When did you grow out of free will and adopt genetic determinism?

When did you grow out of free will and adopt genetic determinism?

Other urls found in this thread:

theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2016/06/theres-no-such-thing-as-free-will/480750/
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causal_loop
foxnews.com/science/2016/05/27/dna-from-ancient-phoenician-stuns-scientists.html
twitter.com/AnonBabble

I went the opposite direction OP

Relatively recently actually. It honestly explains a lot. Some of Stefan Molyneux's videos actually steered me to believe in determinism despite the fact he believes in free will

cuck

The understanding that free will is an illusion will cause one of the greatest revolutions in human thought. It is amazing how few people understand it.

I believed in genetic determinism until I studied Biology.

>retrograding to a position with ever growing evidence against it

wew

how is that cuck

I accept that IQ and most traits are under genetic control (explaining nigger societies, etc etc) but I don't believe in strict full blown determinism in that every action we make is merely the result of strict causality

You have the free will to ride a tie-dyed skateboard to the nearest nail salon and ask for a Hulk Hogan schnitzelsandwich. Therefore, you must have some type of free will regardless of any philosophical or scientific circle-jerking about the nature of causality.

Determinism might be (mostly?) true scientifically, but it's a poisonous ideology. It's for people who don't want to take responsibility for their actions.

That's fatalism, which is different.

No, it shows how little you know about the subject. Everything we do can be traced to prior causes which took place before our inception.

Except the real evidence increasingly shows that your diet, social & economic environment, and even things like temperature have a massive, massive effect on the way your genes are expressed. It's a little subject called epigenetics

well then fuck fatalism and low-IQ savages wit shitty genetic profiles

Never. There's no reason to either.

Never. People can overcome base impulses.

Every activity we do is based on the pursuit of pleasure and avoidance of pain. This hardwiring cannot be circumvented in any conceivable way.

yeah, he is retarded in that regard. like most other people, he has no arguments to back up his claims about free will.

but if you try to debate him, he'll just say "not an argument" and hang up

So what? A middle schooler can grasp what causality is and what it implies. It requires a man to take real responsibility for his decisions.

This is why you don't go to a third tier state school.

theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2016/06/theres-no-such-thing-as-free-will/480750/

Not true. You could surgically remove the parts of the brain that lead you to pursue pleasure and avoid pain.

Taking responsibility for ones actions may be useful for societal reasons, but from a scientific and philosophical vantage it is patently wrong.

>It's for people who don't want to take responsibility for their actions.

Realizing the mechanics behind something doesn't automatically invalidate that "something", especially if you're still stuck in the same plain of existence

It's like saying that knowing that pain is just chemical reactions in your brain makes you deadpool

Give me any example of that happening.

>B-but I bet you didn't go to Yale!
>Links an article from The Atlantic

You're trying really hard.

>You could surgically remove the parts of the brain that lead you to pursue pleasure and avoid pain.
only if you are predetermined (by gense + environment) to do so

I am proof that race mixing can be beneficial. I can control both my drinking and the intense desire to genocide.

And you're not trying at all.

You can do it for logical reasons or illogical reasons, but it would still be a conscious decision which alters the way you behave.

What's a thought experiment?

tell that to emos

>everything you do is determined, therefore everything you do is determined
Brilliant reasoning. Top logic.
You do not realize the vacuousness of the position?

Reminder that while free will does not exist, the universe is fundamentally indeterminate.

It would be impossible to remove the pleasure and pain responses without turning the individual into a zombie (and thus unable to make freely willed decisions)

>the universe is fundamentally indeterminate

What is your reasoning for this?

I'll do it eventually -- or maybe I won't.

I'll just wait and see what I do.

You were not paying any attention it seems, free will is an illusion because the variables behind decision making are very numerous but they are still limited at the end of the day.

How many potential locations and momenta does an individual electron have?

This is a baseless argument. Simply because we don't know the cause doesn't mean it wasn't caused.

Are you controlling the electron? No, therefore free will is still impossible.

You asked for a reason why the universe is fundamentally indeterminate. I gave you the biggest one.

Mainly from what we know about quantum mechanics. There are some qualities that particles exhibit that either cannot be measured precisely or that we simply cannot know. To imply that all things within the universe abide by a cause-effect relationship with each other is a very large leap of faith.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causal_loop

I don't understand why people think determinism is incompatible with free will anyway.

If we lived in a universe where a banana could peel itself without expending any energy, would that universe be one with greater free will? Why do you think that?

Compatibilism is the only rational belief. You have to understand that things are already determined by higher dimensions, not a god.

Some would argue that a deterministic universe is a requirement for free will to exist: There wouldn't be any meaning behind our actions if we couldn't guarantee the outcome of those actions.

>not a god
And you came to that "understanding" because...?

