Free Will: Too Commonly Misunderstood

How should we think about weird things?
jquinn914
New Member
Posts: 6
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 11:33 pm

Free Will: Too Commonly Misunderstood

Postby jquinn914 » Fri Aug 05, 2016 11:52 pm

I originally made this post on reddit's philosophy subforum but I felt posting here could provide me with some greater insight. I want to be able to explain why the common idea of Free Will is incorrect in the simplest, most straightforward, yet convincing way possible. The primary motivation behind this, is what if we could explain this to a kid; a 14 year old just starting high school. Would this integral piece of a core understanding of reality, increase the likelihood of these kids becoming not only scientifically literate but becoming able to form optimal belief systems allowing more and more people to align by reality rather than this big mish-mash of conflicting ideology between people that causes most if not all conflicts in the world. I'm looking to improve upon this so any criticism or suggestions are welcome.


Argument against Free Will All credit to /u/Fibonacci35813 for his well articulated philosophical arguments P1: The behavior of all matter is determined by antecedent condition together with the natural laws and cause and effect.
P2: Humans (and subsequently their brains and body) are made up of matter.
P3: Thoughts and behavior are the function of the brain and the body.
C: Thoughts and behavior are the function of antecedent condition together with the natural laws and cause and effect. Now, one might question the first premise and argue that some matter is probabilistic or perhaps even random. Ok, so here is an additional premise: P1b - If matter is not determined by antecedent condition together with the natural laws and cause and effect, then it is determined by probablisitc determinism and/or randomness.
But then you get the conclusion: Cb: Thoughts and behavior are the function of randomness or probabilistic determinism.

Further Elaboration: If we're composed of matter, we're subject to the laws of nature. We haven't come far enough in neuroscience to predict someone's behavior from the state of each individual, of roughly 100 billion, neuron. We do know, however, that neurons are composed of atoms. We also know atoms act according to physical laws. We know that what each atom does at any given time is determined from the beginning of the universe. We know that if we knew the state of every atom in the universe in one frame of time, then we can predict the state of every atom in the universe at ANY other frame of time in the future and similarly calculate the state of every atom in the universe at ANY other frame of time in the past. That means with such knowledge, we could know the state of everything emergent from atomic physics, including the state of our bodies and the emergent processes of our bodies, our minds. We'd be able to know this because every state of the universe is brought about by the prior state. Here's a simple example, you know a meteor flying through space is travelling at 8000 m/s in a given direction and there's no matter anywhere remotely close enough to affect this meteor in any way, you can then predict a second from now that meteor will be 8000 meters, in that given direction, from where it was a second ago because its state a second ago determined its state a second in the future. You can complicate this scenario all you want, if you knew all the parameters of its state and the laws of physics you'd know where it was at any time before and any time thereafter.

Humans are incredibly complicated. There's roughly 100 billion neurons interacting in the brain, there's 5 ways for the brain to collect information on the current physical circumstances (our senses), and those neurons interpret that information and compute an output not just on current circumstances but past circumstances stored, however accurately (not perfect), within certain neurons. You deactivate the ventromedial prefrontal cortex and your behavior changes because your brain can no longer inhibit the influence emotional information has on the computations for behavior. You deactivate any other part of the brain and you have similar results: behavior changes. Deactivating the amygdala for example, results in fear and memories of fear no longer being calculated into behavior. There's an interaction between the Dorsal Raphe Nuclei and the Ventromedial Prefrontal Cortex that makes us feel we have control over a situation that, if interrupted, make us feel as though there's no possible escape: The elephant tied to a wooden stake planted in the ground never tries to escape even though they could easily force their way free. Similarly, if you put a rat in a hamster wheel that doesn't deactivate shocks being delivered to its tail through rotation, then place that same rat in a hamster wheel that deactivates those shocks upon rotation, that rat, in most cases, doesn't even attempt to rotate the wheel. Now, these are simple, macroscopic level experiments, but imagine if we manipulated which neurotransmitters bind to each receptor site of each individual neuron of the 100 billion along with the exterior circumstances and memories of a human. Also, Imagine you designed the DNA of this human and knew all the epigenetic factors and how to manipulate them. You could then, likely, control their every action.

