Free will versus determinism

[peacegirl]

Please try to remember what you say, it's hard to take people seriously who don't. In your response to Talloola in post #267 you said she made you feel ill.

No Dexter, you are still trying to put words in my mouth. I said: "With all due respect talloola, you have no idea what you are talking about. People will not continue when they can't find justification to continue. Of course, you don't have an inkling of what I am talking about, yet you come off like some kind of expert. It literally makes me feel ill inside."

Her comment did make me feel quite nauseous, but I never said people are making me ill. You are trying to defend your position, and I am asking you to please let it go, or you might get caught making another false accusation.

 

[JLM]

No Dexter, you are still trying to put words in my mouth. I said: "With all due respect talloola, you have no idea what you are talking about. People will not continue when they can't find justification to continue. Of course, you don't have an inkling of what I am talking about, yet you come off like some kind of expert. It literally makes me feel ill inside."

Her comment did make me feel quite nauseous, but I never said people are making me ill. You are trying to defend your position, and I am asking you to please let it go, or you might get caught making another false accusation.

Come on, Talloola is "people"- you've now dug enough dirt out of the hole to bury yourself.

 

[karrie]

So, to those of our forum who are engaged in this thread, it sparked an idea in my mind last night, and I figured I'd pose the question to you all.

We're all aware of assorted Utopian ideals, if you were given the chance, what is the change you'd like to see the human undergo to bring about your Utopia?

 

[JLM]

So, to those of our forum who are engaged in this thread, it sparked an idea in my mind last night, and I figured I'd pose the question to you all.

We're all aware of assorted Utopian ideals, if you were given the chance, what is the change you'd like to see the human undergo to bring about your Utopia?

Easiest question, Karrie...............eliminate greed. :smile:

 

[L Gilbert]

So, to those of our forum who are engaged in this thread, it sparked an idea in my mind last night, and I figured I'd pose the question to you all.

We're all aware of assorted Utopian ideals, if you were given the chance, what is the change you'd like to see the human undergo to bring about your Utopia?

Rehumanization for all that have lost it or never found it to begin with.

 

[karrie]

Easiest question, Karrie...............eliminate greed. :smile:

Oh, that would be a big one. Greed is one of the most hardwired attributes of the human animal. It's been so responsible for our success as a species that I don't know if we could simply let it go. It's in man's nature to hoard for his family.

For me, hyper stimulating our sense of empathy would be ideal.

 

[Curiosity]

PeaceGirl

I am curious as to why you selected your username as you inflict utter chaos rather than peace. You sign on to a forum with people eager to share and learn and for some - to spend a few hours in enjoyment with friends of long standing - a good community of people who have a collective of brains, humor, interests, kindness and thought.

They deserve far more than your unsharing attitude while swamping page after page of Andem's forum with what I have become to believe is nothing more than personal swill.

You dare to demean that others refrain from posting their beliefs? That
is not a basis for discussion but a demand by a dictator.

Now that you are past the exchange - still arguing - never in agreement - insisting everyone agree with you and your ridiculous campaign, I suggest you give up the future space you plan to use on this exhaustive diatribe and select another more interesting topic for exchange with the good people here.

Letting go doesn't mean "you lose", it only means you have some semblance of courtesy and willingness to remain part of the group of good people who post here.

 

[peacegirl]

Well yes, when someone I do respect speaks, I tend to listen. But that doesn't mean I necessarily agree with them. Dexter for example is far more trained in science than I am, so in that respect, I always do take the time to read what he has to say and am careful to try to meet his standards of rigorous thinking when I debate him, and I haven't always succeeded in doing so. Dexter has repeatedly designated stuff as mystical nonsense or garbage that I find worthy of investigation.

But Dexter is the last person you should be depending on to disquality this knowledge given that he has not thorougly investigated this knowledge. Yes, he says he read the first two chapters but he has not one question. That is suspect. I know he will come back with a vengence, and I'm prepared.

Perhaps the fact that I went through most of the details so extensively with you is proof enough that I did take Lessans seriously enough? I wouldn't have done it if I thought it was nonsense.

But you still come off with an attitude like you were able to disquality this knowledge, when I know you didn't understand as much as you thought.