Agreed. That's the point I was trying to make. In a non-deterministic universe, our 'decisions' would be based on sheer randomness. If a human living in a hypothetical non-deterministic universe suddenly made the decision to lower his landing gear and prepare for rapid photosynthesis, is he more free or less free than us?

When did you grow out of making bad posts? answer time.. but time has not caught up with you yet. Nor has experience apparently.

What does that have to do with anything? you dont control it, its another variable.

So there is also something like "indeterminism". Which allows some things to act randomly, but without much effect for a whole determined universe.

That is why everything actualy works in this universe and we can call it "an order". When I throw the ball at you, in normal circumstances it will hit you. Just that simple. Maybe simple particles can act randomly, but it does not have much effect for an universe. All big things are acting linear, detemined by every previous effect that had impact on them.

it's not 'genetic' determinism but universal. Everything goes moves according to laws of nature that humans understand as equations and 'general rules'. When you see a waterfall, if you had all of the variables you could calculate the precise location that each water molecule passing over would fall up until all of the water on Earth boils away. The only issue is that humans cannot, and will never be able to know all of the variables. Similarly if you stood above humanity you could parse all of human history if you had the unknown variables, everything from evolution to migration flows out of material circumstances shaped by the physical processes we understand through the laws of nature.

It's kind of a no shit idea to say that determinism is true, but since humans are human we will never even approach understanding of the God function so there is no reason to live any differently than if we believe free will to be true. Free will is an abstraction we use for consequential purposes, it helps us understand the world from our know-nothing perspective better.

Exactly how biblical prophecy operates aswell.. major events.. but minor events less so.

Like.. major event.. sun is going to do something, you might not be able to control.. this is a major event. Just an example not necessarily a real example but just a conceptual one.

Can't have a 1 dimensional line without a 2 dimensional plane, can't have a 2 dimensional line without a 3 dimensional plane. You can't have a 4th dimension (time/duration) without a higher dimension to contain those frames.

There are time frames of your entire life, birth to death running in synchronous existence in higher dimensions.

(cont) we are minor compared to the rest of the univese and or solar system is a miniscule part. so when other parts change.. we change aswell.. that's also involuntary.. how we adapt to these things is another matter.

You can assert that. Where does God disappear as a possibility, exactly?

/thread

Determinism is shit for weak people who complain on r9k all day. Free will is a fundamental of what it means to be human, the way God made us

(cont) also there's the determinator part of this, that some have the power to change this, those who direct the major events.. or can alter them.. might be called gods.. or god level interactions in what we think of that to be..

If you analyze yourself you will realize we are biological robots.. very advanced, not the tinker toys we create.. it's very possible that we have build in things that relay every expression and every thought to some kind of storage..

We are the most advanced robots that exist.. the biblical god is clearly considering us his children.. that they made us or had a role in making us.. But we are not tinker toys.. the level of intelligence to create something like us.. well just consider micro bacteria being more advanced than our most sophisticated robitic technology.. if they wanted to kill us.. we would barely even recognize it before it was over.. Clearly they have other motivations..

Not exacly.

But yet, IMO indeterminism is some kind of easy shortcut. Chaos theory sais that EVERY event has an impact for every other thing in the universe. Which would mean, that tiny little quantum bastards are messing all the order, and make everything pretty random. Well, still we don't have free will, but our future is just not detemined.
But I think there must be some other force and law which moves that quantum particles in determined fashion, and we are lacking with evidence for their determined movement. Now we see their randomness. I hope someday we will find the answer for that dilemma, and all things will be clear from then.

(cont) masters of technology.. biological technology.. very advanced compared to metal tinker toys.. Infiinately more advanced and capable of so many things.. or wasting it all aswell. And being mislead..

>stopping at genetics
>not being governed by the laws of the universe

It's like the entire world is playing catchup to what I figured out 10 years ago.

(cont) just consider for example something as simple as birds.. they are connected to earths magnetic fields and use it for navigation.. consider our insanely advanced cerebrum.. It's not even far fetched that there are such relay things in our brain that simply relay all choices all expressions all choices all thoughts into another place.. especially considering that 10.000 holy ones are going to come from the sky and judge us with jesus leading them.. all according to our deeds.. were they just wizzing about us cloaked with candid camera.. ofcourse not.. :)

When did you grow out of determinism and adopt both determinism and indeterminism?

(cont) far more likely that they would read you in some fashion.. like the palm of your hand. But in a more sophisticated way.. "next."..

Are you the guy with the default white pigmentation theory or do just all potato mouths type in this autist monologue tone?

it's me with the "autist default pigmentation theory." And i speak for myself only. But i accept your apology in advance. foxnews.com/science/2016/05/27/dna-from-ancient-phoenician-stuns-scientists.html

I just don't think a god can have direct influence over humanity and their actions and intentions.

99.9999% deterministic indeterminism, sure

Ya. . kinda like that..

One of the qualities of most theistic conception of God is that of omnipotence. I don't see how an omnipotent Creator would be incapable of doing *anything*.

