Don’t ‘pics or it didn’t happen’ me on that one.
General / Off-Topic So... Do we have free will? :)
- Thread starter WeComeInPeace
- Start date
So which is it?? the chicken or the egg...
we can forget the rooster... becos roosters dont lay eggs
whispers to himself don't take the bait... don't... just ... don't do it Arti! browses through SteamGames library for distraction
I think it is a need, for some humans, to explain everything. Therefore, if you try to use, proven scientific principles, such as determinism (cause and effect) or the laws that drive the universe (the study of time and motion, therefore everthing can be predicted) then you will fall down; because the ability to think, offers humans (& most animal life) the freedom to think, which is basically a random act; thus, we have free will.Then I wonder where does these ideas stem from about having no free will? All I knew are some odd ideas from Richard Dawkins (aka "there is no such thing as free will") but other than that I would have to google for it. Which I just lack the will to do.
I did read the OP but was assuming that it wasn't just the idea of one person without a further background.
Yes you can load things in your favour and then predict what one human will be thinking and doing. But that would be a response reflex and nothing to do with, normal human behaviour.
Well, according to your beliefs: The chicken. According to mine: The egg. This was the result of cross breading,
One one the more prominent examples would be determinism, which is simply the idea that past events dictate current ones. It's an extension of cause and effect.
For example, if I could capture the complete state of the universe at some point in the past, and then run a simulation of it, It's an extension of cause and effect.I may discover, upon fast forwarding the simulation to the present, that all macroscopic events had played out precisely as they had in history, down to my own second to second choices. Such a simulation may even be an accurate predictor of all future events, at least until observation of that potential future resulted in a deviation.
No matter how I perceive the apparent choices set before me, my past may well shape my current reactions in an entirely predictable manner, if enough accurate information about that past is on hand.
I can't say for sure if this is the case or not. Nor can I really call any truly random events that could disrupt the concept of a deterministic universe 'will'.
The first chicken egg was probably laid by something ever so slightly different from a chicken.
Speciation is widely accepted, has been observed in nature, and can be readily demonstrated in experiments.
Being the son of a god; beat the system at the time. To proclaim, or be proclaimed as a god, was putting that person, against the Emperor; who was considered a god on Earth. In direct opposition to the ruler at the time. This had been the case for centuries. They had a simple solution to deal with these upstarts. To prove tehmselves in the circus and perform tasks. Such as the tasks faced by Hercules. J.C. was not proclaiming himself to be a god; which was why Pilot, washed his hands of the matter and handed J.C. back to the Israelites.
Last edited:
Jesus is the Seed of His Father.... impregnated into a clean earthly vessel(Virgin conception)
--purpose: to shed light on earth of heavenly understanding... from a earthly perspective
The DNA of his Heavenly father carries the innate knowledge of heavenly understanding.. through inherited genes
a unique DNA makeup of the God seed and Human Seed
a Bride or Bridegroom.. is for the purposes of legal reconciliation
for just as a bride desires to be loved or simply acknowledged.. and those who come back to reconcile themselves to their marriaage.. have legal standing if one accepts the other and recognises the others faithfulness through both commitment and acknowledgement by their testimony... Faith and faithfulness is a continuation of evidence by way of Actions and Acknowledgement and recognising who your bride or bridegroom is... both humanly speaking and heavenly speaking
Thus if the marriage is recognised on both sides... One is considered part of the Family of God
The Seed bearer is the ongoing propagation of the DNA God Seed in which both the growth of the seed and the resultant fruits will be made manifest and will reveal whether or not they are of the same Seed.. for just as apples produce apples the The fruit of Jesus will be displayed.. selflessness,sacrifice,patience,long suffering,kindness etc etc
How is this possible?? Matthew 19:26
Last edited:
Yeah, it's all about how much data is available in order to calculate or predict a certain phenomenon.
This is a little besides your point, but the more accurate data a simulation is fed, the more accurate its predictions become.
I really like the concept of a simulation, and the weather data is a very good example here. In the past two decades weather simulation has evolved a lot,
and if you look at it, it's still just about 60% accurate, if even. If we had 50 fold the calculation power the current simulations are using, we could make weather predictions that would be 99,9% accurate, because what current simulations lack is the ability to calculate every molecule and its interaction and dependency on other molecules' behaviour (temp,agility,composition,deflection,radiation influence, etc.).
I also think that the known universe is a predictable clockwork, we did make quite some advacements towards explaining certain phenomena by means of simulation
(like the inevitable merge of Milky Way and Andromeda, which will tear both galaxies apart)
But in order to predict, you need a lot more data than we have available.
People in a 2000 years ahead might wonder how we even managed to survive without knowing what's going to happen next (figure of speech)
However, biologically the human body will one day have no more mysteries to us, the mind will always remain a mystery, though.
You can predict how someone might react, even by only applying logic and psychology,
but i don't think it will ever be possible to foresee someone's future by starting up a simulation.
I hope that's not too confusing, watching Netflix on the other screen so i'm a bit distracted
But... Was it your choice to watch Netflix?Yeah, it's all about how much data is available in order to calculate or predict a certain phenomenon.
This is a little besides your point, but the more accurate data a simulation is fed, the more accurate its predictions become.
I really like the concept of a simulation, and the weather data is a very good example here. In the past two decades weather simulation has evolved a lot,
and if you look at it, it's still just about 60% accurate, if even. If we had 50 fold the calculation power the current simulations are using, we could make weather predictions that would be 99,9% accurate, because what current simulations lack is the ability to calculate every molecule and its interaction and dependency on other molecules' behaviour (temp,agility,composition,deflection,radiation influence, etc.).
I also think that the known universe is a predictable clockwork, we did make quite some advacements towards explaining certain phenomena by means of simulation
(like the inevitable merge of Milky Way and Andromeda, which will tear both galaxies apart)
But in order to predict, you need a lot more data than we have available.
People in a 2000 years ahead might wonder how we even managed to survive without knowing what's going to happen next (figure of speech)
However, biologically the human body will one day have no more mysteries to us, the mind will always remain a mystery, though.
You can predict how someone might react, even by only applying logic and psychology,
but i don't think it will ever be possible to foresee someone's future by starting up a simulation.
I hope that's not too confusing, watching Netflix on the other screen so i'm a bit distracted
I really don't want to sound harsh, and personally i don't have anything against you, so take the following with a pinch of salt:
You are constantly derailing this thread with theological remarks that have nothing to do with this topic,
and you write "how is this possible" ... how is what possible? You recite lines from text written by people who had the clear intention to create some sort of obedient-system
to get people to act the way they would have liked them to be like. Religion is merely the predecessor of modern laws. With the difference that not a judge will make a verdict, but a god.
And back then i can imagine a lot of people being scared of that.
But even that is beside the point, if you want to lead a religious discussion about creationism,
as long as the Forum rules allow, why not open a separate thread on that topic, cause it clearly has little to do with THIS topic.
If anyone takes offense in my statements, this is a debate, in a debate i usually prioritise argumentation over personal feelings or the person who my argument(s) is directed at.
It still only reflects my own worldviews even if i don't say that in every sentence.
But... Was it your choice to watch Netflix?
huh? If you are trying to put me in that corner, i never said free will doesn't exist, i actually argumented FOR free will,
so yes it's my free(13,99eur/month) will to watch what Netflix has to offer.
that's not the point. the point is if the system could theoretically be predicted given no constraints, because that would confirm how it works. actually our ability to predict has increased exponentially and solely thanks to the increase of information and our means to use it. we do not know how this will be in future, but for now everything points in this direction, while there is no evidence whatsoever that there exists some independent entity that could bend the rules of pyshics, i.e. act out of sheer will. the whole construct is an entelechy. read on.
is that a real question?
I believe it arose around the time of J.S. Mill - likely as a consequence of Newton
I'm a simple man. I see a video with Jordan Peterson and I click like.
I take no offense to any challenging debate, as it helps me understand the angles in which to approach a subject matter...
more often than not... i approach from a biblical angle... whether it be common sense, common knowledge, and when applicable use science in support of!!
you make the arguement i derail the thread when i use my biblical based knowledge... yet i constantly use logic and common-sense and common knowledge more than i use scripture... this is for your benefit... however you perceive that it is biblically based
each of us have the ability to express the knowledge which we are armed with.... you too can utilise scripture if you so choose..
the fact that you dont... is not my loss
if i challenge your thinking... it will either make you go ahhhhhhh!!!! or aaarrrrrgggggghhhhh!!!
emotions aside you will either accept or reject whats presented!!
this is the essence of free will!!
Read the first pages, these last ones have honestly been pretty bad.
Yeah, I agree with this. I just got home from a long day at work and reviewed the first part of this thread and found some of it to be quite good. Not good enough to convince me of my own lack of free will, but definitely some well thought out positions compared to where the conversation ended up going. I enjoy a lot of what Piccomander has been bringing to the table most recently.