The issue of emergence: Now, I can say with high probability, there are people with higher IQ's than I, that believe in Libertarian free will. However, what I noticed in many responses is a lack of understanding of the very essential and, I'd argue, necessary concept of emergence. I mean, without understanding emergence, you simply cannot hope to grasp many of the more complicated questions of reality.

Firstly, what is emergence? To quote Sean Carroll, "the idea that there are multiple theories/languages/vocabularies/ontologies that we can use to usefully describe the world, each appropriate at different levels of coarse-graining and precision."

What does he mean by 'different levels of coarse-graining and precision'? An example relevant to my free will argument would be 'biology is at a more coarsely-grained level than chemistry and atomic physics is at a more precise level than chemistry.' This is to say 'biology is at a level emergent from the level chemistry occupies which is emergent from the level of atomic physics'.

Why is this important to understanding reality? Well, for example, someone might say 'a total understanding of atomic physics tells you NOTHING about how the brain works (neuroscience)'. In fact, many if not most people reason exactly like that. Well, you'd be correct to say 'a total understanding of atomic physics does not give us a total understanding of how the brain works'. However, it DOES tell us some ways in which the brain CAN'T work.

Okay so with a complete theory of atomic physics, Core Theory, given the overwhelming probability it's correct, what can we derive to be a false idea about how the brain works? The brain cannot function independent of the universe. If the brain cannot function independent of the universe then there is no possibility for libertarian free will, which is, to quote John Hendrix, "the ability to perform some other action in place of the one that is actually done". So when you make a choice, you could NOT have made any other choice. There's a logical scenario where libertarian free will can exist: The atoms that compose the human brain do not abide by the laws of physics. I can't disprove this. I can point to the lack of a good reason to believe it any more than that reality is an illusion and that '2+2=4' is illogical, which are equally empirically unlikely.

What about compatibilism? Compatibilism is certainly plausible, but that's because it only proposes the emergent IDEA of free will. I'd argue that compatibilists are talking about something different than libertarians and determinists. In fact, a determinists that understands emergence, would probably say the compatibilist version of Free Will, to once again quote Sean Caroll, "is as real as baseball". Baseball is certainly real, but it's certainly not as fundamental as biology. In fact, the idea of free will is probably a function of consciousness which is a function of the brain and if you find that hard to swallow because you're , unfortunately, of the popular opinion that we know NOTHING about consciousness and that it's this huge unsolvable mystery, do some web surfing for neuroscience studies on consciousness and I guarantee you, your opinion will shift to 'there's more we don't know than do know but there are some things that we know.'

One study I think is relevant to this topic of free will is Libet's study on voluntary actions. The action potential cascading to the subsequent action occurred .55 seconds before the action. The 'decisive' thought for this action occurred .2 seconds before the action; that's .35 seconds after the action was bound to occur. Sounds a lot like the action was computed and THEN we thought and felt we chose it and THEN the action was done.

What about God and moral accountability? If I had libertarian free will and the knowledge of Laplace's Demon (Everything in universe) and I created a robot, knowing it would commit heinous acts in reaction to future circumstances, I'm responsible for those actions because I KNEW, arguably even intended (why else would I create the robot with this knowledge), creating this specific robot would lead to it doing such things. Deflecting the blame onto the robot is like a shooter blaming his gun. Just because we don't have libertarian free will doesn't mean we don't have the ability to shape a moral society. In fact, I'd argue, if we spent less time blaming and appropriating punishment to fulfill a primitive need for vengeance, we could put more biological (including neuroscience of course) and psychological effort into detecting and reforming potential serious offenders. Anyone predisposed or subject to the life circumstances that result in such crimes requires intervention of some form.

User avatar
Gord
Real Skeptic
Posts: 29090
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: Silent Ork
Location: Transcona

Re: Free Will: Too Commonly Misunderstood

Postby Gord » Sat Aug 06, 2016 2:00 am

jquinn914 wrote:Argument against Free Will All credit to /u/Fibonacci35813 for his well articulated philosophical arguments

P1: The behavior of all matter is determined by antecedent condition together with the natural laws and cause and effect.
P2: Humans (and subsequently their brains and body) are made up of matter.
P3: Thoughts and behavior are the function of the brain and the body.
C: Thoughts and behavior are the function of antecedent condition together with the natural laws and cause and effect.

Now, one might question the first premise and argue that some matter is probabilistic or perhaps even random. Ok, so here is an additional premise: P1b - If matter is not determined by antecedent condition together with the natural laws and cause and effect, then it is determined by probablisitc determinism and/or randomness. But then you get the conclusion: Cb: Thoughts and behavior are the function of randomness or probabilistic determinism.

I pretty much agree with that. But I'm not a philosopher, so I have to use my imagination to guess what it all means. :mrgreen:
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE

User avatar
gorgeous
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4129
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2015 2:25 pm

Re: Free Will: Too Commonly Misunderstood

Postby gorgeous » Sat Aug 06, 2016 2:43 am

where is the mind? -------------“Concerning matter, we have been all wrong. What we have called matter is energy, whose vibration has been so lowered as to be perceptible to the senses. There is no matter.”
― Albert Einstein -
Science Fundamentalism...is exactly what happens when there’s a significant, perceived ideological threat to one’s traditions and identity.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
True Skeptic
Posts: 10209
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Free Will: Too Commonly Misunderstood

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sat Aug 06, 2016 3:03 am

I didn't/couldn't read it all....so boring. JUST LOOK.....at your own daily activities. Free will....or predetermined?

Silly Hoomans.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
scrmbldggs
Has No Life
Posts: 19636
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 7:55 am
Custom Title: something
Location: sees Maria Frigoris from its house!

Re: Free Will: Too Commonly Misunderstood

Postby scrmbldggs » Sat Aug 06, 2016 3:12 am

gorgeous wrote:where is the mind?

You've been searching in vain for quite some time now, haven't you?
Hi, Io the lurker.

User avatar
Gord
Real Skeptic
Posts: 29090
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: Silent Ork
Location: Transcona

Re: Free Will: Too Commonly Misunderstood

Postby Gord » Sat Aug 06, 2016 3:39 am

gorgeous wrote:where is the mind?

We've already explained that to you.

“Concerning matter, we have been all wrong. What we have called matter is energy, whose vibration has been so lowered as to be perceptible to the senses. There is no matter.”
― Albert Einstein -

Einstein never said that.
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE

jquinn914
New Member
Posts: 6
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 11:33 pm

Re: Free Will: Too Commonly Misunderstood

Postby jquinn914 » Sat Aug 06, 2016 3:55 am

He did. But gorgeous clearly doesn't even understand what he meant. I'm almost tempted to ask him to explain it rather than do it myself but I'll be civil. He was saying matter is really condensed energy..... which is entirely irrelevant to everything I've said. Not travelling near light speed, check, not of planetary mass, check. Okay. We're good, Newton's laws still apply here.

Anyway, it seems I might be in the wrong place for this.

User avatar
gorgeous
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4129
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2015 2:25 pm

Re: Free Will: Too Commonly Misunderstood

Postby gorgeous » Sat Aug 06, 2016 11:50 am

condescending skeptic...what a shock....so everything IS energy....and where is the mind?
Science Fundamentalism...is exactly what happens when there’s a significant, perceived ideological threat to one’s traditions and identity.

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 8K Posts
Posts: 8119
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Regular sleeper
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: Free Will: Too Commonly Misunderstood

Postby Poodle » Sat Aug 06, 2016 4:12 pm

jquinn914 wrote:... Anyway, it seems I might be in the wrong place for this.


Not necessarily - you were just unlucky enough to hit one of gorgeous's bursts of mental diarrhoeah. There are a number of people on here who could discuss the matter with you - and will, if you give 'em time. But stay long enough to be able to distinguish the genuines from the utter fools (and we seem to have more than our fair share of those at the moment).

Welcome to the forum, by the way.

User avatar
Gawdzilla Sama
Has No Life
Posts: 19459
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2008 2:11 am
Custom Title: Deadly but evil.

Re: Free Will: Too Commonly Misunderstood

Postby Gawdzilla Sama » Sat Aug 06, 2016 4:56 pm

If there's free will there must be free won't.
Chachacha wrote:"Oh, thweet mythtery of wife, at waft I've found you!"

WWII Resources. Primary sources.
The Myths of Pearl Harbor. Demythologizing the attack.
Hyperwar. Hypertext history of the Second World War.
The greatest place to work in the entire United States.

User avatar
OlegTheBatty
True Skeptic
Posts: 10407
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 2:35 pm
Custom Title: Uppity Atheist

Re: Free Will: Too Commonly Misunderstood

Postby OlegTheBatty » Sat Aug 06, 2016 5:54 pm

Schrodinger's cat took a look at premise 1 and said "maybe yes, maybe no."
. . . with the satisfied air of a man who thinks he has an idea of his own because he has commented on the idea of another . . . - Alexandre Dumas 'The Count of Monte Cristo"

There is no statement so absurd that it has not been uttered by some philosopher. - Cicero

User avatar
Gawdzilla Sama
Has No Life
Posts: 19459
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2008 2:11 am
Custom Title: Deadly but evil.

Re: Free Will: Too Commonly Misunderstood

Postby Gawdzilla Sama » Sat Aug 06, 2016 6:19 pm

I honestly don't know why this is a debatable subject.
Chachacha wrote:"Oh, thweet mythtery of wife, at waft I've found you!"

WWII Resources. Primary sources.
The Myths of Pearl Harbor. Demythologizing the attack.
Hyperwar. Hypertext history of the Second World War.
The greatest place to work in the entire United States.

jquinn914
New Member
Posts: 6
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 11:33 pm

Re: Free Will: Too Commonly Misunderstood

Postby jquinn914 » Sat Aug 06, 2016 11:24 pm

Gawdzilla Sama wrote:I honestly don't know why this is a debatable subject.


There's 2 major reasons.
1) Our intuition is not scientific. Evolutionarily, our brains are naturally fit for survival, not discovering the truths of our reality. An everyday person trusts their gut extincts over what sounds counterintuitive.
2) The way our belief systems work, older beliefs are harder to discard than newer ones and therefore recently learning something which conflicts with a longstanding belief often leads to compromising with a logical loophole or outright denying the new information. Conflicting beliefs also don't necessarily come in contact with one another. For example, I'm sure gorgeous learned newtonian physics at some point in his/her late teens and probably picked up on how every effect has a cause in everyday experiences, but that doesn't mean those ideas ever came into contact with gorgeous' belief system surrounding human behavior.

In response to gorgeous "what about the mind"
By mind I suppose you're referring to the stream of consciousness, or the awareness and critique of one's self and their surroundings. Well much like biology stems from chemistry, the mind stems from biology (more specifically neurology). Take any piece of the mind, say memories of events, and there's an appropriate part or parts of the brain that is responsible. Let's say you're remembering a night out yesterday, your hippocampus is retrieving the 'story' of last night and signalling to your occipital lobe to play the 'video' of the 'story' and each communicates with the limbic system, primarily the amygdala, to retrieve the emotional content of the 'story'. If you isolate this process, you could say it was initiated by the prefrontal cortex and believe me there's a lot more neurological processes involved than I stated or potentially even known in modern neuroscience. I It's a vastly simplified example but if there's those bits and pieces that we know the brain is responsible for is there really good reason to believe the untold remainder of this conscious process is for some reason NOT caused by the brain. It really doesn't even matter though because Core Theory tells us what can and cannot be in the world apparent to us in everyday life, and it would be a violation of natural laws if you could have "chosen otherwise". The idea isn't that Free Will is not real, it's that free will is an illusion, but an illusion that generally makes sense to refer to in everyday life. As cosmologist Sean Caroll would say, "It's as real as baseball".

Why does it matter?
This is a question with a complicated and extensive answer, but I can give you one example used by neuroscientist Sam Harris: When a bear attacks you and you escape, injured, but alive, you don't develop a strong hatred and sense of vengeance for that bear. You don't spend the next 8 years thinking about what you would do if you found that stupid bear, obsessing to the point of impeding one's life. When a psychopath attacks you and you escape, injured, but alive, there's a good chance that the psychopath will become an unhealthy obession through hatred and a primitive need for redemption simply because you thought "he could have chose otherwise". The legal system works through deterrence, what happens after a crime is irrelevant. Sure removing a dangerous person from society serves the greater good but it's because he can't cause any more harm not because "he got what he deserved". This sort of thinking echoes through all social faucets of our life. We spend an inordinate amount of time thinking about those who have harmed or inconvenienced you. Many times it leads to worsening or prolonging conflict, again because "they could have done otherwise. I hate them. I need to get even." There's no telling how vast the positive effect a universal understanding of this could reverberate through the world.
Last edited by jquinn914 on Sat Aug 06, 2016 11:43 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Gawdzilla Sama
Has No Life
Posts: 19459
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2008 2:11 am
Custom Title: Deadly but evil.

Re: Free Will: Too Commonly Misunderstood

Postby Gawdzilla Sama » Sat Aug 06, 2016 11:37 pm

Not sure that matters, but enjoy.
Chachacha wrote:"Oh, thweet mythtery of wife, at waft I've found you!"

WWII Resources. Primary sources.
The Myths of Pearl Harbor. Demythologizing the attack.
Hyperwar. Hypertext history of the Second World War.
The greatest place to work in the entire United States.

User avatar
gorgeous
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4129
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2015 2:25 pm

Re: Free Will: Too Commonly Misunderstood

Postby gorgeous » Sat Aug 06, 2016 11:48 pm

jquinn....intuition---in --inner tuit to teach...intuition is the inner teacher....remote viewing uses intuition to see events in the past, present ,and future...they have done controlled blind viewings where a few people saw the same details and events though they viewed it months apart....---it is one new science that can be duplicated and anyone can be trained to remote view........people are fully conscious when having a near death experience or traveling out of body....the mind is not the brain...the mind is non-physical....
Science Fundamentalism...is exactly what happens when there’s a significant, perceived ideological threat to one’s traditions and identity.

jquinn914
New Member
Posts: 6
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 11:33 pm

Re: Free Will: Too Commonly Misunderstood

Postby jquinn914 » Sat Aug 06, 2016 11:49 pm

Gawdzilla Sama wrote:Not sure that matters, but enjoy.


I was just editing my last post to include that as again, it's not something intuitive. I remember in college everyone thought of me as this benevolent 'live and let live' guy while others were constantly "beefing" over this or that. My brothers had an opate problem and would occassionally steal and sell my stuff. My best friend would ask why I was more concerned with helping them than demanding penance and payment. It matters far more than I ever thought back then.

jquinn914
New Member
Posts: 6
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 11:33 pm

Re: Free Will: Too Commonly Misunderstood

Postby jquinn914 » Sat Aug 06, 2016 11:58 pm

gorgeous wrote:jquinn....intuition---in --inner tuit to teach...intuition is the inner teacher....remote viewing uses intuition to see events in the past, present ,and future...they have done controlled blind viewings where a few people saw the same details and events though they viewed it months apart....---it is one new science that can be duplicated and anyone can be trained to remote view........people are fully conscious when having a near death experience or traveling out of body....the mind is not the brain...the mind is non-physical....


You realize the founders of this very site worked hard to debunk exactly that right? You sound like someone that read Eben Alexander's "Proof of Heaven". In fact, this is exactly the kind of thinking that prompted the founders to start 'Skeptic' magazine. It also prompted Carl Sagan to write, arguably his most memorable book, 'Demon Haunted World'. Intuition is geared to tell us to run away when there's a rustling in the brush or to use a sharpened stick instead of your bare hands, it's an incredible human feat but not based around empiricism none the less. What's that saying? "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence". An experiment is an experiment, there are good ones and bad ones. Ever hear of Bayesian statistics? It's the most logical basis of belief there is and it's essentially how scientists determine probable from improbable. One of the key rules is "assign less credence to what you WANT to be true". Then there's "Adjust credence constantly to account for new evidence". Very nice stuff for forming a world view.