Those things wouldn't imply that you have a choice in the matter.

If he wants to, but it's very clear that man is left to their own devices and it's all settled in the judgement.. go see matthew 13.. that way those who do bad can start to do good etc. instead of immediate judgement which would destroy most of them unjustly because it would destroy those who do bad and change for good aswell were it it to come right away..

You are a sequential biological robot.. with sentience.. you live in time in a sequence of events determined by actions.. conceptually god sees your entire line instantly and when you change something he see's it also instantly your future changed.. when you yourself only see your past and the next choice ahead of you.

>massive, massive effect

you're exaggerating here. The impact is actually so small it's still difficult to prove where they come in effect.
If you're a fat slob that isn't epigenetics.

True op. People who "refuse to act on their impulses" are only doing so because something in the environment or their own biology caused it.

If something happens outside of causality it doesn't exist.

omincient: check
omnipotnent: check
leads to contradictory logic: check

we need to embrace paradox. Afterall, who really was phone?

When 11

(cont) infact this is so clear that even the high priests of judah started worshipping the fallen guardian cherub (satan) saying god does no longer care god has abandoned this world because he didn't interfere on their behalf.. ezekiel 8-10

I'm not talking about God.

>One of the qualities of most theistic conception of God is that of omnipotence.

Irrelevant since this hypothetical god doesn't have any defined qualities. A god doesn't have to be a creator.

God precedes the world in which there would be logic, Mr. "private-languages-are-incoherent".

chicken and egg.. chicken and egg.. Inevitably regardless how far you extend it.. there is something permanent that maintains that which is impermanent.. Because nothing comes from nothing, or you wouldn't even exist, and if you don't exist then we go full nihilism.. so it's not a new thing this line of thought.

but your brain enabling you to think these things, and your beautiful mother and father didn't come simply from nothing..

Then where did god come from?

No, but you're trying to rule out God as a Creator. Or else you aren't, in which case you're not saying anything greater than you personal opinion when you say
>not a god

If there are three holes for the marble to fall in, and two are closed, the marble will always fall in the open one.
All of that even though the atom had infinite potential locations and momenta.

Where did He come from? I don't know. I'm trying to understand why I should reject God as a possibility.

>can't have a discussion about gods without Christfags exclusively talking about God and basing their arguments on God

I rule out God because I believe all human religions are inherently false and human conceived.

So you're not talking about God when you refer to gods? Is God special to you or what?

Why believe that?

He simply is.. I AM that's the declaration of eternal holy spirit.. the heavenly father within the universe acting on its will and the emmisary jesus christ son of god.. the right hand of god where the heavenly father is the "ARM".. extended into its own creation. (the universe). maintainers/shepherds etc.

If you didn't have something that is permanent you wouldn't even exist.. do all the mental gymnastics you require.. and take chicken and egg as far as you want you will always come to the same conflusion.. The only thing that resolves it is something permanent that precides over something that is impermanent.. and the universe is impermanent.. so it cannot be the eternal, even if it remodels itself and rebirths itself in new solar systems.. because doing so it would lose its basic mechanisms..

Because why should I trust them? Why would a human know how or what the universe what created from?

Is there anything more cucked than submitting to fate?

thats literally the dumbest excuse for being a cuck i have ever seen. either way you would be exercising free will. choose to be a cuck or choose not to be a cuck and only raise your own children

(cont) the only alternative to this is that the entire universe is an advanced simulation, but then again you've just simply extended chicken and egg yet again.. the only resolution for you even existing is that there's something undefined that is permament.. and aware. and able to form a structure that facilitates us..

theism is inevitable the only question is really who is right and who isn't.

When I got into programming and realized that logically humans must work the same way. Even dna is a binary system.

Will cannot be "free" in any sense in neither a deterministic or indeterministic universe.

Check mate.

(cont) and to circumvent the who's right and who isn't the secular societies created the big bang theory and pushed evolution rather than bioadaptation.. to move the conversation to neutral ground.. It's understandable but it's not correct.

I'm not suggesting you should. I'm asking you how you rule them out. You can not trust someone - it doesn't mean everything they say is necessarily a lie.

You shouldn't. We should just accept that the idea of a god cannot be proven nor falsified since the concept is logically paradoxical. I don't know how I feel about worshiping paradoxes.

No, but to have trust means there must be some evidence to gain that trust. Are you going to believe every news article you see without clear sources?

Of course you're not.

Damn nigga you smart

Let me ask muh genes.

I've got no qualms. You also, I assume, have few qualms about use of inductive reasoning, even though justification for doing so is logically nonsense.

Damn you are like a decade + late since the idea expired.

What you're willing to qualify as evidence is arbitrary though. I'll believe what I want to believe - I'm not going to pretend I have much in the way of objective criteria as to whether or not whatever I believe is undoubtedly right, since there is no such thing as far as I or anyone else I've encountered has articulated.