discussion Random philosophical thoughts

[arget]

If you really want an existential crisis look up what a Boltzmann Brain is.

 

[FoamBottle25]

Go read the jaunt by stephen king... nightmare fuel right there

 

[bigballedbob]

When the Pope dies, is he being fired or promoted.

 

[ham2323]

When I was a kid I thought about these things. Now I have internalized everything, as if there was no longer a separation between my thoughts and myself

 

[4rcan1st]

Go read the jaunt by stephen king... nightmare fuel right there

That's a good representation of "fuck around and find out", haven't read that one before. Thx.

 

[misaki002]

What if there is no free will and everything is determined by physical laws only?
What if there never was a choice for me to not play lewd games?

I think a lot about the first question. The problem i think lies in existence of true random events.... For example lets take a throw of dice... the number ends at the top is determined by the strength of throw its angle and many many other things. Our choices are too determined by aspects of our lives (of course there are too many aspects and are too complicated to define all of them). Like when somebody takes a bus to work 15 minutes too early because once he was too late, for example. If everything has a reason to happen then i dont think the free will exists. But on the other hand if random event can occur then its up to free will to select if it happens or no.

 

[User_89876]

I think a lot about the first question. The problem i think lies in existence of true random events.... For example lets take a throw of dice... the number ends at the top is determined by the strength of throw its angle and many many other things. Our choices are too determined by aspects of our lives (of course there are too many aspects and are too complicated to define all of them). Like when somebody takes a bus to work 15 minutes too early because once he was too late, for example. If everything has a reason to happen then i dont think the free will exists. But on the other hand if random event can occur then its up to free will to select if it happens or no.

True randomness is at the heart of nature (Quantum physics, chaos theory, ...), so there is no chain of causality, I think. Random fluctuation on smalles scale will increase to impact the macro world. So the universe is not a simple machine, still I don't see where there is a choice anywhere. Where is the lever for our conciousness to determine the outcome of any thought process or even action?

 

[misaki002]

True randomness is at the heart of nature (Quantum physics, chaos theory, ...), so there is no chain of causality, I think. Random fluctuation on smalles scale will increase to impact the macro world. So the universe is not a simple machine, still I don't see where there is a choice anywhere. Where is the lever for our conciousness to determine the outcome of any thought process or even action?

Hmm i am not that knowledgable but doesnt chaos theory suggests that there si some order in chaos? The lever would be inside our brain i guess but i think the lever is choosing one of the two outcomes of random event. If there is random event then there is a lever and then i think there is a possibility of free will... (you will pull the lever to one of the outcomes)

 

[User_101810]

"All the world's a stage, and all the men and women merely players," (Shakespeare)

 

[User_89876]

"All the world's a stage, and all the men and women merely players," (Shakespeare)

Same is true for our consciousness. It merely watches what we do and tries to reason about it afterwards. There is scientific evidence for this!

 

[48e1-920b-9a4ff0ce20]

Quantum physics, chaos theory

Chaos Theory isn't random in any way. It just means that outcomes are sensitive to initial conditions. The same initial conditions will still produce the same outcome in a deterministic system, it's just that any deviation, no matter how minute, will likely produce a radically different outcome through the accumulation of compounding deviance.

The jury is still out on whether the seemingly random aspects of quantum physics are "genuinely random" or merely indicative of a substrate of reality we as yet lack data to produce a cohesive theory around.

Of course, all of it is random to humans, in the sense that both "merely difficult to predict events" and "genuinely random" events are far beyond our capacity to track or predict.

Where is the lever for our conciousness to determine the outcome of any thought process or even action?

It doesn't matter. I am. I perceive and act on reality. As do any of you.

What difference if I am an ephemeral electric gestalt arising from consistent natural processes or if I am some metaphysical process somehow bound to this reality?

What is it to be a self that is not a machine? Is it mere access to state which is not available should I be torn asunder in search of it? Why should we not then consider the greater existence that holds both reality and metaphysics and still see it as deterministic a whole? Am I some private space that is inaccessible save this connection to being, from which decisions are somehow compared to hidden state, or even some personal pool of "true randomness"?

Am I more in being if I have access to some private transcendental random number generator rather than being an eddy in a deterministic chaos that stretches beyond the bounds of light to transmit?

I think not.

Free will is an irrelevant concept. We are and we must contend with reality and one another whether or not the future is mutable or whether it is an unchanging crystal of time we are simply experiencing as it travels an unchanging path. To despair that you are a calculable affect of the universe is silly. You still are, still choose based on your internal processes, and still experience existence. What difference would more hidden state or taking your choice and boiling it down to metaphysical random selection make?

Predestination does not abridge us of responsibility as we walk that predestined path.

The idea that if, with perfect information of the entire history of every photon and particle of the entire universe, I am calculable, and that therefore that calculability somehow removes me of the responsibility of being me is absurd.

 

[User_89876]

Chaos Theory isn't random in any way. It just means that outcomes are sensitive to initial conditions.

You are right that's not randomness, but this sensitivity is so extreme that quantum fluctuations will make the future unpredictable.

The jury is still out on whether the seemingly random aspects of quantum physics are "genuinely random" or merely indicative of a substrate of reality we as yet lack data to produce a cohesive theory around.

