tom sarbeck

As I no longer live in Spain, I thought I was less attached, until I saw the horrific penalties between Morrocco and Spain. It was dire, painful and slightly heart breaking.

Watching France play England in Scotland was absolutely hilarious. Everyone at the viewing party (30 of us) was supporting France (anyone but England) except an English…[Read more]

jakelafort wrote:
I simply wonder how ritualized behavior originates and becomes coded.

Just guessing at an example, a ritualized behavior might have been facilitated by an odd genetic mutation, e.g. a vocal tract optimization that enhances communication just enough to help the vocalizer sound sexy and communicate juicy love (and so on) so he can…[Read more]

Touting “medicines” without transparency and evidence is an age old snake oil approach.

For more detailed, specific research, I’d try google scholar, e.g. starting with something like this:

https://scholar.google.com/scholar?as_ylo=2018&q=traditional+chinese+medicine&hl=en&as_sdt=0,5

I limited those search results to 2018 and later, just to…[Read more]

Unseen, you haven’t explained anything. You’ve just stated that we make decisions because we do one thing rather than another (huh?), despite the fact that we could not have done otherwise. Such a decision is empty of responsibility. Sorry you cannot see that. I don’t think we will go any further with that. If you want to eat the whole cake and…[Read more]

I am not forcing you to accept anything. You posted a video saying she speaks for you better than you could, where she defines non-free will as the inability of an agent to do other than they have done. This by the way, does not necessarily infer predeterminism. It does exclude an agents ability to have done anything else.

She clearly says…[Read more]

She specifically says that you cannot do B, C, D…Z instead of A. If A is the only possible outcome, choice, alternatives, even decisions are illusions. If free will (as she describes it) is an illusion, so are all of the above. You cannot have both. A rock isn’t responsible for falling in a particular direction, nor is a person who cannot but do…[Read more]

This person loses me at 8:33. She is conflating something akin to a “reaction” to someone’s behaviour with “responsibility”. Yes, it doesn’t sound controversial that if x does this, that y will retaliate. However, that is not the same as saying that x is “responsible” for what they did. Unseen, the person could NOT have done other than they had…[Read more]

Unseen, it is an illusion that we make decisions if we cannot but do what we have done. Adding “another level” or talking about “the every day” as though it is somehow divorced from determinism is just a gross copout. I don’t understand how situating it in the “every day” avoids the consequences of your certainty that there is no free will.  No…[Read more]

So my answer to your question is that we can make decisions because of the language we use when talking about them at the shallow level.

So you’ve introduced a magical shallow level where this all magically makes sense. Bravo unseen, you’ve attempted to answer my question by giving me a post-modernesque non-answer. Groan.

Unseen, how can someone make a decision if they cannot have done otherwise? That is like saying a computer makes a decision when in reality it is following a code it cannot but follow. It is not even that different to saying a rock makes a decision in which way it rolls down a hill. That the human phenomena is vastly more complex is irrelevant, if…[Read more]

My mistake Jake. Thanks for the clarification

(see Enco…see how easy it is to concede a point and admit you misconstrued someone else’s argument)!

No Jake. The “every day” element is a silly excuse. It is absurd to claim certainty of something and ridicule those who even withold a position, and then go on to talk seriously and passionately about things that would require the thing you are certain about to not be the case. You are clearly not that certain if “every day life” pressures you…[Read more]

Enco, you often pack so many points and/or opinion into a post that it’s impossible to respond to all of them, so I’m forced to just reduce and prioritize, while just plain trying to ignore other points.

TheEncogitationer wrote:
Why would we want to fuck up all of that good work by adopting a policy of “respect” and “understanding” towards…

[Read more]

doesn’t the fact that people can resist acting upon desires, even innate desires, indicate that some form of Volition does exist after all?

Actually, Unseen is certain that there is no such thing as free will. So, in effect, choice, volition, decision etc are totally meaningless. If you could not have done but what you did…then moral r…[Read more]