Dillahunty vs. Slick and A.I.
Post Reply
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
15-10-2016, 12:13 PM
RE: Dillahunty vs. Slick and A.I.
(15-10-2016 05:20 AM)unknowndevil666 Wrote:  
(14-10-2016 09:28 PM)Peebothuhul Wrote:  Also of note is exactly how disparagingly simplified he's being when you read Mathilda's comments about interconnections and stuff. Not counting that it's not just chemical but electron flow and interconnected-ness and a whole other heap of things.
(14-10-2016 11:36 PM)Rahn127 Wrote:  It's all about making connections in our brains. Our brains are a neural network and as we learn new things, new pathways are constructed in our brains.
It's not just a bunch of chemicals up there. It's cell structure & neural pathways.

I think the point of Slick's question, although he does grossly misrepresent it by calling it "chemicals" and comparing it to the reaction between baking soda and vinegar, is "how is a physical brain capable of handling pure, abstract logic?". The way he's thinking, no matter how complex a physical system is, it doesn't have any mechanism that is pure and logical. In other words, 1000000000000! * 0 is still 0.
It's mostly that. My contempt of it is how he assumes the notion of purity is something that exists/matters or should exist.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-10-2016, 10:49 AM
RE: Dillahunty vs. Slick and A.I.
(15-10-2016 05:26 AM)unknowndevil666 Wrote:  
(15-10-2016 01:13 AM)true scotsman Wrote:  We are able to selectively focus by self generated action of our own brain just as we are able to move by self generated action of our bodies. We are free to think or not to think, basically. This is the essence of free will.
Yes our minds are the product of biology and Chemical reactions but we have some control over it.

I think the rebuttal to this, that I have myself, would be to argue against free will in a physical, deterministic universe. If everything is physical, including your brain, and everything follows the deterministic laws of physics, how can we "choose" to do something if physics dictates the particles composing our choice-making mechanisms? I agree that Slick's answer isn't good either.

Your rebuttal does not address the points I brought up. I don't see any argument here, just a question. I don't think that the brain acts in accordance with natural laws. I think the brain acts in accordance with its nature. All things act according to their nature. The laws of physics are our conceptual identification of the facts which are inherent in the things that act. They are descriptive. Matter does not obey the law of gravity. The law of gravity identifies conceptually what matter does, i.e. attract other matter. The fact that matter attracts matter is inherent in the nature of matter and the law of gravity identifies this general fact about how matter acts.

There is no contradiction between free will, as I've informed the concept, and the fact that all actions are determined. They are determined by the nature of what acts. Consciousness acts in accordance with its nature and man's particular form of consciousness is volitional.

Also, choice is a species of causation. Our choices lead to specific actions and the choice is part of the causal chain. So I think our conscious actions can be determined and caused and also volitional.

If we did not have the ability to selectively direct our attention we couldn't be having this discussion because we could form no concepts and have no knowledge beyond the first level perceptual knowledge. I would know that there are things on another thing but I'd have no way to know any more than that. But by focusing my attention and identifying those things, symbols on a screen in this case, by a conceptual process, then I can have awareness beyond the perceptual level and understand what you are trying to say. That does not happen automatically. It requires volition.

Do not lose your knowledge that man's proper estate is an upright posture, an intransigent mind and a step that travels unlimited roads. - Ayn Rand.

Don't sacrifice for me, live for yourself! - Me

The only alternative to Objectivism is some form of Subjectivism. - Dawson Bethrick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes true scotsman's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: