Philosophy versus Science, the ultimate experiment.

[bjj hero]

Common sense said the world was flat, that the sun moves around the earth and that no one could run a 4 minute mile. You can say you believe that but you don't know it and there is no evidence to support it.

You're not reading what I'm saying and just want an argument.
Why, if everything was the same, would the conclusion you make about a given situation change? It wouldn't, as you would always think the same thoughts etc.
Please stop being pedantic, otherwise I could go into the philosophical reasons why you don't have any evidence for anything & everything.

You cannot recreate the set up to test it so youre guessing. There are not even any similar examples to take points from. Its your opinion, there are even others who agree with you, that doesn't make it fact. Ive done philosophy 101 so dont give me all of that philisophical ideas on evidence. We could be in the matrix but without supporting evidence Ill take it as unlikely and not stress about it.

I wasn't looking for an argument, I was hoping you would defend your position with a little more than "its common sense". Read some quantum physics and apply your common sense to that.

You are right that we assess then choose most decisions based on past experience and from the information around us. Do I swim across the aligator infested river or walk around it? That sort of decision you will make the same over and over again.

There is an argument that the closer to 50/50 decisions could go either way. Pick heads or tails? Apart from those with OCDesque rituals most people pick heads or tails almost a random. This would change your time line forever. You want to get triple pant shitting twisted? Some theories in Quantum physics say you chose both at the same time, as well as hundreds of other options. Once you wrap your head around some of the theory its equal in validity to your predetermination stance. Both are untested.

Now if you are willing to go with the 50/50 decisions going either way then you have to allow the 25%-75% decisions to go the oposite way every 4th run through. Extending this further, there will be the odd occasion when you swim across that aligator river. This doesn't support free will either, it is about probabilities. Im just not putting it forward as the truth, shutting out other ideas.

I'm not arguing and saying your idea is false or stupid. Im saying don't tell me it is fact. You can't know that.

 

[goggles6]

heh heh heh, well something similar to this has occured in humans, Twins seperated at birth live earily similar existances, some have even produced things near identical to each other.
For example two NON-identical twins but who shared the same DNA were seperated at birth both became carpenters, married similar wives and the first carpentry models they both made were wooden car toys which were nearly identical. Its all about the genes, don't worry we're all different but its all about the genes...

 

[GloatingSwine]

But how can you prove that that decision is anything other than the direct product of everything that makes us up, and hence not a 'choice' per se, but a pre-programmed result?

But how can you prove that we are anything other than the direct product of everything that makes us up?

"If you were to live your life over & over again, with no memory of the previous times, you would make the same choices each and every time. "

Not necesarily. All of the influencing factors on our behaviour, whether they're genetic, social, or whatever, are not absolute. They are dispositional influencers, chances and likelyhoods, not absolute certainties. Faced with an exact repeat of the same situation with no prior memory of that situation, you would have the same likelyhood of doing the same things, but you might not actually do the same thing.

 

[Deacon Cole]

Could this answer our questions about higher forces controlling us?

No.

 

[bjj hero]

You might like reading some Roger Penrose. He's got some interesting thoughts and research there done on artificial intelligence and how the physical structure of the brain affects the way we think. I get what you're saying, "If everything was exactly the same, you'd make the same decision, so it's really not a decision", and I essentially agree. But I think what is being argued is that "That not only won't happen, it's a physical impossibility," (which is where quantum physics comes in,) "so bothering with it is just a mental wankfest, of no use."

QFT, he even managed to get the word wankfest in. Mazty says Im being sceptical as Im not giving this "We really could be stuck in the matrix" BS months of my time, sat in a room with a mirror, looking up my own arse being disappointed when there are no answers, just shit and farts.

Thing with quantum physics is, how does it change your path of thought? You will always arrive at the same conclusion as nothing to do with thought is random.

People have enough trouble pinning down what thoughts are, never mind their nature. You really dont know, you're again guessing. An educated guess? I wouldn't like to judge but a guess all the same.

Theres more to Quantum physics than one over arching theory. Some of it says you make every path of thought at once just like you make every possible decision. Schrodingers cat is alive and dead. So which choice you make is not important as you made every possible choice. Im not saying I sign up to it but its equally as valid as the version you are stating as truth. You, nor I actually know. Its all a guess. Common sense doesn't come into it. Great leaps have been made when smart men threw common sense out of the window.

If youre interested Id recommend Schrodinger's Kittens and the Search for Reality by John Gribbin [http://www.play.com/Books/Books/4-/414073/-/Product.html?searchstring=schrodingers+kittens&searchsource=0] as a real idiots guide to QED etc. Some of it is a real head fuck. Interesting though. There are some things we just don't know. Thats why we keep experimenting
and always will.

Thought experiments are good. They provide a basis for new experiments when science and learning get to the point of putting them into practice. I think you'll struggle with yours though.

My last post in this "mental wankfest". Im not saying youre wrong, Im saying you are too sure in your untested ideas.

 

[Jerious1154]

I dont know the answer, but its probably Quantum.

If this is a Diskworld reference you just had one of the greatest first posts ever.
If not, I just read too much Diskworld.

 

[confernal]

The only abouslete way to prove if free will exists would be to figure out every stimuli that affects us.... and since you have back ground radio waves, radiation and etc that interfere with our thinking and chemistry you would have to take into account of the stars, planets and other heavenly bodies that would effect us, then take into account to what affects them, then what affects the affecters(not sure if thats a real word), then what affects them and what affects them and so on and so on until we reach numbers which we as a species could never understand since such a number would instanly destroy our brains into a liquid pulp. Therefore we don't know and there is no absolute proof one way or another.

 

[Datalord]

I know the experiment is almost impossible to make but what's your opinions? Could this answer our questions about higher forces controlling us?

No. You're forgetting about quantum physics.

Quantum physics states that you cannot predict the state or an atom experiencing radioactive decay, or the rate at which it releases quanta, however, just because we cannot predict them, doesn't mean it is impossible.

I don't buy the whole "Chaos Theory" bs, just because we are incapable of predicting something now, doesn't mean it is impossible

 

[Taerdin]

I don't understand the argument against free will anyways. I've never had a decision, and been forced to take a certain route against my will. If I see two juices, apple and orange and in my mind I want to take the apple I do it, no one controls me and makes me take the orange. If you're saying well you were raised in such a way that you came to like apples more than oranges so you didnt really make that decision yadda yadda, then well... so what? Free will is us being able to make the choice we WANT to make. My life up till that point may change what I WANT, but it doesn't change my ability to choose that for myself.

It really boils down to your definition of free will I guess? Supposedly it is just a "free and independent choice". I am always free to make that choice, no matter what predispositions have been placed upon me. If I'm predisposed to apple juice I can choose it if it's available to me, no unforseen force cancels out my desire for it and forces me to grab the orange out of my fridge against my will. My will is mine to control, and I! WILL!!! APPLE!!!!!!!