipes.   Not that is gains me wins here, but it IS more fun.
Atheist born, atheist bred.  And when I die, atheist dead!

 

SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk