Lol, there is no possible way for me to argue against that. You could be right, who knows? Our understanding of Physics isn't advanced enough to the point to have concrete evidence for either side.
Beliefs or Lack Thereof: Q&A
- Thread starter Orayn
- Start date
- Status
Quantum... therefore... duck.
I corrected that for you.
Yeah, this is why the determinism camp feels that free will is an illusion. It's a rock solid argument.
I don't care either way but just trying to help convey arguments!
http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/pol116/grand.htm
This is it. It may not be a good translation, though, and it's taken out of context. Look it up on wikipedia for some background info, if it doesn't make much sense, but it essentially tackles your very question.
I never said anything about a cure...
Stop dithering and answer the question. Why is the onus on a religious person to answer a question with an invalid premise?
Pollux
Member
Thanks, I"ll read it tomorrow. Going to get some sleep now. Good night all, glad to see this thread is staying civil.
Well, I'm sitting here with a bunch of popular Physics books that I've read. I've taken Physics in college, but I wasn't a major. You may be right. Could you present me with some concrete evidence?
Honestly, I'd argue that the belief that we do have free will and accountability to our actions can be a deterministic factor that at least inspires you to do certain things that you wouldn't have done otherwise, regardless of whether we actually have free will or not.
Thing is, if this universe and our actions are deterministic (and the evidence at this stage in time points towards yes) I think it in itself puts accountability to our actions as a species, considering that humans through cooperation can directly affect the environment around us, it's our duty to at least attempt to create a better environment for the world and people around us.
It eloquently restates it, but of course can't answer it!
But wouldn't the very nature of humanity also be subjected to prior influences, and out of our control?Honestly, I'd argue that the belief that we do have free will and accountability to our actions can be a deterministic factor that at least inspires you to do certain things that you wouldn't have done otherwise, regardless of whether we actually have free will or not.
Thing is, if this universe and our actions are deterministic (and the evidence at this stage in time points towards yes) I think it in itself puts accountability to our actions as a species, considering that humans through cooperation can directly affect the environment around us, it's our duty to at least attempt to create a better environment for the world and people around us.
The Technomancer
card-carrying scientician
Honestly, I'd argue that the belief that we do have free will and accountability to our actions can be a deterministic factor that at least inspires you to do certain things that you wouldn't have done otherwise, regardless of whether we actually have free will or not.
Thing is, if this universe and our actions are deterministic (and the evidence at this stage in time points towards yes) I think it in itself puts accountability to our actions as a species, considering that humans through cooperation can directly affect the environment around us, it's our duty to at least attempt to create a better environment for the world and people around us.
Honestly trying to rationally incorporate determinism into every aspect of a person's decision making process seems like trying to open a crate with a crowbar that's inside it. Hence why I'm forced to embrace "well we should at least act like we have free will"
Self aggrandizing appeal to authority aside, I'll give you a little more charity.
It's not just knowledge of physics one requires, but philosophy, biology, chemistry, psychology, to be really informed on the nature of free will.
I'm just kidding. Psychology will give you an edge over the rest.
Sssssshhhhhh. Don't ruin it, lol.
Interesting take on this, I had not considered it. Although attribution of responsibility (which is, really, the main problem) is still up for debate and individual interpretation.Thing is, if this universe and our actions are deterministic (and the evidence at this stage in time points towards yes) I think it in itself puts accountability to our actions as a species, considering that humans through cooperation can directly affect the environment around us, it's our duty to at least attempt to create a better environment for the world and people around us.
Yeah, but I always find that to be a cynical view to have on life, we should at least believe we can make a difference, regardless of whether it's futile or not.
I'm a pre med student who has taken all those courses and review that stuff constantly, and I was a Poli Sci and Psychology double major, who graduated with a 3.98. I also took multiple philosophy courses.
What more do I need? lol
I don't see a problem with this really. Illusions helps humans deal with a lot of things in their lives (and no this is not a jab at religion, but at beliefs in general). I think it's mistaken to think that if everyone was perfectly rational, the world would be a better place.
You seem to be more guilty of this than SoulPlaya is. At least from an outsider's point of view, there is someone being needlessly confrontational and someone who is getting justifiably defensive.
At least he admitted the argument has no obvious holes, which is more than most people are willing to do. Yet you still felt obligated to hammer the point home by making him out to be a simpleton.
Personally, although my stance on the determinism vs free will debate (among many others) is cynical, I don't base my life around these ideas. They're diversions and mental exercises, not the framework I use to evaluate my actions.
you need evidence to be able to correlate delusion and psychosis?
