3 questions for atheists
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 8 Votes - 1.5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
02-02-2014, 02:00 AM
RE: 3 questions for atheists
(02-02-2014 01:53 AM)Chippy Wrote:  Blah blah blah, Americans blah blah blah.....

You do realize how idiotic your pathetic nationalistic generalizations are.

Thumbsup

It's Special Pleadings all the way down!


Magic Talking Snakes STFU -- revenantx77


You can't have your special pleading and eat it too. -- WillHop
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-02-2014, 02:01 AM
RE: 3 questions for atheists
(02-02-2014 12:05 AM)Brownshirt Wrote:  
(01-02-2014 10:14 PM)houseofcantor Wrote:  Usually, coherence is required to criticize a lack thereof. Tongue

I was hoping that the omission of the "of" wouldn't throw anyone too much. I think if it did, it's likely that you wouldn't have got it anyway.

Only if the sense was to make no sense.

living word
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes houseofcantor's post
02-02-2014, 02:02 AM
RE: 3 questions for atheists
(02-02-2014 01:59 AM)Vosur Wrote:  
(02-02-2014 01:21 AM)Cephalotus Wrote:  I don't have much to add to this particular discussion. I just wanted to point out to anybody who still might have any doubts that Chippy is *obviously* trolling and has absolutely nothing of value to add.

To any discussion.

Ever!
Do you think that this post, for instance, was of value to the discussion in the thread it was posted in?

If you do, your claim that he has never added something of value to a discussion is false by your own admittance.

If you don't, I'd appreciate an explanation.

The hyperlink took me to a thread about determinism. It reads:

"If you have "Free will" then you're bound to have a "super consciousness" A.K.A control over your subconscious thought process which you can use to choose your next thought before you think it."

And was posted by IndianAtheist. In other words, I don't understand your question.

THIS USER IS NO LONGER ACTIVE. THANK YOU, AND HAVE A GREAT DAY! http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...a-few-days
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-02-2014, 02:05 AM
RE: 3 questions for atheists
(02-02-2014 02:02 AM)Cephalotus Wrote:  The hyperlink took me to a thread about determinism. It reads:

"If you have "Free will" then you're bound to have a "super consciousness" A.K.A control over your subconscious thought process which you can use to choose your next thought before you think it."

And was posted by IndianAtheist. In other words, I don't understand your question.
I don't know why the link didn't take you to the post I was referring to; I'll have to quote it for you instead.

(15-12-2013 03:40 AM)Chippy Wrote:  
(15-12-2013 02:18 AM)Tartarus Sauce Wrote:  I suppose I should clarify my question in the title. I understand that pinpointing one of these ideas as true would have huge implications on a wide scope of topics, but that's not what I'm talking about. I'm focusing on our experience with reality in relation to these concepts.

Suppose you visited a number of different universes; some deterministic, some indeterministic, and some free-will based. My question is: would we experience them differently, or would they all appear to operate the same to us? I personally don't think we could notice any differences since we perceive time as linear, and therefore can't test any hypotheses through measuring different outcomes.

You wouldn't be able to function in the universe where you and everyone else had contra-causal free-will. You and everyone else would do things for no reason, behaviour would be entirely random and no form of planning or organisation would be possible. Your behaviour would even be decoupled from all of your evolved survival instincts and capacities: no desire to eat, no sense of pain, no desire for sex, no fears, no emotions, no pleasure. The universe in which humans had contra-causal free-will would be the same as the universe in which humans were subject to indeterminism.

The universe with contra-causal free-will would not be "linear" as all behaviour would be completely free of antecedent causes (of any origin). This seems counterintuitive but that is what libertarian or contra-causal free-will entails.

This is why most people that have thought about this matter for a very long time argue that the idea of contra-causal free-will is incoherent.

The consenus view regarding human agency amongst philosophers, neuroscientists and legal scholars is what is termed compatibilism. That view is that:
--humans do have free-will (but not contra-causal free-will as that is an imaginary idea);
--the physical universe is largely (though not entirely) deterministic;
--free-will and determinism are compatible, i.e. not mutually exclusive

[Image: 7oDSbD4.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-02-2014, 02:07 AM
RE: 3 questions for atheists
Everything in quotes is what I can see.

