jakelafort

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 518 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #30335

    jakelafort
    Participant

    This is interesting. You guys are offering hypothetical advice. If Ivy truly wants advice she will say what the issues are.

    #30323

    jakelafort
    Participant

    Was just thinkin bout anthropic principle and Reg goes ahead and mentions it. It must mean something. It can’t be a coincidence.

    I’d say if randomness is at play the clockwork metaphor does not work. It is a metaphor for determinism. Great way to test determinism…play that shit back DJ. It is a question as much for science as it is for philosophy. We really don’t know..we are all shooting sparks.

    #30319

    jakelafort
    Participant

    Robert i agree with much of what you’ve written. Not all of it.

    The conclusion that we are unimportant? check.

    You wrote i am in the god camp of omniscient possibility. That is the best way to insult me! But i think it is a non sequitur. At least i cant see how a clockwork universe depends on our appreciation of its intricacies. it either is or is not deterministic.

    I frame the issue differently in contemplating how different forms of life such as monkeys, parrots and paramecium perceive things. For me it is simply an issue of consciousness. And i damn fucking sure do not think it is a phenomenon that arises ab intito in humans. It is very likely something of a spectrum. It is an evolved attribute of life with gradations.

    Whether there may be some degree of freedom to the way lifeforms act…i can not say..maybe. It is a scientific question.

    As to whether the universe is knowable i have been of the opinion for quite some time that it is not. The genesis of super intelligence may have something to say about that. Don’t think humans will unpeel the onion.

    #30318

    jakelafort
    Participant

    Davis, the analogy is a construct. It does not mean that you are describing something beyond the construct.

    But i like the metaphor u used for determinism…clockwork universe. And i am asserting that the sophistication/complexity of the life in that universe does not alter the operation of the clock.

    #30309

    jakelafort
    Participant

    Dictionary says…an act of selecting or making a decision when faced with two or more possibilities…some synonyms…choice, option, alternative, preference..CHOICE suggests the opportunity or privilege of choosing freely.

    Thus in common usage the word CHOICE and UNCONSCIOUS are indeed at odds. We may be no different from a paramecium, eukaryote or any individual cell or collection of cells. Indeed, if the universe is utterly deterministic that is the case.

    See, i am good with the word determinism. In the history of human thought there is such a sickening egoism and anthropomorphism. Briefly, we see religion as the poster child for this kind of thinking…the Greeks of antiquity had it also…the silly geocentrism, the notion that we are so important in a universe that is so unimaginably vast and complex, the idea that other animals are so far below/beneath us and we have all of these unique attributes…it is all BS..let me stop…

    So i do not conceive the word determinism as implying that there is an author. Any causative agent can determine the course of events.

    #30305

    jakelafort
    Participant

    Robert, can’t agree. That is solipsism. Whether we are cognizant of how things will unfold has no bearing (in most instances) on how they will unfold.

    Unconscious choices? That is a contradiction. I cant comment on random code replication issues cuz i aint got that knowledge cuz i didn’t go to college.

    #30303

    jakelafort
    Participant

    Davis, i can’t see how complexity obviates determinism.

    Also, the notion of choice makes sense only in the context of consciousness.

    #30288

    jakelafort
    Participant

    Simon, the but for ( for instance, but for a Denovisan taking a shine to a homo sapien 122,ooo years ago this occurrence would not be) causation is endless. On the other hand it is gravity alone that accounts for the ball”””””””’s falls. Kind of reminds me of legal analysis of causation. In this instance gravity is akin to proximate cause. The endless sequence of events that led to the fall of the ball are necessary but not sufficient.

    #30277

    jakelafort
    Participant

    Nein, nein, Wittgenstein, the sun will rise right on time.

    #30268

    jakelafort
    Participant

    I used the search function for New Scientist but that article does not appear.

    Our minds work outside causal reality? WTF? I would like to know what makes you think so. Even it were so and i in know way concede it is so, it does not follow or establish that there are gods, irrespective of whether those imagined entities operate causally. Btw there is some recent progress underway scientifically in terms of understanding consciousness. I aint got the link and am too lazy to get it now.

    Religion has an explanation you say. So what? How is that even on a par with a hypothesis? Anybody can make up nonsense but the conception does not equate with the assertion. At least you said something that is not about harlots and insane mythology but you have demonstrated more an IQ of 16.4 than 164.

    #30261

    jakelafort
    Participant

    Yeah, i have read about that council, other councils and about precursors. That is not what i am asking you. Step outside your comfort zone and answer me…CONCEPTUALLY, why is there any validity to any of it? Again a text can not authenticate itself. Is there any rational reason to believe that what has been handed down whether in its original version(s) or modified has any validity?

    #30256

    jakelafort
    Participant

    Michael, are you sure you are not dogmatic in this opinion and more importantly in your approach to reality? You take great care to differentiate your views from those of mainstream Christianity. How do those differ? Both mainstream and Michael-think spring from authority and doctrine and are held/cherished as cocksure.

    Once a person has fully embraced ideology/religion/views that are as aforementioned there is no possibility of discovering what is real or true if it is at variance with dogma. (dogma is amgod backwards…could that be a message?) You readily espouse your discoveries/understanding but divulge zero about the foundations. None of us are interested other than at an academic level (me not at all…bore the shit out of me) unless you establish the foundations. There are many reasons for us to discount all iterations of mythology, superstition and its dogma. So without doing that ( i have asked u repeatedly) there is no reason to respect/consider what you are representing.

    #30252

    jakelafort
    Participant

    What a shitty way to live Michael.

    I gather that putative evidence that contradicts your understanding is rejected. The evidence is either specious or intended to deceive. Isn’t that a bit myopic though to assume that we are IT. Is there anything deceptive or contradictory about life in other parts of the universe? It may be imagined that life arises elsewhere naturally or supernaturally depending on your brand of coffee.

    #30248

    jakelafort
    Participant

    So aliens are nonexistent because they would be supernatural?

    #30245

    jakelafort
    Participant

    Michael, if we were visited by super-intelligent aliens and compelled to answer yes or no as to whether history attests to the accuracy of the prophecy of the book of revelation on pain of execution for an incorrect answer how would you answer?

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 518 total)