Trent Strong
Banned
I'm guessing 99% of people who say they have a 'relationship with God' aren't hearing voices or seeing Jesus or God appear before them or anything. They aren't hallucinating.
Sanky Panky
Banned
I'll take this one.
It's the idea that God created the laws of nature, and created the information contained in DNA for life/ecosystems/organisms to be self-sustainable. Any pollution to this design leads to instability, which is what leads to the belief that all parts were designed to work together.
so prayer as a form of communication wouldn't count as a psychosis?
defined as an abnormal condition of the mind, I wouldn't say its farfetched.
I admit. I have personal flaws.
This is a very flawed argument (not an attack against you, but the argument itself) because it creates divine justification for natural occurrences like earthquakes, plague, drought, extinction, etc. In fact, any action can be attributed in some way to this idea, (overlaps with the determinism vs free will debate), and thus can be justified as being part of the ineffable plan.
It's not fun if you're going to admit to them!
I used to like you Zaptruder. Why are you being an asshole to me?
EDIT: BTW, you're a cool person Haly.
But when a large number of otherwise normal people exhibit this behaviour, you may have a problem in defining it that way.
You need physiological evidence to classify something as a psychosis.
You do know what the word physiological means dont you?
I used to like you Zaptruder. Why are you being an asshole to me?
I dunno man. I just kinda annoyed at the meme of quantum uncertainty used as the gap to allow crazy ideas through (and the stuff you and haly were talking about, was tangentially related to that).
The stuff in the brain doesn't even operate at a scale which would be affected by quantum outcomes.
But the idea of quantum uncertainty is like this crack in our social conciousness that allows the pseudo-intellectuals to pry at it with an inane crowbar.
I dunno how quantum-whatchamajigs work either! I just know that molecular biology isn't affected by that craziness!
yes, and like i said, neuroscience can prove this, unless the neurologist that was interviewed in mahers movie was lying. Grasping your hands together to ask of something/say thanks to a deity is empirical enough.
appreciate the self important comment on my vocabulary though
yep, thats why its called psychosis
Trent Strong
Banned
Psychosis has a pretty hazy definition and psychologists argue about what constitutes it. The usual definition is: "a symptom or feature of mental illness typically characterized by radical changes in personality, impaired functioning, and a distorted or nonexistent sense of objective reality."(I got his definition from an on-lne medical dictionary.) I guess you could argue that since God doesn't exist, the belief that he does exist is a distorted sense of objective reality. But that seems like a pretty big stretch. I don't think psychosis can be defined as "an abnormal condition of the mind." Because an abnormal condition of the mind could describe anxiety disorders, depression, and a million other disorders that don't qualify as psychosis. Also, since most people on the planet pray, then, by definition, prayer is not abnormal, or an abnormal condition of the mind. Belief in some sort of God probably has a biological basis and is definitely normal.
We agree then, for the most part. I just feel like this debate will benefit from greater development on a TOE.
TOE?
Theory of everything. It's a theory that could lead to the accurate prediction of any experiment (as Wikipedia likes to call it), as it fully explains ALL physical phenomena. From what I've read in these books of mine, it's the holy grail of scientific research, and what all research in Physics is essentially aiming for.
Someone needs to step their Physics knowledge up, lol. *Asshole smirk*
religion is definitely an altered perspective on reality, and at this point in time it is detrimental to furthering our understanding of the universe, and still causes conflict.
If you put two atheists from different cultures into a philosophical debate it will be productive, however if you put two people from differing religions into a similar situation it will most likely cause disagreement and disdain for one another.
This is unquestionably both detrimental and a distorted perspective of reality.
Its more like a mainstream, socially acceptable form of psychosis, whether it was self imposed or (more likely) driven into your brain at a young age.
Its also telling when psychadellic drug users claim to have religious/spiritual experiences, when its the brain malfunctioning and being unable to process reality.
Theists, When I look at the world, particularly in developed nations and the western nations, I see a decline in Religion. Europe has gotten much more secular and parts of America are definitely following that path.
Do you guys see religion, at least organized religion, dying out?
Do you guys see religion, at least organized religion, dying out?
Trent Strong
Banned
Oh, I agree that religion is a bad thing. I'm an atheist and an anti-theist. You're preaching to the choir here. I just think it's pretty hyperbolic to call the average religious person psychotic.
If prayer is defined as mute communication with God, then are internal monologues evidence of psychosis, too? Who are you talking to anyway? Yourself? Jeeze, isn't that vaguely schizophrenic! Maybe we need more space in our psychiatric manuals for that kind of craziness!
