News:

Welcome to our site!

Main Menu

Quest for Truth

Started by Absolute_Agent, June 16, 2019, 09:02:36 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Hijiri Byakuren

Quote from: Absolute_Agent on June 18, 2019, 01:59:20 PM
However the highway signs do give instructions to free will creatures--then you must think that the DOT violates your free will when the sign tells you which way to go.

Sent from my moto e5 play using Tapatalk
The DOT didn’t create me either, they merely run the roadways. They do indeed limit my free will by issuing instructions, but this is not a contradiction since the DOT has never claimed to give me free reign over the roads.

You are focusing on the wrong part of my argument. I never claimed that free will was sacrosanct, I said your argument (that God gave us free will while also issuing instructions to us) was contradictory. Also, you still have not established that God is, in fact, something other than a fictional character.
Speak when you have something to say, not when you have to say something.

Sargon The Grape - My Youtube Channel

Absolute_Agent

Quote from: Baruch on June 18, 2019, 03:46:30 PM
Taqdir??

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Predestination_in_Islam
Qadr (Divine destiny) is a complicated subject but it is understood to operate in harmony with free will.  Jewish Kabbalah actually I find does an effective job of explaining the interplay between destiny and self-determination.

Sent from my moto e5 play using Tapatalk


Hijiri Byakuren

Quote from: Baruch on June 18, 2019, 02:39:05 PM
Part of the conundrum of the idea of free will.  Can there be free will, if there isn't complete freedom from physical law?  Even QM doesn't get you out of that problem, since it deterministically says eg: that there are three possibilities ... A=25%, B=50% and C=25%.  The determinism is just one step farther back in the background.

As far as we know, any instructions to life is thru the DNA plus the natural law mediated history of the organism.  We don't have post-facto control of our genetics/embryology.  And we can't choose to "fall up".  We can vary the rate at which we fall down (hang glider).
Oh don’t worry Baruch, I’m well aware of this. I just wasn’t ready to introduce it into my argument yet. Have patience, ol’ Hijiri is still winding up for the imperial smackdown. [emoji6]
Speak when you have something to say, not when you have to say something.

Sargon The Grape - My Youtube Channel

aitm

Quote from: Absolute_Agent on June 18, 2019, 12:44:16 PM
living in a world of illusion;


the world is not an illusion simply because one says it is without any type of evidence.

You are not living in a world of illusion...it is spelled d.e.l.u.s.i.o.n
A humans desire to live is exceeded only by their willingness to die for another. Even god cannot equal this magnificent sacrifice. No god has the right to judge them.-first tenant of the Panotheust

Absolute_Agent



Quote from: Hijiri Byakuren on June 18, 2019, 03:47:43 PM

You are focusing on the wrong part of my argument. I never claimed that free will was sacrosanct, I said your argument (that God gave us free will while also issuing instructions to us) was contradictory. Also, you still have not established that God is, in fact, something other than a fictional character.

And I don't intend to, since that would violate your free will...  I never said the free will granted us was absolute either.  For instance we cannot jump over Mount Everest no matter how much we might choose to.  Free will exists within a context of limits and boundaries, and it can be overridden.  Yet freedom of conscience is sacred above all other aspects of free will.


Sent from my moto e5 play using Tapatalk


Absolute_Agent

Quote from: aitm on June 18, 2019, 03:54:22 PM
the world is not an illusion simply because one says it is without any type of evidence.

You are not living in a world of illusion...it is spelled d.e.l.u.s.i.o.n
Yes, all are self-deluded to one degree or another.  It's human nature.

Sent from my moto e5 play using Tapatalk


Sal1981

Quote from: Baruch on June 18, 2019, 03:44:05 PM
That is what the Nazis said as they burned them.
It means you should use your own brain to evaluate the contents of a book, you know, use analysis and judgement about its contents.

Besides, the Nazis didn't burn any old book - they burned Communist books, or "subversive" books, amongst others that challenged Nazi ideology.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_book_burnings

Quote from: Absolute_Agent on June 18, 2019, 03:44:24 PM
So it refutes the claim that God sending us instructions is a violation of our free will.
What are you even on about? You've blindly accepted a 1400 year old book as sanctified truth, without analysing it. You. Have. No. Free. Will. if you accept it uncritically, in the first place.

Besides, I don't believe in free will. I think we have agency, but that's another discussion altogether.
Quote from: Absolute_Agent on June 18, 2019, 03:44:24 PM
  They are provided for our benefit, but God is not forcing anyone to follow them.  Ergo, being a freethinking Muslim is not a contradiction of terms, as mistakenly asserted above.

Sent from my moto e5 play using Tapatalk


Asserted where? You know what, I don't care.

What I do care about are claims about the world that also align with reality. The other stuff is just entertainment.

Absolute_Agent

Quote from: Sal1981 on June 18, 2019, 03:58:20 PM
It means you should use your own brain to evaluate the contents of a book, you know, use analysis and judgement about its contents.

Besides, the Nazis didn't burn any old book - they burned Communist books, or "subversive" books, amongst others that challenged Nazi ideology.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_book_burnings
What are you even on about? You've blindly accepted a 1400 year old book as sanctified truth, without analysing it. You. Have. No. Free. Will. if you accept it uncritically, in the first place.

Besides, I don't believe in free will. I think we have agency, but that's another discussion altogether.Asserted where? You know what, I don't care.

What I do care about are claims about the world that also align with reality. The other stuff is just entertainment.
Funny you've assumed that I never analyzed the Qur'an; perhaps what you meant is that you've never analyzed it. 

Sent from my moto e5 play using Tapatalk


Sal1981

Quote from: Absolute_Agent on June 18, 2019, 04:01:27 PM
Funny you've assumed that I never analyzed the Qur'an; perhaps what you meant is that you've never analyzed it. 

Sent from my moto e5 play using Tapatalk


I never claimed I had, and I have no reason to either, because I have no intention or justified reason to read it.

I'd much rather read a philosophy book or a physics book than the some political book by a goat herder.

Absolute_Agent

Quote from: Sal1981 on June 18, 2019, 04:05:44 PM
I never claimed I had, and I have no reason to either, because I have no intention or justified reason to read it.

I'd much rather read a philosophy book or a physics book than the some political book by a goat herder.
Exactly.  Going on about something you haven't the foggiest clue about.  Next time try reading a book before you submit a critical evaluation, it can really help your case.

Sent from my moto e5 play using Tapatalk


Sal1981

Quote from: Absolute_Agent on June 18, 2019, 04:11:45 PM
Exactly.  Going on about something you haven't the foggiest clue about.  Next time try reading a book before you submit a critical evaluation, it can really help your case.

Sent from my moto e5 play using Tapatalk


*Yawn*

Critical evaluation on what, exactly? I only write on stuff I have knowledge on. Free will is one such subject, and you're talking about your ass, because you have not even offered a clear definition on free will - and I don't expect to get one from you.

Absolute_Agent

#116
Quote from: aitm on June 18, 2019, 03:54:22 PM
the world is not an illusion simply because one says it is without any type of evidence.

Authorities on the subject suggest "reality" is in fact an illusion:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/futurism.com/physicists-suspect-reality-illusion/amp

Ironically enough, Shakyamuni Buddha had discovered this 2500+ years prior. 

Sent from my moto e5 play using Tapatalk

Absolute_Agent

Quote from: Sal1981 on June 18, 2019, 04:17:36 PM
*Yawn*

Critical evaluation on what, exactly? I only write on stuff I have knowledge on. Free will is one such subject, and you're talking about your ass, because you have not even offered a clear definition on free will - and I don't expect to get one from you.
Free will and agency bring up the same definition.  So if you claim a difference, elucidate me then.

Sent from my moto e5 play using Tapatalk


Sal1981

Quote from: Absolute_Agent on June 18, 2019, 04:23:58 PM
Free will and agency bring up the same definition.  So if you claim a difference, elucidate me then.

Sent from my moto e5 play using Tapatalk


*whoosh*

There isn't any clear definition - that's the point. I don't think there is any free will, remember?

It's because it simply isn't parsimonious with what we know of how our brains work, and how everything follows a causality chain, because everything is ordered, "following" simple physical rules of nature like Newton's gravity, or thermodynamics. These mechanical rules offers no place for free will to exist in.

Agency is simply a better word what we really have, I also call it volition, but it's basically the same thing: The apparatus in our heads making decisions.

Also, I don't think anything is truly random, the closest we get to randomness is unpredictable behavior, like radioactive decay in unstable atoms, simply because of unknown variables/laws or just inability to calculate the behavior of objects (like throwing dice). Even if there was randomness - how would that square with free will? If it was random, it would mean decision-making apparatus would ultimately also be random, and worse yet, we wouldn't be able to get regularity to be able to ascertain the nature of reality because of this randomness in nature, because for nature to be random also means the laws of nature would allow for randomness - this is an important tautology, I think, that necessarily means nature follows an ordered pattern that we call physical laws.

I think what we have is an illusion of free will, ala Sam Harris' definition. We simply, for good reason, have no direct access to the workings for a lot of the inner workings of our brains because our experience of self is phenomenological, IMO. You no more have a will over your own thoughts than the sensation of hunger or the dilation of your iris when entering a dark room. Just as a thought experiment: What will your next thought be? Do you even choose? No. You make decisions, sure, of the choice of what time the alarm on a clock should be set at, or what flavor of ice cream to buy, or whatever decision.

Hijiri Byakuren

Quote from: Absolute_Agent on June 18, 2019, 03:55:09 PM

And I don't intend to, since that would violate your free will...  I never said the free will granted us was absolute either.  For instance we cannot jump over Mount Everest no matter how much we might choose to.  Free will exists within a context of limits and boundaries, and it can be overridden.  Yet freedom of conscience is sacred above all other aspects of free will.


Sent from my moto e5 play using Tapatalk
Yes, “free will” is indeed restricted by physics. I have never stated otherwise; indeed I would argue that it doesn’t exist at all, but that is a discussion for another time. We are talking about your worldview right now, not mine.

Unfortunately you have exposed yet another contradiction in your argument. You said earlier that you believe there is sufficient evidence for God’s existence, yet now state that you will not present it. So you now put forth an argument which is contingent on the presence of a God whose existence you not only haven’t proven, but now actively refuse to prove. Since you either cannot or will not back up your position, I am forced to conclude that your position is worthless; but as I said near the beginning of this thread, I already knew this, because I already knew that you had nothing to present. We have come full circle, and it should now be clear to you why I hold your beliefs in total disdain.

You now have three choices. Choice number one: you continue making your futile arguments which I may or may not respond to for the purpose of my own entertainment. Choice number two: you concede the argument, and we move on. Choice number three: you actually make an attempt to prove that your god exists, and we make actual progress in this discussion.
Speak when you have something to say, not when you have to say something.

Sargon The Grape - My Youtube Channel