"[[ (15-12-2013 02:18 AM)Tartarus Sauce Wrote: I suppose I should clarify my question in the title. I understand that pinpointing one of these ideas as true would have huge implications on a wide scope of topics, but that's not what I'm talking about. I'm focusing on our experience with reality in relation to these concepts. Suppose you visited a number of different universes; some determini...[SNIP]... incoherent. The consenus view regarding human agency amongst philosophers, neuroscientists and legal scholars is what is termed compatibilism. That view is that: --humans do have free-will (but not contra-causal free-will as that is an imaginary idea); --the physical universe is largely (though not entirely) deterministic; --free-will and determinism are compatible, i.e. not mutually exclusive"

This still does not help me answer your questions, and I'm unsure why you are asking them.

THIS USER IS NO LONGER ACTIVE. THANK YOU, AND HAVE A GREAT DAY! http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...a-few-days
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-02-2014, 02:08 AM
RE: 3 questions for atheists
(02-02-2014 02:07 AM)Cephalotus Wrote:  Everything in quotes is what I can see.

"[[ (15-12-2013 02:18 AM)Tartarus Sauce Wrote: I suppose I should clarify my question in the title. I understand that pinpointing one of these ideas as true would have huge implications on a wide scope of topics, but that's not what I'm talking about. I'm focusing on our experience with reality in relation to these concepts. Suppose you visited a number of different universes; some determini...[SNIP]... incoherent. The consenus view regarding human agency amongst philosophers, neuroscientists and legal scholars is what is termed compatibilism. That view is that: --humans do have free-will (but not contra-causal free-will as that is an imaginary idea); --the physical universe is largely (though not entirely) deterministic; --free-will and determinism are compatible, i.e. not mutually exclusive"

This still does not help me answer your questions, and I'm unsure why you are asking them.
I'm starting to think that you're being obtuse on purpose; you have to left-click on the box to show the text in a coherent format.

[Image: 7oDSbD4.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-02-2014, 02:17 AM
RE: 3 questions for atheists
(02-02-2014 02:07 AM)Cephalotus Wrote:  This still does not help me answer your questions, and I'm unsure why you are asking them.

You are mentally retarded aren't you?
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-02-2014, 02:20 AM
RE: 3 questions for atheists
(02-02-2014 02:08 AM)Vosur Wrote:  I'm starting to think that you're being obtuse on purpose; you have to left-click on the box to show the text in a coherent format.

Just because someone participates on an internet forum doesn't necessarily mean they know all the quirks of every single forum format. Implying that I am being "obtuse on purpose" was borderline rude. :|

As far as the sciences are concerned, my specialties gravitate more towards chemistry and biology than physics and philosophy. Asking me if this is a good contribution to this conversation is like asking a third grader about sex. I'm pretty sure I didn't participate in this thread (and I can't even read the entire thread to put Chippy's contributions into context) so again, I don't quite understand why you are asking me about this thread specifically. Are you trying to defend him, or something along those lines?

THIS USER IS NO LONGER ACTIVE. THANK YOU, AND HAVE A GREAT DAY! http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...a-few-days
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-02-2014, 02:20 AM
RE: 3 questions for atheists
(02-02-2014 02:07 AM)Cephalotus Wrote:  This still does not help me answer your questions, and I'm unsure why you are asking them.

He is asking you that question because your claim that I have made no valuable posts is plainly untenable. I have been responsible for some of the most informative, cogent and well-referenced posts on this entire forum.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-02-2014, 02:29 AM (This post was last modified: 02-02-2014 02:33 AM by Vosur.)
RE: 3 questions for atheists
(02-02-2014 02:20 AM)Cephalotus Wrote:  Just because someone participates on an internet forum doesn't necessarily mean they know all the quirks of every single forum format. Implying that I am being "obtuse on purpose" was borderline rude. :|
My apologies, I didn't mean to be rude.

(02-02-2014 02:20 AM)Cephalotus Wrote:  As far as the sciences are concerned, my specialties gravitate more towards chemistry and biology than physics and philosophy. Asking me if this is a good contribution to this conversation is like asking a third grader about sex. I'm pretty sure I didn't participate in this thread (and I can't even read the entire thread to put Chippy's contributions into context) so again, I don't quite understand why you are asking me about this thread specifically. Are you trying to defend him, or something along those lines?
I am challenging your claim that he has made no valuable contributions to the forum because he has demonstrated the opposite on many different occasions.

Furthermore, since you concede that you are unable to tell whether the post in question was a good contribution on account of your lack of expertise, I can't help but wonder how you can tell that he has never contributed to any discussion.

[Image: 7oDSbD4.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: