|
Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today. |
28th January 2019, 06:50 AM | #161 |
Schrödinger's cat
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Malmesbury, UK
Posts: 16,140
|
|
__________________
"If you trust in yourself ... and believe in your dreams ... and follow your star ... you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things" - Terry Pratchett |
|
28th January 2019, 06:55 AM | #162 |
The Clarity Is Devastating
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Betwixt
Posts: 20,891
|
|
__________________
"*Except Myriad. Even Cthulhu would give him a pat on the head and an ice cream and send him to the movies while he ended the rest of the world." - Foster Zygote |
|
28th January 2019, 07:02 AM | #163 |
Banned
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 8,324
|
No that's backwards.
Logic is a way we describe our observations of how reality works. If reality does not appear to obey logic then logic can be wrong. Also, there is no reason to think that logic applies to the creation of the universe since logic is an observation of how the universe goes, not necessarily how a 'not a universe' goes. |
28th January 2019, 07:08 AM | #164 |
Banned
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 8,324
|
|
28th January 2019, 07:09 AM | #165 |
Muse
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Tampa Bay, Florida
Posts: 816
|
It seems to come down to:
1. Every event needs a cause. 2. The exercise of free will is an event that does not need a cause. Seems logically inconsistent to me. |
28th January 2019, 07:41 AM | #166 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 14,971
|
|
__________________
We all hate poverty, war, and injustice Unlike the rest of you squares. Tom Lehrer - Folk Song Army |
|
28th January 2019, 07:47 AM | #167 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 14,971
|
Actually, despite what some people claim, we have never discovered any situation that doesn't appear to obey logic.
Quantum physics, for example, obeys good old classical logic just fine. (edit) But I will agree that if we found we could describe reality better by sometimes ditching logic, then that is just what we should do. |
__________________
We all hate poverty, war, and injustice Unlike the rest of you squares. Tom Lehrer - Folk Song Army |
|
28th January 2019, 08:02 AM | #168 |
Muse
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Tampa Bay, Florida
Posts: 816
|
So free will are events that cause themselves! Like the universe popping into existence because it popped into existence.
So those events are not caused by themselves. You need a soul or god to cause them. Doesn't this contradict the first statement? |
28th January 2019, 08:45 AM | #169 |
Schrödinger's cat
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Malmesbury, UK
Posts: 16,140
|
Bingo.
So many people assume that anything that seems obvious to them must be true. I usually counter by pointing out that it's obvious that the earth is flat, and that the sun goes round the earth. Most of modern physics - quantum theory, relativity, cosmology - is counter-intuitive. In order to begin to grasp any of them you need to leave your common sense at the door. |
__________________
"If you trust in yourself ... and believe in your dreams ... and follow your star ... you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things" - Terry Pratchett |
|
28th January 2019, 09:27 AM | #170 |
Banned
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 8,324
|
Indeed i was just pointing out that logic, mathematics, physical laws etc are descriptive rather than proscriptive. reality always trumps them.
its fine to be sceptical of something which appears to violate well established laws because at a first pass it is probably wrong but if the evidence truly shows that reality was illogical we would need to dump logic or at least expand it to include this new event. when we are talking about the creation of the universe all bets are off anyway as we cannot use obsevations of what happens in the universe to proscribe what must happen outside it, before it, or whatever (whatever those terms even mean) |
28th January 2019, 11:41 AM | #171 |
Meandering fecklessly
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 8,428
|
|
28th January 2019, 12:30 PM | #172 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 301
|
|
28th January 2019, 12:58 PM | #173 |
Philosopher
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Tiny town west of Brisbane.
Posts: 7,174
|
|
__________________
Thinking is a faith hazard. |
|
28th January 2019, 01:15 PM | #174 |
Meandering fecklessly
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 8,428
|
It's all about ordered versus un-ordered systems; you're saying in effect that a high-ordered system (a mind) was begun/started before the low-ordered beginning of the universe (the big bang) which goes against the laws of physics as we know them.
So it's another in a long line of contradictions that you're unable to deal with. I've read some of your intervening posts and you've talked about logic too. So you'll need to explain, logically, how a complex entity exists before a simple entity (that happens to encompass everything; i.e., the universe) in order for the simple entity to be created, but you'll also have to explain, logically, how something can create (take action) with no time in which to do so. If time only began to exist with the beginning of the universe, there cannot be something 'before time.' Anyway, unless you invoke magic, your creator being cannot exist. |
28th January 2019, 01:20 PM | #175 |
Guest
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 8,627
|
|
28th January 2019, 03:10 PM | #176 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 301
|
I've heard of quantum foam but I'm not too familiar with it. Quantum foam acts indeterministically, right?