Wasn't this sorted out? There are no hidden variables no matter what theory we will come up with. Nature is inherently probabilistic. See Bell's inequality.

It doesn't matter. I am. I perceive and act on reality. As do any of you.

Here I am not sure if I agree. Fundamentally I am convinced that I myself am, because I seem to experience life and myself. As for "you", I cannot say the same for you. I perceive you as part of the outside that is different from me and my inside world. Sure, could be the same, but I will never be 100% sure.

Free will is an irrelevant concept.

It's not as soon as terms like responsibility and morals come into play. A stone has certainly no free will, so you cannot make it responsible for anything. Animals might(!) have free will , if it exists, still they are not moral beings. So I disagree. The existence of free will if fundamental for the concept of responsibility

Predestination does not abridge us of responsibility as we walk that predestined path.

You lost me. Predestination, if it exists, contradicts free will, as there is no choice at all. It therefore contradicts responsibility. You can't blame nature for obeying it's laws. Nor can you blame it judge anyone else

The idea that if, with perfect information of the entire history of every photon and particle of the entire universe, I am calculable, and that therefore that calculability somehow removes me of the responsibility of being me is absurd.

No. Here I argue that predestination arising from perfect calculability cannot exist. calculability or computability is really limited. Both randomness and non linearity are examples where this concept breaks in reality. Even with perfect information the future is not comparable die to randomness.

And even if it existed I can't follow why it could coexist with responsibility.


Interestingly enough there was a recent paper published that hints at the possibility that our brain's core functions do rely on random quantum effects.

 

[48e1-920b-9a4ff0ce20]

And even if it existed I can't follow why it could coexist with responsibility.

My philosophic view on the matter is that it doesn't matter what we are.

All of the same ethical and moral issues still exist even if we are not somehow transcendent.

We will still have thieves and murderers, and they will still have chosen to commit those crimes.

We still must decide what to do with them if we do not wish to suffer their depredations.

It may be that they are fundamentally incapable of having done differently, but so be it.

If they cannot be said to have made that choice, then it may be said that they are that choice.

If their very existence is that of a murderer, I see no reason we should not still punish them for their action.

Regardless of what I am, I have thoughts and desires. I exist in and experience my life regardless of its substrate.

There are actions I can take that will or will not cause suffering for others.

If my choice can be foreseen from the configuration of the universe, that doesn't change that I am the small part of the universe that makes that choice.

A stone lacks sufficient internal state, lacks expectation, lacks qualia of any form. We are brilliantly complex swirls of whatever we are.

It is my position that "free will" is little more than a philosophic coping mechanism. It has no real meaning to it. It is handwaving. A flourish to dismiss difficult questions and nothing more.

As for quantum mechanics, I expect we will see. Non-local or superdeterminate correlations are certainly still possible. I'm not convinced that pilot wave theory is particularly unlikely.

I am not much a fan of the theories of superpositions and belief in the vague notion that the universe collapses into state based upon observation.

I expect this will be little more than a folly in the long run. What replaces it may be stranger still, but I see no reason to believe the clock does not operate by clockwork.

 

[draslimeil]

In the end humans are just another lifeform, a walking, talking fleshbag full of liquid and nerves that will grow and then decay untill we break down and decompose. We have no andvantage over other lifeforms beyond our massive, overly complex brainmatter, there's no such thing as a soul or gods or afterlife or any of that stuff, that just an amalgamation of lack of understanding, hubris and fear that we've collectively crafted stories around all that stuff.

Also asparagus is the worst vegetable that exists. period.

 

[User_89876]

In the end humans are just another lifeform, a walking, talking fleshbag full of liquid and nerves that will grow and then decay untill we break down and decompose. We have no andvantage over other lifeforms beyond our massive, overly complex brainmatter, there's no such thing as a soul or gods or afterlife or any of that stuff, that just an amalgamation of lack of understanding, hubris and fear that we've collectively crafted stories around all that stuff.

Also asparagus is the worst vegetable that exists. period.

I can agree to one of those sentences with my full heart and 100% certainty

 

[draslimeil]

I can agree to one of those sentences with my full heart and 100% certainty

Well it better be the asparagus part, otherwise we'll have to take this outside.

 

[Tosser]

You are here.

 

[stangnomez]

"Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo" and "Hurt people hurt people" mean the same thing

 

[48e1-920b-9a4ff0ce20]

If their very existence is that of a murderer, I see no reason we should not still punish them for their action.

I wanted to expound on this statement. I do not argue for overkill in punishments, death for every crime or any of that nonsense.

Regardless of how the universe operates, we operate on limited information. We don't get to know if the kid that stole a candy bar will be a thief or turn around an become a doctor if given a just punishment.

Our lack of foresight means we must act as if the universe is unpredictable whether it is or not, because we are ourselves limited.

 

[odspyykt]

I wonder what happens when you die, stay like a ghost or go to another place, could it be that we are surrounded by our dead relatives at every moment? . It makes me question what i do when i think about it.

Most likely nothing. Like when you go to sleep and have no memory of anything when you wake up.

You must be registered to see attachments