So_crates
-
Posts
2,271 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
23
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Calendar
Gallery
Everything posted by So_crates
-
If everything is determined, that is all outcomes already decided, and we have no free will, the why SIT or pray? If we go according to determinism, it's not like we're going to change anything.
- 1,462 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- dark persuasion
- delusion
- (and 10 more)
-
And if you've described them recently, why are you wasting bandwidth repeating them And for thousands of years there wasn't scientific method? All you still have is words. I didn't notice any numbers or scientific measurements in your theory. I also haven't heard any numbers orb scientific measurements when you've explained your theory. So all you have is words. So they have nothing but philosophy and a few half baked theories, also. I'll wait for the movie. You're contradicting yourself again. In the third quote you claim modern neuroscience hasn't done this yet, this referring back to scientific measurements and numbers. Then you say Churchland was updating with brain data. Yah, and still all you have is words. Denial is more than a river in Egypt. Just look at the length of this rambling post.
- 1,462 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- dark persuasion
- delusion
- (and 10 more)
-
Also: how to receive it and have your needs and wants parallel.
-
Don't think so. Considering the first post in this branch of discussion was on nominalizations, to which you responded with a long post full of tautologies, which you said was necessary to make people comfortable, I would hazard a guess that your discomfort goes back to dealing with nominalizations. Considering you bragged about all the time you spent researching the free will vs. determinism debate, could it be that your discomfort comes in realizing this whole debate may be nothing more than a way of talking? A lot of chin music that narrows to nothing more than a dog chasing its tail?
-
Still handing me bull. The fact that you're trying to get away from it, tells me something is there. Remember what I said about the size of the post, being off point, and the attempt to snow? What is causing discomfort in you now?
-
You haven't answered my question about what makes you so uncomfortable that you'd project it onto me.
-
Finally, the last horse crosses the finish line. Or does it? But also to me. Once again why would I be uncomfortable about an obvious statement? If you can't dazzle them with brilliance baffle them with bull. The above quite is Grade A bull. Yah,sure,that's why you failed to mention them again, right? This is your I mentioned them before trick. Sorry, not buying it. So your saying God lied to us? To be honest I couldn't care less one way or the other. God says he gave us free will. You believe it or you don't. Makes little difference to me. No, you claim we've come full circle. You still haven't explained to me what you're so uncomfortable about that you have to project it onto me. Again, you claim I have my answer. I don't. What you gave me was a lot of bull. Yes you were. Call it what you want. There are two people in this conversation, if it didn't come from me, where did it come from? No, your guess was an attempt to not only bull me, but an attempt to bull yourself.
-
I'm beginning to think he is a troll. An example of what PLAF can do for you.
-
You apparently didn't look very hard.
-
Why is it everyone gets it but you?
-
You have your explanation in the next to the last post I made, you're either continuing to dodge or too dense to see it.
-
So you continue dodging. Your subject dropped.
-
You're apparently uncomfortable with something else. Note the projection in the following post: Now, once again, why would I be uncomfortable with a captain Obvious statement. That's you projecting. Not so. You're certainly trying to dodge this one. And I will drop this matter if you keep dodging.
-
You apparently feel uncomfortable with something I stated, as you felt I needed to be comfortable. Project much?
-
I'm not dodging, you are. Why should I answer your question when your trying to change the subject to avoid considering mine?
-
Yah, dodge some more, that'll win me over.
-
So you choose to continue being dishonest. Then you wonder why most people here don't respond to you. The subject is your "softball"post which you don't seem to have the ability to address.
-
Now you're trying to change the subject. What's up? You can't address the facts? You don't want to face the fact that you tried to bull yourself out of an uncomfortable, for you, situation?
-
Bull! You're trying to obscure the fact you have no idea what you're talking about. One of the tell tail signs is when people start telling you what you already know. And why would I feel uncomfortable with that tautology? So why would I need you to make it comfortable for me if I feel no discomfort?
-
Never said they didn't exist and weren't real. A tautology. And your point is? Yawn! Waitress can I get a table closer to the point? Welcome to Mike's tautology festival. Get to the point, Charles Dickens. You're not being paid by the word. So far, with this post, the only time you're wasting is the reader's. And once it's discovered then what? Cue the drum roll. And that deterministic free will mechanism is... You apparently haven't seen all of them. You might say this post is like life: it has a beginning, an end, and a lot of padding in between.
-
I think a major problem in the whole free will vs. determinism debate is the failure to understand that we're dealing with nominalizations. Nominalizations are verbs that are disguised as nouns. Saint Vic addressed this in the class when he talked on not being able to warm love in a test tube and having a test tube of hot love. Love doesn't exist, but being loving does. Terry Pratchett mentions this in one of novels when he suggests: "Grind the universe to a fine powder, then sift it through the finest screen, and show me one molecule of duty, one atom of mercy." Duty doesn't exist but being dutiful does Mercy doesn't exist, but being merciful does. Put simply, you're thinking you're dealing with things, determinism and free will, when you're actually dealing with processes. There is no determinism, only a regulation process. There is no free will, only a process of choice. There are no subdivisions of choice any more than there are subdivisions of gravity or electricity. Choice is choice and free will is free will, just as soup is soup and apple butter is apple butter. @Mike
-
You mean to tell me it ran contrary to the determinism you claim the universe has in every other instance? Except with that Facebook group you've refered to. But then they're spiritual too, right? Okay, I'll rephrase that. What in the universe changed so John the Baptist could get spirit within him? So once again we'll cheat by changing definitions. So how does natural free will become free will? But animals never become spiritual, men do. The why didn't Even get it by believing and wanting it. I have got a man from the lord, she said. And you'd be wrong. How'd God communicate with Noah? Moses? Adam after the fall? Really?! And where was Joseph's spirit? Mary's? Moses'? Pretty hard for a sophisticated robot with or without spirit. Yah, let's add a modifier that solves the dilemma. Extraneous information. And just were is that in the bible? You don't have to tell me the astonishingly obvious the merely obvious is more than enough. More of the astonishingly obvious. Or maybe he's trying to hide that he doesn't know what he's talking about. I'm waiting to see how fast this dog is going to chase its tail. And I'll bet many in the audience were yawning and wishing he get to the point. Yah on one hand God wants deep heartfelt conversations and on the other hand he wants sophisticated robots.
-
Thank you. I apologize for misunderstanding.
- 1,462 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- dark persuasion
- delusion
- (and 10 more)
-
Sorry the editor part of the software didn't take me to the next page, like it usually does and I thought it didn't render. All I can do is request the mod on duty delete the duplicates.
-
I know OS that they're obvious statements. But then, if you were like me, when you were little you always checked under your bed for monsters. You obviously knew that you just looking at the monster wouldn't stop it from hurting you. Your real motivation was you wanted it to know you knew it was there.