If it truly does act indeterministically, then I'd say that perhaps the universe can begin through events due to the quantum foam. Tell me if you agree with this. To happen, an event must have an underlying mechanism that allows it to happen. |
28th January 2019, 03:26 PM | #177 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 301
|
The essence of the paradox is that particles can interact in such a way that it is possible to measure both their position and their momentum more accurately than Heisenberg's uncertainty principle allows, unless measuring one particle instantaneously affects the other to prevent this accuracy, which would involve information being transmitted faster than light as forbidden by the theory of relativity ("spooky action at a distance"). This consequence had not previously been noticed and seemed unreasonable at the time; the phenomenon involved is now known as quantum entanglement.
I'm pretty sure I'm wrong about this, but doesn't quantum entanglement resolve the paradox? By the way, you said that indeterminism is not about whether or not an event has an underlying cause or not and that it's more about whether the result is always the same, but how would you define indeterminism explicitly? |
28th January 2019, 03:28 PM | #178 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 301
|
|
28th January 2019, 03:44 PM | #179 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 14,971
|
I don't think it is always possible to disentangle the "what it does" from "what it is".
For example when you can't describe walking without describing legs and no description of legs would be complete without a description of walking. There must be some level of reality where you can't drill down any further and the "what it does" is simply a description of "what it is". Sent from my Moto C using Tapatalk |
__________________
We all hate poverty, war, and injustice Unlike the rest of you squares. Tom Lehrer - Folk Song Army |
|
28th January 2019, 03:49 PM | #180 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 301
|
I suppose you can say that free will is determined in the sense that it is determined by an agent.
In the context of this argument, determinism means something like "mechanical process." I don't have a very good definition of it, but what I mean is something like how inanimate objects behave and how they are governed by the laws of physics and can not do other than what the laws of physics dictate. Think of something like a plastic bag being blown in the wind or a slinky falling down stairs, as opposed to a person dancing or doing something like juggling, which are better seen as free actions, in the context of this argument. So if free will exists, however you conceive of it, it would be different than a slinky falling down stairs because THAT is dictated by the laws of physics, while actions are not precisely dictated by physical laws. As far as indeterminism, I'd be interested in how you define it and contrast it with free will. Only if you don't mind, of course. |
28th January 2019, 04:01 PM | #181 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 301
|
You may believe that existence is not about anything. But do you know that it is not?
Phenomena like near death experiences, children remembering past lives, out of body experiences, etc. have not yet been disproven. They may have taken some damage, but they have yet to be disproven. Yes it may seem very much like God is not needed, but take into account that there are people who have investigated the paranormal and the supernatural in-depth and questioned their beliefs over and over again only to remain a believer. That may be the conclusion you have come to, but other people who question their beliefs have come to different conclusions, who's to say who's really right in the absence of 100% proof? Maybe it just comes down to your temperament. |
28th January 2019, 04:12 PM | #182 |
Philosopher
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Tiny town west of Brisbane.
Posts: 7,174
|
|
__________________
Thinking is a faith hazard. |
|
28th January 2019, 04:34 PM | #183 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 14,971
|
My definition of (libertarian) free will:
"A person has free will if there are at least some times when that person is choosing between more than one ostensibly possible course of action that: 1. All those courses of action are still possible and; 2. The reason that one is picked over the others is that it was the conscious intention of that person" Determinism: "There is only one possible next state" Indeterminism: "There is more than one possible next state" As I see it indeterminism would be necessary for libertarian free will but not sufficient (is a random fork is not free will) Sent from my Moto C using Tapatalk |
__________________
We all hate poverty, war, and injustice Unlike the rest of you squares. Tom Lehrer - Folk Song Army |
|
28th January 2019, 04:51 PM | #184 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 301
|
I agree, you have to have a mind that is capable of taking action.
You seem to be saying that intentions cause action, but what is the difference between the intending of an action and the willing of it? I can intend to do the dishes at some point, but not do them now. But I can't will myself to do the dishes unless it's right now. The act of willing, whatever that is, is free will in action. Thus, the intention does not determine the act of willing. 1. Only events that have mechanisms behind them are coherent. (This statement should be self-evident)(By coherent I mean that it makes sense, it is self-consistent) (If you freeze ice, for it to freeze at all it has to freeze in a way in which it can actually accomplish freezing (which is the way that makes sense). Freezing in any other way that doesn't accomplish freezing is a way that doesn't make sense and is ultimately incoherent.) 2. Random events don't have mechanisms behind them. (It's the definition of random) 3. Therefore random events are incoherent. 4. Incoherent things can not exist. (Again, this should be self-evident, I don't know how to break this down into anything simpler.)(Think of a ball that is all white and all black at the same time, how could this exist?) I don't really know how to break down the idea that random or indeterministic events are incoherent or that incoherent things can not exist. To me, it is self-evident, but it's hard to explain how it is self-evident. What is your definition of indeterminism? |
28th January 2019, 05:26 PM | #185 |
Observer of Phenomena
Pronouns: he/him Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Ngunnawal Country
Posts: 87,214
|
What is obvious is the reason why the premise "the universe must have come into existence deterministically" is incorrect, because it is possible for the universe to have come into existence indeterministically. The way it actually occurred is, I agree, not obvious.
It's quite possible to come to a lay understanding of deep cosmological science simply by reading some of the many popular science books available at your local bookstore or online shop. If you want the mathematical details, then there's no shortcut for that. |
__________________
So take that quantum equation and recalculate the wave by a factor of hoopty doo! The answer is not my problem, it's yours. Three Word Story Wisdom |
|
28th January 2019, 05:28 PM | #186 |
Observer of Phenomena
Pronouns: he/him Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Ngunnawal Country
Posts: 87,214
|
|
__________________
So take that quantum equation and recalculate the wave by a factor of hoopty doo! The answer is not my problem, it's yours. Three Word Story Wisdom |
|
28th January 2019, 05:46 PM | #187 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 301
|
I agree, the determinant must not be a deterministic cause, leaving free will and indeterminism. Since indeterminism isn't an option, that leaves free will. However, if there is no free will to cause an event, if an event's cause was another deterministic event, then the chain continues backward into eternity.
|
28th January 2019, 05:49 PM | #188 |
Observer of Phenomena
Pronouns: he/him Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Ngunnawal Country
Posts: 87,214
|
A full and complete proof will require a five-year university degree plus several more years in a graduate program, culminating in a PhD. Are you sure you want to get into that? I mean, if you do, more power to you. But don't ask for the proof if you can't handle it. Here's a layman's explanation:
Indeterminate (ie, uncaused) events are observed in laboratories all the time. It is very well-established that at any time, a particle-antiparticle pair can burst into existence, uncaused. No-one can predict when such an event is going to occur. These quantum fluctuations are observed in a laboratory as the Casimir Effect, which is a real, measurable force. Uncaused events occur all the time. Atoms can spontaneously decay into other, lighter atoms. We call this radioactivity, and while it occurs at a specific rate, no-one can predict exactly when a single atom will do it. It is uncaused. Technically it is stochastic. Remember, these links are to Wikipedia, so if you want proof of these, you need to scroll to the bottom of the page and check the references. |
__________________
So take that quantum equation and recalculate the wave by a factor of hoopty doo! The answer is not my problem, it's yours. Three Word Story Wisdom |
|
28th January 2019, 05:53 PM | #189 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 301
|
|
28th January 2019, 05:57 PM | #190 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 301
|
Take a dead body. A dead body is pretty much just an inanimate object. While alive it is no different, just animated by free will. However, because the body can be considered inanimate, this means that it has no mind or will just as a rock has no mind or will. Therefore, physical substance can't have free will. Rather, it must be the person who has free will. Meaning, the person is not reduced to anything simpler or any kind of physical substance. It is ultimately a person. This means that free will can not be "evolved" because what evolution evolves are bodies which are just physical objects. So you'd need something like a soul for free will. This is where we run into problems however. I don't know what kind of deal the soul is, but I'm thinking that the soul is fundamentally a person rather than a substance. How that works, I'll have to get back to you on.
Are you saying free will is an emergent property of being alive if one assumes free will exists? |
28th January 2019, 06:06 PM | #191 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 301
|
If that's true, then indeterminism might be true. But I still can't help but think that it defies reality. It's like you take a fact from reality that says "every event must have a mechanism" and you take another fact, the observation of the uranium atoms that doesn't have a mechanism, and they contradict each. Reality ultimately can not contradict itself, yet another thing I take to be true. But to be honest, I'm a little more suspicious of the experiment than I am of the idea that everything must be coherent. Who knows what you're really looking at when you look at the quantum realm. I would probably have to see some papers that leave no room for other outcomes before I start to believe that reality can essentially defy itself.
|
28th January 2019, 06:12 PM | #192 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 301
|
|
28th January 2019, 06:16 PM | #193 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 301
|
|
28th January 2019, 06:18 PM | #194 |
Observer of Phenomena
Pronouns: he/him Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Ngunnawal Country
Posts: 87,214
|
|
__________________
So take that quantum equation and recalculate the wave by a factor of hoopty doo! The answer is not my problem, it's yours. Three Word Story Wisdom |
|
28th January 2019, 06:21 PM | #195 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 301
|
|
28th January 2019, 07:15 PM | #196 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 301
|
An event caused deterministically is externally caused, meaning that it needs something other than it to cause it to happen.
An event caused by free will is caused internally. Both have antecedents, but free will is not susceptible to infinite regress. The reason free will is not susceptible to infinite regress is because there is no chain of events of one causing another, rather, just the continuous use of free will. |
28th January 2019, 07:23 PM | #197 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 301
|
|
28th January 2019, 07:30 PM | #198 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 301
|
Just imagine one apple being created every one second. Since infinity has no end, how could you get an infinite number of apples after an infinite number of seconds? You couldn't get to the point to where it is infinite, all you would have is a continuously growing finite set of apples.
|
28th January 2019, 07:34 PM | #199 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 301
|
|
28th January 2019, 07:35 PM | #200 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 14,185
|
Saying "infinite number" means you need to look up a few things about infinity.
|
Thread Tools | |
|
|