Karrie to take another example, is a mother and I'd be foolish not to take her opinion seriously in anything concerning education and childhood issues. We recently had a heated debate on how the issue of religion and ethics should or shouldn't be tackled in public schools. We disagreed significantly. I have my views but I take hers seriously because she has consistently demonstrated that what she has to say is well thought out and valuable.

I'm sure she has a lot of good things to say based on the world we live in. But I am talking about a new world, and she knows absolutely nothing in regard to this unprecedented knowledge. I also have four children. And I have three grandchildren. I would never be able to understand this knowledge based on this alone.

The point here is that we all come here with our different experiences and point of views. Sometimes they clash, sometimes they don't, but most of us manage to make it all happen under respectfulness which is one of the reasons we keep coming back here.

That's a good thing. But I have been especially picked on because of these fantastic claims. So I am a definite target for the crank patrol.

Are you honestly surprised that none of us here agree with Lessans? Considering the experience you had at other forums, can you really say that none of us agree because of gang mentality?

A lot has to do with the gang mentality. If Dexter was truthful, he would have admitted that hearsay from other forums, is not proof. If he is a true philosopher, he is going against all of the basic principles of a well thought out argument. I wish he had held off, just for a little bit, before he went searching to find some 'proof' that would justify his better than thou attitude. The veracity of any truth is contained within itself, not somewhere in cyberspace. There is a real problem when you bring in, as a defense, what other people have falsely said. It's becomes a witch hunt, nothing more.

 

[L Gilbert]

Oh, that would be a big one. Greed is one of the most hardwired attributes of the human animal. It's been so responsible for our success as a species that I don't know if we could simply let it go. It's in man's nature to hoard for his family.

Actually greed is the tendency to want an irrational amount more than one could use.

For me, hyper stimulating our sense of empathy would be ideal.

That's basically what I said.

 

[karrie]

A lot has to do with the gang mentality. If Dexter was truthful, he would have admitted that hearsay from other forums, is not proof. If he is a true philosopher, he is going against all of the basic principles of a well thought out argument. I wish he had held off, just for a little bit, before he went searching to find some 'proof' that would justify his better than thou attitude. The veracity of any truth is contained within itself, not somewhere in cyberspace. There is a real problem when you bring in, as a defense, what other people have falsely said. It's becomes a witch hunt, nothing more.

You sent us to that forum, and Googling to find the book. That's on you, not on Dexter. If you don't want people looking at what you link to, or trying to hunt down sources for the reading you want them to do, then supply information.

 

[Curiosity]

So, to those of our forum who are engaged in this thread, it sparked an idea in my mind last night, and I figured I'd pose the question to you all.

We're all aware of assorted Utopian ideals, if you were given the chance, what is the change you'd like to see the human undergo to bring about your Utopia?

Karrie

Humans are in nature flawed in varied ways - that is the purpose of our time here on earth - to learn how to adjust, accept, reject and find a better path.

If we were steeped in our perfection we would contribute nothing other than pretty trees and flowers or majestic mountains and oceans, while beneficial - remain devoid of growth or change other than what nature
demands.

I cannot conceive of a lifetime to reliving the same "role" over and over.

 

[karrie]

Actually greed is the tendency to want an irrational amount more than one could use.

That's basically what I said.

Good point...

oh well, with enough empathy one would not hoard if someone else needed it anyway, so my fix cures greed

Karrie

Humans are in nature flawed in varied ways - that is the purpose of our time here on earth - to learn how to adjust, accept, reject and find a better path.

If we were steeped in our perfection we would contribute nothing other than pretty trees and flowers or majestic mountains and oceans, while beneficial - remain devoid of growth or change other than what nature
demands.

I cannot conceive of a lifetime to reliving the same "role" over and over.

This is a good point. The 'purpose' of suffering as some might say.

 

[Dexter Sinister]

Her comment did make me feel quite nauseous.

And how is that different from making you ill? You twist and dodge almost as well as Lessans. Nice try.

Apropos of nothing in particular, at s_lone's urging I tried to read chapter four and gave up in disgust. It starts with an appallingly bad and irrelevant digression into physics. The man understands nothing of science, any bright 12-year old would recognize it as blithering nonsense.

