Determinism

[MagsJ (..a chic geek)]

@peacegirl

Ecmandu: Your entire posts on these threads are extremely ignorant and extremely insane.

Peacegirl: It’s actually your knee-jerk reaction that’s the problem here.

I think that some would be taken more seriously if they stopped using words like ‘insane’ …or ‘kook’ …it makes them sound like p*icks! in not aiding in substantiating their claims any the more, by using it.

[Sculptor]

@Ecmandu

Your entire posts on these threads are extremely ignorant and extremely insane.

I think you need to take care calling people other than yourself “insane”.

[Ecmandu]

Ok, fine, your author is insane.

People like to kill and torture JUST because they like to kill and torture, it has NOTHING - no connection whatsoever !!! To blame or determinism.

Take MagsJ for example… or Sculptor in this thread.

They are sadists - they can’t back up my “insanity” with an argument.

I back up everything I say with arguments, ‘cause, you know, that’s what philosophers do.

Fortunately for me, I brush it off because I realize that they’re retarded sociopaths.

[Artimas]

Well what about dreams and the sub or unconscious state? That is time travel in a sense in some or a lot of cases whether the dreamer understands or not. Future or past. Time is a man made concept, change is what is real and if you do not think change can be reversed then I don’t think you will like the future much since it contradicts determinism, I’m not denying it exists but so do other concepts or systems mentioned. That’s all humans really try to work on and achieve is bettering the future, understanding and of reversing the past.

[Ecmandu]

And, you know what Sculptor and MagsJ.

Take it to the debate forum. “Ecmandu is insane”

That’s a challenge.

My debate is that you’re both Retarded sociopaths, and that I’m sane.

[Ecmandu]

@Artimas

Well what about dreams and the sub or unconscious state? That is time travel in a sense in some or a lot of cases whether the dreamer understands or not. Future or past. Time is a man made concept, change is what is real and if you do not think change can be reversed then I don’t think you will like the future much since it contradicts determinism, I’m not denying it exists but so do other concepts or systems mentioned. That’s all humans really try to work on and achieve is bettering the future, understanding and of reversing the past.

We carry the past with us and by doing our own work on ourselves we change the baggage.

[promethean75]

Those two aren’t retarded sociopaths. These two are, though.

[Ecmandu]

@promethean75

Those two aren’t retarded sociopaths. These two are, though.

Most sociopaths fit into society.

[peacegirl]

@Ecmandu

@promethean75

Those two aren’t retarded sociopaths. These two are, though.

Most sociopaths fit into society.

Ecmandu, why did you not acknowledge my last post that you have misinterpreted my comments? This is a serious problem in this thread. I’m not condemning you. I’m trying to find a common denominator.

[Ecmandu]

@peacegirl

@Ecmandu

@promethean75

Those two aren’t retarded sociopaths. These two are, though.

Most sociopaths fit into society.

Ecmandu, why did you not acknowledge my last post that you have misinterpreted my comments? This is a serious problem in this thread. I’m not condemning you. I’m trying to find a common denominator.

Oh, I responded to you.

“ People like to kill and torture JUST because they like to kill and torture, it has NOTHING - no connection whatsoever !!! To blame or determinism.”

You didn’t respond to me or yourself.

Your whole thesis is that blame only comes from freedom and that if we stop blaming people no violence will ever occur.

That’s insane.

[peacegirl]

@Ecmandu

@promethean75

Those two aren’t retarded sociopaths. These two are, though.

Most sociopaths fit into society.

Ecmandu, why did you not acknowledge my last post that you have misinterpreted my comments? This is a serious problem in this thread. I’m not condemning you. I’m trying to find a common denominator.
[/quote]
Ecmandu: Oh, I responded to you.

Peacegirl: I didn’t see it. I apologize if I missed it.

Ecmandu: “ People like to kill and torture JUST because they like to kill and torture, it has NOTHING - no connection whatsoever !!! To blame or determinism.”

Peacegirl: What a superficial response. Obviously people hurt others because they want to, but WHY? You are not a terrible investigator.

Ecmandu: You didn’t respond to me or yourself.