No, on the contrary, it's growing, especially in China.
the definition of psychosis is hyperbolic itself to the point where mentioning it makes people think you are crazy (ive been there)
its not necessarily an evil
schizophrenia is a different league altogether, and using it in jest is extremely insensitive.
cutmeamango
Banned
Determined randomly?
So while the deterministic argument works thru regression, when we actually regress to assume as current knowledge that unless infinite prediction exists, there isn't determinism, we go back to the identity and metaphysical level of discussion?
Closely. Randomness allows Free Will. Infinite events give the possibility of infinite choices. Of course they may be hindered thru a gamma of interferences as to the act part, but as I said, in my concept free will is not in the act.
Sorry for my tardiness, I was caught up watching a movie here.
Fair enough.
I subscribe to the idea, we've already got it pretty good... and it's good enough for our needs as they pertain to the human scales that we work with.
Better theories of our physical universe will simply drive the degree of accuracy up, but to me, doesn't mean we can't get started on derivative theories with high degrees of efficacy and accuracy. And science would have to agree, having derived chemistry and biology, even while physics itself continues its march onwards.
While we'd be able to answer more subtle questions of more quaint occurrences at scales outside of what we're commonly used to dealing with - I really strongly do not think that, that kinda stuff has any sort of bearing on a discussion of free will; which relates much more strongly (as in, pretty much exclusively) to an understanding of psychology, neurology, cognition, biology and chemistry.
Troll! I mocked what I, and it seems like most here, think is an insensitive position, and then you say I'm being insensitive. Either you're completely blind to irony or you be trollin'!
I believe everything that ive posted, and dont consider it trolling
it doesn't matter if you're being ironic or not, its not something to joke about.
Only like two Christians have taken my survey so far. Here it is again, and I added another question:
Christians:
1) Were you indoctrinated by this religion since birth because your parents follow this religion, or did you become a Christian later in life?
2) If you were born in ancient Greece, do you think you would believe in Zeus with the same fervor you believe in God or would you be more or less critical?
3) Do you believe that the Bible is the word of God (ie it's perfect, infallible, exactly how it should be, not just written by man)?
4) Do you believe that some or more of the detailed stories in the Bible (Adam and Eve, Noah, etc) are metaphorical or do you believe all are literal?
5) If you think some are metaphorical, how do you determine which are metaphorical and which are literal? How do you reconcile the two?
6) If they are metaphorical, then why do you follow it as an actual religion and not just fables or stories meant to teach a moral lesson?
7) Have you ever seriously sat down by yourself and critically thought about your religion and why you believe it?
8) If an asteroid were to strike Earth, wiping out all of humankind, do you think the Christian God would continue to exist in reality or idea?
Christians:
1) Were you indoctrinated by this religion since birth because your parents follow this religion, or did you become a Christian later in life?
2) If you were born in ancient Greece, do you think you would believe in Zeus with the same fervor you believe in God or would you be more or less critical?
3) Do you believe that the Bible is the word of God (ie it's perfect, infallible, exactly how it should be, not just written by man)?
4) Do you believe that some or more of the detailed stories in the Bible (Adam and Eve, Noah, etc) are metaphorical or do you believe all are literal?
5) If you think some are metaphorical, how do you determine which are metaphorical and which are literal? How do you reconcile the two?
6) If they are metaphorical, then why do you follow it as an actual religion and not just fables or stories meant to teach a moral lesson?
7) Have you ever seriously sat down by yourself and critically thought about your religion and why you believe it?
8) If an asteroid were to strike Earth, wiping out all of humankind, do you think the Christian God would continue to exist in reality or idea?
D
Deleted member 1235
Unconfirmed Member
no they don't and they never did. but you still here people talk about miracles when they get medical treatment and get well. It's the same reason we have stories of medical miracles from the past. Guy gets lucky boom miracle.
Haha, be careful! He cannot be trusted!
I embrace that we should pick and choose when to act like we have free will. In our daily lives it is generally a useful lie but in terms of policy creation it's incumbent ideas represent challenges to the efficacy of, for example, the legal system. I think perhaps when thinking of ourselves it is valuable to think in terms of Free Will and when thinking of others it is valuable to think in terms of environment and influence.
Pollux
Member
And Africa....
Go to sleep!
Dice
Pokémon Parentage Conspiracy Theorist
So if I were not me, what would my beliefs and personality look like? How is anyone supposed to be able to answer this question?
- Status