 

[s_lone]

But Dexter is the last person you should be depending on to disquality this knowledge given that he has not thorougly investigated this knowledge. Yes, he says he read the first two chapters but he has not one question. That is suspect. I know he will come back with a vengence, and I'm prepared.

I don't see that anybody in here disqualified this knowledge according to what Dexter had to say about it. I discussed point by point everything I read from chapter 1 to 5 and explained very clearly what I agree with and what I didn't agree with.

It seems to me that because Dexter has been one of the most unapologetically critical of Lessans, you have chosen him as your scapegoat, thinking he caused the rest of us to not go along with Lessans. You're wrong. We all explained in our own different ways what we think of Lessans. At least have the decency to treat us all as individuals and not a blind bunch of sheep.

But you still come off with an attitude like you were able to disquality this knowledge, when I know you didn't understand as much as you thought.

I understand quite well what I've read so far. I also understand why our ancestors thought the Earth was flat, that doesn't mean they were right.

Read my last post you refused to read and then you can explain to me what I didn't understand.

I'm sure she has a lot of good things to say based on the world we live in. But I am talking about a new world, and she knows absolutely nothing in regard to this unprecedented knowledge. I also have four children. And I have three grandchildren. I would never be able to understand this knowledge based on this alone.

That's not what I was saying. My point was simply that we all have different experiences and that is what makes all of our opinions valuable. Having children or not is indeed irrelevant to this thread.

That's a good thing. But I have been especially picked on because of these fantastic claims. So I am a definite target for the crank patrol.

If you want my honest opinion, I think you're a target for the crank patrol because of you and Lessans attitude, not because of what you are defending.

I actually had a debate on astrology with Dexter. He would've had all the reasons in the world to call me a crank, considering his very scientific view of the world, but he didn't because I didn't present my case as if it was indeniable knowledge.

A lot has to do with the gang mentality. If Dexter was truthful, he would have admitted that hearsay from other forums, is not proof. If he is a true philosopher, he is going against all of the basic principles of a well thought out argument. I wish he had held off, just for a little bit, before he went searching to find some 'proof' that would justify his better than thou attitude. The veracity of any truth is contained within itself, not somewhere in cyberspace. There is a real problem when you bring in, as a defense, what other people have falsely said. It's becomes a witch hunt, nothing more.

I agree that truth is contained within itself but it also needs to come with evidence. We have all been unconvinced by Lessans' evidence.

 

[JLM]

Oh, that would be a big one. Greed is one of the most hardwired attributes of the human animal. It's been so responsible for our success as a species that I don't know if we could simply let it go. It's in man's nature to hoard for his family.

For me, hyper stimulating our sense of empathy would be ideal.

Yep, to be able to visualize "walking in the other person's shoes", would sure humanize us. :smile: Back to greed, I think we have to look at the definition of "success". Using the accumulation of wealth to help others is good, collecting material possessions??????????

 

[karrie]

Yep, to be able to visualize "walking in the other person's shoes", would sure humanize us. :smile: Back to greed, I think we have to look at the definition of "success". Using the accumulation of wealth to help others is good, collecting material possessions??????????

By success I meant simply breeding success. Bringing children forward into breeding age. The drive to find and hoard food and goods is part of our drive to care for our offspring. But I guess one could argue true greed has actually short circuited that drive, since our most affluent individuals often don't replace their own population.

 

[s_lone]

So, to those of our forum who are engaged in this thread, it sparked an idea in my mind last night, and I figured I'd pose the question to you all.

We're all aware of assorted Utopian ideals, if you were given the chance, what is the change you'd like to see the human undergo to bring about your Utopia?

I recently read a pretty good book called Dark Nature, A Natural History of Evil.

Amazon.com: Dark Nature: Natural History of Evil, A (9780060927905): Lyall Watson: Books

The author reflects on the nature of evil from a biological point of view.

While I can't dream of summarizing the book, the basic idea goes something like this:

What we consider ''evil'' is in our own nature, despite all our attempts at creating imaginary scapegoats (angry gods, karma). ''Evil'' is rooted in our biological past.

Evil is part of us because nature is an incredibly ruthless and violent place and we are part of nature. It truly is the law of the jungle out there and it is the fittest who survive. That is how natural selection works. If being aggressive gives you an advantage over others, you have better chances of propagating your genes. But there are also contexts in which being altruistic can become an advantage and that is the key to understand where we want to go as human beings.

