Philosophy

[Slade]

I PROBABLY UNDERSTAND THE TOPIC A LOT BETTER THAN SOMEONE HERE. IF YOU TRULY UNDERSTOOD THE TOPIC, I'M SURE YOU WOULDN'T HAVE MADE THE ARGUMENTS YOU MADE. OF COURSE YOU CAN ALWAYS SHOW ME THIS "CONSENSUS" WITH SOME SOURCES.

I never said anything about a consensus, or about free will.

What I'm saying is that the reason this is puzzling to physicists is not because the models are incomplete, but because they seem to be incomplete due to necessity. For example, the results given by Pauli matrices on half-spin particles cannot be adequately accounted for when approached with the more classical outlook presented in your initial point. Are you familiar with Bell's theorem?

 

[Ishimaru Jinrai]

Theory of Propaganda By: ME!::::

Propaganda is a tool used in today's media, and internet, to manipulate people's minds to accept certain ways of life, or instill bias amongst people. The main selling point: "Everyone is saying it on the TV, so IT MUST be true!"

The way I can trick someone into thinking another person is a criminal with Zero evidence is simple: I first make up a lie about them with pausable specifics - get some other people to believe the lie - Get the people whom heard it from them, who suddenly now interpret it the lie as a FACT, and not a lie anymore. - The person the lie was origianally created to attack based off Zero evidence and assumptions has now become PROVEN EVIDENCE, backed by a number of people, who are basing their source on the credibility of the other people who told them, as those people are basing it off the ones who told them, and so on...

In essence, it's easy to manipulate people to believe things based off nothing, for the simple fact that they put faith in what other (ill-informed) people around them say. When really, they're just seeds of illogic further spreading the disease... Like two ships sailing into a storm whom both assume the other knows how to go around it....

>:] Think logically.... Think individually...

 

[iKotomi]

Something related to this is also that one math guy's proof that you cannot prove something about a system from within a system (or some ish like that--that's just the best way I remember it). And I think that applies here when you consider what I said about 'many worlds' (or an object that does not experience things as we humans do). Only an object that could effectively prove that things can be one way or another (in this not experiencing time linearly or one reality) could really say whether or not that's true. But that's the way I'm looking at it.

There seems to be some confusion as to what or who's being referred to, but it's probably Godel. Godel's incompleteness theorem roughly states that given a consistent system, you can't prove everything about a system using that system's axioms. By extension, you can't prove that your system is consistent using only the axioms of your system. You can still prove a lot of things given that your axioms are true- that's just how logic works, but there will always be some statement that cannot be proven or disproven.

This discussion probably will go nowhere, because what it comes down to is people believing certain statements about the universe to be true and being unable to prove it. The problem with free will versus determinism, is that a lot of people really want to believe that we have the power to change future outcomes, and there are a lot of people that want to believe that everything happens for a reason.

There is a lot of evidence in neuroscience to suggest that everything we think to be "free will" is actually a result of the chemical and electrical processes that are constantly taking place in the body, and there is a lot of evidence to believe that randomness really does drive a lot of systems. I would say that the evidence supports a theory that things are "mostly determined" but there's a little bit of randomness that could possibly be what we consider "free will" if you want to call it that.

Of course you can say stuff like how do we trust our observations, and tons of dead guys have written about that. My own advice if you actually want to have meaningful discussion without coming to the conclusion that you can't prove anything, is to just ask better questions in the first place.

 

[Death_Emperor_X]

http://25.media.tumblr.com/492e2f449770bf51906400515247959d/tumblr_mzm7zipj8e1r5pe9fo1_400.gif Enjoy this shit, Slade. Take your mind off of these silly people for a sec.

That's badass! lol, It's like Slade has fans.

 

[Skipjack]

I like to keep things simple:

There's no such thing as weird, but there is a socially acceptable.

When it comes to politics, don't feel, think.

Your imagination is your strongest ally, but only use it reasonably.

It's okay to rely on your friends to help you through your weaknesses. Over-independence gets you nowhere.