Your whole thesis is that blame only comes from freedom and that if we stop blaming people no violence will ever occur.

Peaceful: WRONG WRONG 100 times WRONG!

Peacegirl: Show me where I said blame only comes from freedom. You are extremely confused!

[Ecmandu]

Then tell me what the fuck you’re saying, because every poster on this thread thinks that’s exactly what you’re saying.

[peacegirl]

@Ecmandu

Then tell me what the fuck you’re saying, because every poster on this thread thinks that’s exactly what you’re saying.

Whoaaaa, what does agreement or disagreement by a few on this thread have to do with the veracity of this discovery. This is not a popularity contest.

[Ecmandu]

@peacegirl

@Ecmandu

Then tell me what the fuck you’re saying, because every poster on this thread thinks that’s exactly what you’re saying.

Whoaaaa, what does agreement or disagreement by a few on this thread have to do with the veracity of this discovery. This is not a popularity contest.

You’re non responsive to your own posts and you’re insane.

You can step out of insanity.

This entire thread is you stating that if people believe they have freedom that murder will happen.

That’s insane.

You also state that if freedom is rejected, this blame, that no murder will happen.

That’s insane.

You are actually insane.

Before you go on again about that’s not what you said…

That’s exactly what you said.

The burden of proof is on you to clarify your position.

[Meno2 (Meno_)]

There are no burdened of proof for insanity, in fact, one either meets the criteria, by understanding the nature of a some crazy act or not. One can be determined to be free to act that way, or break out of that chain, and be free from the guilt by association, or not.

There is a choice , if not, well the bottom line stays as it always have: insanity by definition.

[Ecmandu]

@Meno_

There are no burdened of proof for insanity, in fact, one either meets the criteria, by understanding the nature of a some crazy act or not. One can be determined to be free to act that way, or break out of that chain, and be free from the guilt by association, or not.

There is a choice , if not, well the bottom line stays as it always have: insanity by definition.

Did you not see where I wrote, “you can step out of your insanity.”?

[Meno2 (Meno_)]

@Ecmandu

@Meno_

There are no burdened of proof for insanity, in fact, one either meets the criteria, by understanding the nature of a some crazy act or not. One can be determined to be free to act that way, or break out of that chain, and be free from the guilt by association, or not.

There is a choice , if not, well the bottom line stays as it always have: insanity by definition.

Did you not see where I wrote, “you can step out of your insanity.”?

Ok.

[Meno2 (Meno_)]

@Meno_

@Ecmandu

@Meno_

There are no burdened of proof for insanity, in fact, one either meets the criteria, by understanding the nature of a some crazy act or not. One can be determined to be free to act that way, or break out of that chain, and be free from the guilt by association, or not.

There is a choice , if not, well the bottom line stays as it always have: insanity by definition.

Did you not see where I wrote, “you can step out of your insanity.”?

Ok.

I will glance back at it.

The problem of looking back or traditional analysis is overwhelming, and a failure, this is exactly why suppressing symptoms has come to represent the now viable treatment option. People either suffer from denial , and by finger pointing at others responsible. They dig themselves deeper in the hole, and dreams are available only to those, whose levels of suppression doesn’t sink lower than Victorian modesty.

How low can you go?

As low as the garbage can is deep.

[iambiguous]

A Metaphysics For Freedom by Helen Steward
We exercise free will this issue as Les Reid defends A Metaphysics For Freedom.

‘The Road Not Taken’ is a poem by Robert Frost that describes a moment of choice. He has two woodland paths before him, and he chooses “the one less traveled by.” Quite possibly, Frost was thinking of his own choice of a life as a poet, but the general image applies to all the choices that we make. All through life we have decisions to make, choosing one path rather than another, and those choices give our lives their individual shape. The poem assumes that the future is a blank sheet on which we choose to write our individual life stories.

And, in a sense, this is what the free will/determinism debate comes down to. Deciding if all of the choices that we are confronted with – thousands upon thousands upon thousands of them over the course of a life – happen because one way or another they might not have happened if we had opted to go the other way. Or if “opting to go the other way” is merely the manifestation of an illusion that a wholly determined brain is “somehow” able to foist on us from the cradle to the grave. And for reasons that still completely baffle us. As though the experiences we have in the waking world are just another manifestation of the experiences we have in the dream world: the brain mechanism doing its thing going back to whatever brought into existence matter itself.

Like the Terminator hunting down Sarah Connor in its own rendition of the wide awake world.

Professor Ted Honderich could not agree less. In his book On Determinism and Freedom (2005), he argues that the notion of free will that lies behind all such talk of choices and responsibility is incoherent, and cannot be assimilated to the account of physical reality the sciences have arrived at. In particular, Honderich objects to the notion of origination: that is, to the claim that an action can originate from a deliberate, conscious choice without prior physical cause. He argues that any decision is instead in reality an event or series of events in the neural pathways of one’s brain, and that all such events are embedded within physical causal sequences.

You know what’s next here, right?

Professor Ted Honderich writes a book to dispute the free will advocates as though he himself had somehow freely opted to choose to do this in order to dispute the libertarians. How surreal it all quickly becomes.

The physical cause sequences that presumably can only include his writing the book. It’s as though Nature itself was this actual entity that gets some sort of kick out of putting infinitesimally tiny specks of existence like us in these labyrinthian “philosophical” quandaries. See how we’ll react. If how we react is not “somehow” itself an exception to the physical cause sequence rules.

[Meno2 (Meno_)]

@iambiguous

A Metaphysics For Freedom by Helen Steward
We exercise free will this issue as Les Reid defends A Metaphysics For Freedom.

‘The Road Not Taken’ is a poem by Robert Frost that describes a moment of choice. He has two woodland paths before him, and he chooses “the one less traveled by.” Quite possibly, Frost was thinking of his own choice of a life as a poet, but the general image applies to all the choices that we make. All through life we have decisions to make, choosing one path rather than another, and those choices give our lives their individual shape. The poem assumes that the future is a blank sheet on which we choose to write our individual life stories.

And, in a sense, this is what the free will/determinism debate comes down to. Deciding if all of the choices that we are confronted with – thousands upon thousands upon thousands of them over the course of a life – happen because one way or another they might not have happened if we had opted to go the other way. Or if “opting to go the other way” is merely the manifestation of an illusion that a wholly determined brain is “somehow” able to foist on us from the cradle to the grave. And for reasons that still completely baffle us. As though the experiences we have in the waking world are just another manifestation of the experiences we have in the dream world: the brain mechanism doing its thing going back to whatever brought into existence matter itself.

Like the Terminator hunting down Sarah Connor in its own rendition of the wide awake world.

Professor Ted Honderich could not agree less. In his book On Determinism and Freedom (2005), he argues that the notion of free will that lies behind all such talk of choices and responsibility is incoherent, and cannot be assimilated to the account of physical reality the sciences have arrived at. In particular, Honderich objects to the notion of origination: that is, to the claim that an action can originate from a deliberate, conscious choice without prior physical cause. He argues that any decision is instead in reality an event or series of events in the neural pathways of one’s brain, and that all such events are embedded within physical causal sequences.

You know what’s next here, right?

Professor Ted Honderich writes a book to dispute the free will advocates as though he himself had somehow freely opted to choose to do this in order to dispute the libertarians. How surreal it all quickly becomes.

The physical cause sequences that presumably can only include his writing the book. It’s as though Nature itself was this actual entity that gets some sort of kick out of putting infinitesimally tiny specks of existence like us in these labyrinthian “philosophical” quandaries. See how we’ll react. If how we react is not “somehow” itself an exception to the physical cause sequence rules.

True, the age of uncertainty, of an accelarition for quick answers to come up with the right choices to alliviate overwhelming angst, has short circuited some conventional thinking.

There is no time to deeply analyze causes, motives by lengthy processes, action, quick action, frothing from instinctual confirmation is more often the proper one. Time is running out.

However, contrasted to an a-priori understanding of a conceptual perennial philosophy, the modern world first looks for signs , and metaphorically accumulated symbols .Philosophy instanteniously travels back in time, and automatically recognates into understandable and required patterns. There really is no exit nor termination to cogitation.