As you and JLM already pointed out, it's in our very nature to aid and protect those that are close to us. Outsiders are viewed as enemies from a genetic point of view. A close look at chimpanzees, our distant cousins will confirm this.

While humans do have a ruthless and evil nature, we have evolved and altruism has also played an important role in our biological success on earth. In the same way that we are hardwired to learn spoken language, we are hardwired to develop altruistic and moral behaviour. But a child will never speak if it is raised by wolves. Similarly, it will never develop moral behaviour if it is raised by wolves.

The point here is that we need to love our children dearly. We must hold them in our arms and give them all the affection and tenderness they need. By simply showing our children to be kind, they will become kind because we have evolved into altruistic creatures despite what cynics have to say. When a child grows up in such an environment, there isn't much else he can become but a loving and altruistic person.

So my utopian wish would be for all children in this world to receive the love they need.

 

[peacegirl]

Come on, Talloola is "people"- you've now dug enough dirt out of the hole to bury yourself.

Dexter misquoted me. He is using everything he can muster to make me look bad in the eyes of everyone, and I will defend myself with every fiber.

And how is that different from making you ill? You twist and dodge almost as well as Lessans. Nice try.

Apropos of nothing in particular, at s_lone's urging I tried to read chapter four and gave up in disgust. It starts with an appallingly bad and irrelevant digression into physics. The man understands nothing of science, any bright 12-year old would recognize it as blithering nonsense.

So what was the rest of the chapter about other than your disgust with his digression into physics? Did you read it to learn anything, or did you read it to find something to be disgusted about? I think the latter, and that's exactly why you got nothing out of it.

 

[mentalfloss]

So, to those of our forum who are engaged in this thread, it sparked an idea in my mind last night, and I figured I'd pose the question to you all.

We're all aware of assorted Utopian ideals, if you were given the chance, what is the change you'd like to see the human undergo to bring about your Utopia?

I have absolutely no idea about the means for this, but as long as the consequence is the ability to sustain a healthy planet with minimal unwarranted deaths, that would be a good start I think.

 

[peacegirl]

I don't see that anybody in here disqualified this knowledge according to what Dexter had to say about it. I discussed point by point everything I read from chapter 1 to 5 and explained very clearly what I agree with and what I didn't agree with.

But you didn't s_lone, because as you went on you were completely forgetting the basic principle, which is the core of the discovery.

It seems to me that because Dexter has been one of the most unapologetically critical of Lessans, you have chosen him as your scapegoat, thinking he caused the rest of us to not go along with Lessans. You're wrong. We all explained in our own different ways what we think of Lessans. At least have the decency to treat us all as individuals and not a blind bunch of sheep.

I am not making him a scapegoat. He is flat out wrong, and I will tell him to his face. I am not saying no one thinks for themselves, but there is a tendency to take the side of the one people look up to.

I understand quite well what I've read so far. I also understand why our ancestors thought the Earth was flat, that doesn't mean they were right.

Read my last post you refused to read and then you can explain to me what I didn't understand.

I don't know what post you mean.

That's not what I was saying. My point was simply that we all have different experiences and that is what makes all of our opinions valuable. Having children or not is indeed irrelevant to this thread.

So why did you bring it up in the first place?

If you want my honest opinion, I think you're a target for the crank patrol because of you and Lessans attitude, not because of what you are defending.

I am not a Gandhi who can sit and take a lot of abuse. I'm trying to be less emotional, but it's very difficult when insults are being hurled from every direction. If my emotional reaction causes people to not want to read the book, then so be it.

I actually had a debate on astrology with Dexter. He would've had all the reasons in the world to call me a crank, considering his very scientific view of the world, but he didn't because I didn't present my case as if it was indeniable knowledge.

I knew that was the reason for his belligerence. He doesn't like that someone is making such huge claims and he will try to discredit this man if it's the last thing he does.

I agree that truth is contained within itself but it also needs to come with evidence. We have all been unconvinced by Lessans' evidence.

It's one thing to be unconvinced; it's quite another to go traipsing around the internet trying to gather false evidence. That's called slander.