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?
Not a change at all. All of my chapters and the things I said around them focus on free will being natural, and not supernatural.
If you think this is a change, you've not read my explanations carefully.
Go back and review, so you can catch up on what you missed.
My theory can be a little bit rambling, because I am developing the ideas as I write, sometimes. The next effort will be more elegant, hopefully.
The name I gave to the kind of Free Will (FW) that I am proposing is "Minimalistic Free Will" or minFW for short. It is different from what people commonly think about when FW is the topic.
The first thing for you to know is that, at the moment, my research is addressed primarily to laboratory scientists who work with brain cells. I want to inspire them to look for the kind of mechanism I am theoretically proposing.
So, this is NOT addressed to believers, yet, but the results are simple and can be used for getting better results.
Oddly, the Bible seems to have very little to say about FW. It documents decisions a lot, but not about how free each decision was. I did get 3 tips from VPW, though, that I mentioned last week.
These 3 tips are:
1 - FW is NOT supernatural or spiritual. It is a biological function that even natural men have, and need to believe Romans 10:9
2 – You cannot control the thoughts that hit your mind, but you can control whether or not they can lodge there.
3 – Loss of muscular control is not good. We use our FW to move our muscles, lips, and throat, as we were taught how to SIT.
So, this approach I am taking is to explain things for the simple, animal, biological, brute beast WITHOUT spirit, and how they can make free will decisions.
I am thinking of simple, mundane, boring decisions….and not crucial life decisions.
The way science works is to start with the most simple situation, so this analysis completely omits any spiritual abilities and augmentations we enjoy, having spirit.
It’s starting at the beginning with simple animal decisions.
*/*/*/*
Here is a short summary of where I am going with all this:
Minimalistic Free Will is the ability to self-sculpt one's own will, desires, and activities to match another's will.
This sculpting process is difficult and requires persistent efforts.
This process is really just complicated, self-directed learning.
*/*/*/*
My position is that FW was poorly defined around the 1200s by theologians like Thomas Aquinas, and then secularized by the Enlightenment Philosophers around 400 years ago.
This terrible definition has saturated Western thinking, and complicated it immeasurably.
We humans do NOT have free will, as it has been classically defined.
We can, however, learn and progress in the area of making better decisions.
More explicitly, I believe that we have no Libertarian Free Will. Our biology only supports a weak, delayed form of Minimalistic Free Will, that I am seeing more and more as a complicated configuration of self-directed learning.
This minimalistic FW is sufficient to get the job done.
So_crates, this is from page 1 of this thread. I colored the pertinent lines in red.
Not a change at all. All of my chapters and the things I said around them focus on free will being natural, and not supernatural.
If you think this is a change, you've not read my explanations carefully.
Go back and review, so you can catch up on what you missed.
1 minute ago, Mike said:
So_crates, this is from page 1 of this thread. I colored the pertinent lines in red.
Signs Someone Is Trolling
It can sometimes become difficult to tell the difference between a troll and someone who just genuinely wants to argue about a topic. However, here are a few tell-tale signs that someone is actively trolling.
Off-topic remarks: Completely going off-topic from the subject at hand. This is done to annoy and disrupt other posters.
Refusal to acknowledge evidence: Even when presented with hard, cold facts, they ignore this and pretend like they never saw it.
Dismissive, condescending tone: An early indicator of a troll was that they would ask an angry responder, “Why you mad, bro?” This is a method done to provoke someone even more, as a way of dismissing their argument altogether.
Use of unrelated images or memes: They reply to others with memes, images, and gifs. This is especially true if done in response to a very long text post.
Seeming obliviousness: They seem oblivious that most people are in disagreement with them. Also, trolls rarely get mad or provoked.
The list above is by no means definitive. There are a lot of other ways to identify that someone is trolling. Generally, if someone seems disingenuous, uninterested in a real discussion, and provocative on purpose, they’re likely an internet troll.
Did you see my quote from page 1, pasted in immediately above? It did not have a tag for you.
1 minute ago, Mike said:
What am I dodging?
Signs Someone Is Trolling
It can sometimes become difficult to tell the difference between a troll and someone who just genuinely wants to argue about a topic. However, here are a few tell-tale signs that someone is actively trolling.
Off-topic remarks: Completely going off-topic from the subject at hand. This is done to annoy and disrupt other posters.
Refusal to acknowledge evidence: Even when presented with hard, cold facts, they ignore this and pretend like they never saw it.
Dismissive, condescending tone: An early indicator of a troll was that they would ask an angry responder, “Why you mad, bro?” This is a method done to provoke someone even more, as a way of dismissing their argument altogether.
Use of unrelated images or memes: They reply to others with memes, images, and gifs. This is especially true if done in response to a very long text post.
Seeming obliviousness: They seem oblivious that most people are in disagreement with them. Also, trolls rarely get mad or provoked.
The list above is by no means definitive. There are a lot of other ways to identify that someone is trolling. Generally, if someone seems disingenuous, uninterested in a real discussion, and provocative on purpose, they’re likely an internet troll.
Why should I answer your question when your trying to change the subject to avoid considering mine?
Cause he's a pseudo-intellectual who is here to teach us all about pflap and is using unrelated topics (that he clearly doesnt understand) to try and tie it all together.
You apparently feel uncomfortable with something I stated, as you felt I needed to be comfortable. Project much?
Yeah, I am uncomfortable with you saying that I am dodging, when I have been putting a lot of effort to answer every detail of questions you pose to me.
So, what am I dodging? If you can't remember, I would understand. I sometimes lose details or even entire posts in these posting flurries.
I will drop the matter, unless you come back with a specific dodge.
Meanwhile, does the question of free will being natural versus supernatural intrigue you in any way? It really is the central issue in this topic.
Yeah, I am uncomfortable with you saying that I am dodging,
You're apparently uncomfortable with something else. Note the projection in the following post:
2 hours ago, Mike said:
It's called softballs, not padding. I was making it comfortable to deal with the hidden crescendo: that free will is either natural or super-natural. Have you decided which you believe it is. I am putting my money on natural. Place your bet.
Now, once again, why would I be uncomfortable with a captain Obvious statement. That's you projecting.
2 minutes ago, Mike said:
when I have been putting a lot of effort to answer every detail of questions you pose to me.
Not so. You're certainly trying to dodge this one.
2 minutes ago, Mike said:
So, what am I dodging? If you can't remember, I would understand. I sometimes lose details or even entire posts in these posting flurries.
I will drop the matter, unless you come back with a specific dodge.
Meanwhile, does the question of free will being natural versus supernatural intrigue you in any way? It really is the central issue in this topic.
In addition, I wish to assert that surprisingly free choices can be made, if the right tricky manipulations are made on these same deterministic factors.
In other words, there are ways that determinism can be turned on itself, and the result can be viewed as a “weak” form of free will. However, some long-standing intuitions on how freedom works will be challenged by this new form of Minimalistic Free Will, so prepare for a bumpy ride.
To keep them clearly separate, I’ll call this new and deliberately weakened form “minFW” to distinguish it from classical Libertarian Free Will, or “LibFW.”
in other words, you are saying there is an external force OUTSIDE determinism that can turn it on itself.
Where is your thinking?
Do you think free will is natural, and explainable by science, or at least parts of it?
Or do you think free will is supernatural, spiritual, and inherently un-explainable in science?
in other words, you are saying there is an external force OUTSIDE determinism that can turn it on itself.
No. I explained this in my chapter 6, which was not posted in total, and spread out a little big. Two big chunks can be found on Page17, at the 45 % mark, and page 15, at 70%.
It is one PATTERN of determinism that can be replace or overpower another PATTERN of determinism.
For a simple lever, the pattern of determinism that is unacceptable is the heaviness of a rock that is too much for our muscles to budge. The pattern of determinism that we find acceptable is moving the long lever arm a long distance, in order to get the rock to move a short distance.
I am glad to see that you are reading the early chapters of my theory. Thank you. That was a good question. I will remember to be more clear when re-writing that section, that it is not anything OUTSIDE determinism, but within.
Where is your thinking?
Do you think free will is natural, and explainable by science, or at least parts of it?
Or do you think free will is supernatural, spiritual, and inherently un-explainable in science?
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
330
267
271
186
Popular Days
Nov 12
118
Nov 13
107
Nov 20
105
Nov 9
104
Top Posters In This Topic
Mike 330 posts
T-Bone 267 posts
OldSkool 271 posts
Nathan_Jr 186 posts
Popular Days
Nov 12 2022
118 posts
Nov 13 2022
107 posts
Nov 20 2022
105 posts
Nov 9 2022
104 posts
Popular Posts
OldSkool
I do want to address this Mike. You constantly come at me like I have forgotten, or have been talked out of the truth of wierwille, or that I just don't understand where you are coming from. Personall
waysider
This right here. If you're unable to define and regulate your control factors and variables, your research is worthless. The best you could hope for would be an observational analysis of your collecte
Charity
I agree with So_Crates when he said "Here's a wild idea: why don't YOU become meek and I'll tell you about all the fruit in my life since I stopped making PLAF the center of my life." There have
Posted Images
Mike
Not a change at all. All of my chapters and the things I said around them focus on free will being natural, and not supernatural.
If you think this is a change, you've not read my explanations carefully.
Go back and review, so you can catch up on what you missed.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
So_crates, this is from page 1 of this thread. I colored the pertinent lines in red.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
Signs Someone Is Trolling
It can sometimes become difficult to tell the difference between a troll and someone who just genuinely wants to argue about a topic. However, here are a few tell-tale signs that someone is actively trolling.
The list above is by no means definitive. There are a lot of other ways to identify that someone is trolling. Generally, if someone seems disingenuous, uninterested in a real discussion, and provocative on purpose, they’re likely an internet troll.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
So_crates
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.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
So_crates
Yah, dodge some more, that'll win me over.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Did you see my quote from page 1, pasted in immediately above? It did not have a tag for you.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
What am I dodging?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
Signs Someone Is Trolling
It can sometimes become difficult to tell the difference between a troll and someone who just genuinely wants to argue about a topic. However, here are a few tell-tale signs that someone is actively trolling.
The list above is by no means definitive. There are a lot of other ways to identify that someone is trolling. Generally, if someone seems disingenuous, uninterested in a real discussion, and provocative on purpose, they’re likely an internet troll.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Why are YOU dodging my simple question?
Edited by MikeWhich do you favor? Free will is spiritual or free will is natural?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
So_crates
I'm not dodging, you are.
Why should I answer your question when your trying to change the subject to avoid considering mine?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
I have lost track of what you think I am dodging on. That is why I asked you.
So, I ask again. What am I dodging? I think something just got lost in the shuffle.
I will try my best to answer you, and not dodge.
Meanwhile please think on free will being either natural or supernatural.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
Cause he's a pseudo-intellectual who is here to teach us all about pflap and is using unrelated topics (that he clearly doesnt understand) to try and tie it all together.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
So_crates
You apparently feel uncomfortable with something I stated, as you felt I needed to be comfortable. Project much?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Yeah, I am uncomfortable with you saying that I am dodging, when I have been putting a lot of effort to answer every detail of questions you pose to me.
So, what am I dodging? If you can't remember, I would understand. I sometimes lose details or even entire posts in these posting flurries.
I will drop the matter, unless you come back with a specific dodge.
Meanwhile, does the question of free will being natural versus supernatural intrigue you in any way? It really is the central issue in this topic.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
So_crates
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.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
I am comfortable with free will being natural and not supernatural.
That brings us back on topic: determinism versus the illusion of free will.
I say that we DO have some form of free will (not classical, and not an illusion) that is totally natural and biological.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
in other words, you are saying there is an external force OUTSIDE determinism that can turn it on itself.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Where is your thinking?
Do you think free will is natural, and explainable by science, or at least parts of it?
Or do you think free will is supernatural, spiritual, and inherently un-explainable in science?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
So_crates
So you continue dodging.
Your subject dropped.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
No. I explained this in my chapter 6, which was not posted in total, and spread out a little big. Two big chunks can be found on Page17, at the 45 % mark, and page 15, at 70%.
Edited by MikeIt is one PATTERN of determinism that can be replace or overpower another PATTERN of determinism.
For a simple lever, the pattern of determinism that is unacceptable is the heaviness of a rock that is too much for our muscles to budge. The pattern of determinism that we find acceptable is moving the long lever arm a long distance, in order to get the rock to move a short distance.
I am glad to see that you are reading the early chapters of my theory. Thank you. That was a good question. I will remember to be more clear when re-writing that section, that it is not anything OUTSIDE determinism, but within.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
I STILL have no idea what you mean by be dodging. Please explain.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
Nah, quit messing around and answer So_crates.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Where do you stand on the issue currently at hand?
Do you think free will is real or an illusion? I think it is real.
Do you think free will is supernatural, spiritual, and can never be explained by science?
Or do you think free will is natural, and science (if it is smart enough) can explain it, or at least parts of it?
I think it is natural and explainable by science someday.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.