User avatar
gorgeous
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4129
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2015 2:25 pm

Re: Free Will: Too Commonly Misunderstood

Postby gorgeous » Sun Aug 07, 2016 12:03 am

yes , skeptics will learn about the greater reality when they get out of the small box they have locked themselves in.....read about remote viewing and learn how it is a science...
Science Fundamentalism...is exactly what happens when there’s a significant, perceived ideological threat to one’s traditions and identity.

User avatar
scrmbldggs
Has No Life
Posts: 19636
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 7:55 am
Custom Title: something
Location: sees Maria Frigoris from its house!

Re: Free Will: Too Commonly Misunderstood

Postby scrmbldggs » Sun Aug 07, 2016 12:06 am

Maybe georgie should drop the "borrowed" sig and adopt the one of this poster:
Abdul Alhazred wrote:Scientists don't know everything, therefore my favorite flavor of stoopidz is true.
Hi, Io the lurker.

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26362
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Free Will: Too Commonly Misunderstood

Postby Matthew Ellard » Sun Aug 07, 2016 12:08 am

gorgeous wrote:.intuition is the inner teacher....
As intuition is an evolved innate behaviour, we already have this "knowledge" and therefore there is nothing more to learn. Your statement, as per usual, makes no sense.

gorgeous wrote:remote viewing uses intuition to see events in the past, present ,and future...
There is no such thing as remote viewing and your "remote viewers" still can't identify anything tangible, factual or useful such as where MH707 crashed. They can't answer basic questions because there is no such thing as remote viewing

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26362
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Free Will: Too Commonly Misunderstood

Postby Matthew Ellard » Sun Aug 07, 2016 12:12 am

gorgeous wrote:yes , skeptics will learn about the greater reality when they get out of the small box they have locked themselves in.....read about remote viewing and learn how it is a science...


No. You are simply upset because science and education have left you behind, in some sort of Dark Ages religious fantasy framework that even the Game of Thrones writers laugh at. You haven't got a clue what "quantum mechanics" or any modern science is, so you make up all these bogus scientific claims. :lol:

User avatar
gorgeous
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4129
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2015 2:25 pm

Re: Free Will: Too Commonly Misunderstood

Postby gorgeous » Sun Aug 07, 2016 12:15 am

nothing more to learn?? ...how sad...
Science Fundamentalism...is exactly what happens when there’s a significant, perceived ideological threat to one’s traditions and identity.

User avatar
Gawdzilla Sama
Has No Life
Posts: 19459
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2008 2:11 am
Custom Title: Deadly but evil.

Re: Free Will: Too Commonly Misunderstood

Postby Gawdzilla Sama » Sun Aug 07, 2016 12:21 am

jquinn914 wrote:
Gawdzilla Sama wrote:Not sure that matters, but enjoy.


I was just editing my last post to include that as again, it's not something intuitive. I remember in college everyone thought of me as this benevolent 'live and let live' guy while others were constantly "beefing" over this or that. My brothers had an opate problem and would occassionally steal and sell my stuff. My best friend would ask why I was more concerned with helping them than demanding penance and payment. It matters far more than I ever thought back then.

Well, that made no sense.
Chachacha wrote:"Oh, thweet mythtery of wife, at waft I've found you!"

WWII Resources. Primary sources.
The Myths of Pearl Harbor. Demythologizing the attack.
Hyperwar. Hypertext history of the Second World War.
The greatest place to work in the entire United States.

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26362
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Free Will: Too Commonly Misunderstood

Postby Matthew Ellard » Sun Aug 07, 2016 12:24 am

gorgeous wrote:nothing more to learn?? ...how sad...
Gorgeous? How can I learn evolved innate behaviour?

Are you admitting you don't know the meaning of the word "innate"?
:lol:

User avatar
Gord
Real Skeptic
Posts: 29090
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: Silent Ork
Location: Transcona

Re: Free Will: Too Commonly Misunderstood

Postby Gord » Sun Aug 07, 2016 5:43 pm

jquinn914 wrote:He did.

Gorgeous makes a lot of claims but never backs them up. I'm trying to get him/her to provide sources to back up his/her claims.

So, if Einstein said that, where did he say it? What's the original source of the quote? I've googled for it before but never found it (but then, I didn't really dig further than the first page of google results).
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE

User avatar
Gord
Real Skeptic
Posts: 29090
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: Silent Ork
Location: Transcona

Re: Free Will: Too Commonly Misunderstood

Postby Gord » Sun Aug 07, 2016 5:50 pm

gorgeous wrote:jquinn....intuition---in --inner tuit to teach...intuition is the inner teacher....

Stop making things up.

Intuition comes from from in-, meaning "at" or "on", and tueri, meaning "to look at or watch over". It originally meant "insight, direct or immediate cognition, spiritual perception", and never meant "inner teacher".

Here, learn something: http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=intuition
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE

User avatar
gorgeous
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4129
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2015 2:25 pm

Re: Free Will: Too Commonly Misunderstood

Postby gorgeous » Sun Aug 07, 2016 7:17 pm

noun
1.
direct perception of truth, fact, etc., independent of any reasoning process; immediate apprehension.

2.
a fact, truth, etc., perceived in this way.

3.
a keen and quick insight.

4.
the quality or ability of having such direct perception or quick insight. ----------------
c : the power or faculty of attaining to direct knowledge or cognition without evident rational thought and inference

intuitional
play \-ˈish-nəl, -ˈi-shə-nəl\ adjective
Science Fundamentalism...is exactly what happens when there’s a significant, perceived ideological threat to one’s traditions and identity.

User avatar
gorgeous
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4129
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2015 2:25 pm

Re: Free Will: Too Commonly Misunderstood

Postby gorgeous » Sun Aug 07, 2016 7:18 pm

noun
1.
direct perception of truth, fact, etc., independent of any reasoning process; immediate apprehension.
------as in remote viewing
Science Fundamentalism...is exactly what happens when there’s a significant, perceived ideological threat to one’s traditions and identity.

jquinn914
New Member
Posts: 6
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 11:33 pm

Re: Free Will: Too Commonly Misunderstood

Postby jquinn914 » Sun Aug 07, 2016 9:17 pm

If there were significant evidence of remote viewing, scientists would have no issue with adjusting their ceedence in it. That's how science works. You're reasoning for the existence of remote viewing is your interpretation of one of the dictionary definitiond of it. Essentially, your reasoning for it is, "if there's a word defined as X, then X exists" to which a middle school student would counter "There's a word for unicorn, but unicorns don't exist." From there you'd likely attempt to weasel out of your logical fallcy with something to the effect of "but intuition exists, you've made that much clear." I'd then step in alongside the youngster and allude to an alternate definition of a word like ascension, which in the context of reality can be described as the act of moving towards a higher altitude, but can also describe a spirit going to heaven or transformation to a higher state of being which have no objective context in reality.

User avatar
gorgeous
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4129
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2015 2:25 pm

Re: Free Will: Too Commonly Misunderstood

Postby gorgeous » Sun Aug 07, 2016 9:20 pm

remote viewed events have been verified by others..
Science Fundamentalism...is exactly what happens when there’s a significant, perceived ideological threat to one’s traditions and identity.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
True Skeptic
Posts: 10209
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Free Will: Too Commonly Misunderstood

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sun Aug 07, 2016 9:38 pm

gorgeous wrote:remote viewed events have been verified by others..

None that I have ever seen. Got a link?
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
gorgeous
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4129
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2015 2:25 pm

Re: Free Will: Too Commonly Misunderstood

Postby gorgeous » Sun Aug 07, 2016 9:58 pm

have you watched many remote viewing videos or read books on it? both saw missile hit the pentagon...https://youtu.be/Uhvh2A9B-KA
Science Fundamentalism...is exactly what happens when there’s a significant, perceived ideological threat to one’s traditions and identity.

User avatar
Gawdzilla Sama
Has No Life
Posts: 19459
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2008 2:11 am
Custom Title: Deadly but evil.

Re: Free Will: Too Commonly Misunderstood

Postby Gawdzilla Sama » Sun Aug 07, 2016 9:58 pm

Both are full of {!#%@}.
Chachacha wrote:"Oh, thweet mythtery of wife, at waft I've found you!"

WWII Resources. Primary sources.
The Myths of Pearl Harbor. Demythologizing the attack.
Hyperwar. Hypertext history of the Second World War.
The greatest place to work in the entire United States.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
True Skeptic
Posts: 10209
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Free Will: Too Commonly Misunderstood

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sun Aug 07, 2016 10:46 pm

gorgeous: really? People drawing on a marker board is your evidence for remote viewing?

I don't have the words to register the abysmal ignornance of such a stance.

Truly stunning in its stupidity.

You do realize people can and do draw pictures of........................... everything?

{!#%@} Me thats stupid.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
gorgeous
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4129
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2015 2:25 pm

Re: Free Will: Too Commonly Misunderstood

Postby gorgeous » Sun Aug 07, 2016 11:17 pm

missed the point ...
Science Fundamentalism...is exactly what happens when there’s a significant, perceived ideological threat to one’s traditions and identity.

User avatar
scrmbldggs
Has No Life
Posts: 19636
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 7:55 am
Custom Title: something
Location: sees Maria Frigoris from its house!

Re: Free Will: Too Commonly Misunderstood

Postby scrmbldggs » Sun Aug 07, 2016 11:37 pm

gorgeous wrote:missed the point ...


Good of you to confess, but, yeah, georgie, we know you're very good at that.
Hi, Io the lurker.

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26362
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Free Will: Too Commonly Misunderstood

Postby Matthew Ellard » Sun Aug 07, 2016 11:59 pm

gorgeous wrote:missed the point ...


The point is "Remote Viewing" is another complete failure from the woo team.

No "remote viewer" has ever identified
1) The location of a bigfoot,
2) The leader of the illuminati
3) The aircraft that launched the missiles at the WTC
4) Where an alien UFO is currently hidden on earth,


However, you will keep spamming "remote viewing" you-tube videos, as that is your duty to spread Rense Organisation right wing propaganda.

http://www.rense.com/general96/jfkassassin.html

User avatar
Gord
Real Skeptic
Posts: 29090
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: Silent Ork
Location: Transcona

Re: Free Will: Too Commonly Misunderstood

Postby Gord » Mon Aug 08, 2016 12:26 am

Gord wrote:
gorgeous wrote:jquinn....intuition---in --inner tuit to teach...intuition is the inner teacher....

Stop making things up.

Intuition comes from from in-, meaning "at" or "on", and tueri, meaning "to look at or watch over". It originally meant "insight, direct or immediate cognition, spiritual perception", and never meant "inner teacher".

Here, learn something: http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=intuition

gorgeous wrote:noun
1.
direct perception of truth, fact, etc., independent of any reasoning process; immediate apprehension.

2.
a fact, truth, etc., perceived in this way.

3.
a keen and quick insight.

4.
the quality or ability of having such direct perception or quick insight. ----------------
c : the power or faculty of attaining to direct knowledge or cognition without evident rational thought and inference

intuitional
play \-ˈish-nəl, -ˈi-shə-nəl\ adjective

gorgeous wrote:noun
1.
direct perception of truth, fact, etc., independent of any reasoning process; immediate apprehension....

Exactly. Just like I said: It never meant "inner teacher". You're welcome. I hope you've learnt something, but somehow I doubt it.
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE

User avatar
sandisk
Poster
Posts: 162
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2015 1:20 am

Re: Free Will: Too Commonly Misunderstood

Postby sandisk » Sat Aug 13, 2016 5:09 am

Is Gorgeous suggesting that the individual mind is an illusion or something like that?
Does anyone agree with me that Gorgeous is a frustrated puppy?

User avatar
Gord
Real Skeptic
Posts: 29090
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: Silent Ork
Location: Transcona

Re: Free Will: Too Commonly Misunderstood

Postby Gord » Sun Aug 14, 2016 4:31 am

gorgeous is suggesting the mind is a free-floating ghost that comes and goes from the body entirely at will, that haunts the living after the body passes, and that goes to Trump "University".
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE


Return to “Skepticism and Critical Thinking”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests