How much do genetics make a difference?

[Terxpahseyton]

nvm not thought though

 

[Birdjaguar]

That is a nice quote. And I think it carries a valuable message for how one should, psychologically, relate to it. In deed, I think a healthy mind can not do without this illusion.
But an illusion strikes me as a bad adviser when discussing how thing actually are and work.

Moreover, we already got a truth about how things work. And in there, there is no room for a free will in a strict sense. Whereas "strict" means: actually free. Not just seemingly free, but actually not really at all.
This truth may be incomplete. There is at least some reason to believe that it is with regards to the mind. But to conclude by that that free will was real means to fill gaps or doubts with unfounded wild speculation.

Bozo used to frequent CFC and was a great contributor. He moved to Finland from NJ and married a CFC moderator (Mathilda) and they both dropped out of sight.

How do things actually work? Did I make the decision to add that quote to to my post? Could i have done otherwise? When and where was my decision to have a ham sandwich for lunch made?

 

[Terxpahseyton]

The precise answer is impossible to give. But it would be expressed in terms of biology. chemistry or physics. Since that it how things actually work, to our best knowledge.

 

[cardgame]

Was bozo the originator of that saying? I've heard it before and it ranks up there with the greats.

 

[Birdjaguar]

The precise answer is impossible to give. But it would be expressed in terms of biology. chemistry or physics. Since that it how things actually work, to our best knowledge.

We all have to operate under some assumptions regardless of what is true, or if we don't know the truth. For practical reasons I choose to think that I choose my sandwich. the truth of it is only interesting from a meta level.

Was bozo the originator of that saying? I've heard it before and it ranks up there with the greats.

I think so, but cannot confirm it. He posted it here around 2010. You could maybe search his posts to find the exact time and place. I have always loved it.

 

[Terxpahseyton]

We all have to operate under some assumptions regardless of what is true, or if we don't know the truth. For practical reasons I choose to think that I choose my sandwich. the truth of it is only interesting from a meta level.
.

Aha,,,
Let me translate that: I reject your reasoning for the sake of what I like. Also, your reasoning is useless.

It is not.
Our whole system of morality actually assumes a freedom of will. If that freedom of will was recognized as fictional, that would not destroy this system. But it would improve it.
Because while still demanding personal responsibility, we would not do it for its own sake, which is where the stupid starts.

 

[cardgame]

If we acknowledged there is no free will, that generates an open season on undesirable behavior. Though this may seem to be an actual manifestation of free will, it is merely humanity taking the path of least resistance.

 

[Terxpahseyton]

Assuming "undesirable behavior" was merely curtailed because it disagreed with a higher truth.

If a single statement was a truck. Saying that would be like having the truck decommissioned because you figured out a way make its whole fabrics out of pure excrement, while making its whole load of the same, of course.

You actually believe in justice, don't you? Well let me tell you a simple truth: You can't believe everything you think, let alone feel.
Justice is in a way a very fundamental feeling. But that feeling is not about what is right. It is about what keeps your group alive. However, that feeling was shaped in an entirely different environment than the one we find ourselves in today. Most notably: you actually knew everyone and actually depended on everyone.
Translate those feelings on a mass society and nonsense ensues.
I think making this leap is what many "conservatives" lack. Others may simply lack an interest in the common good. (which is at least sort of kinda maybe troublesome - remember, we can only relate to a group in terms of where we came from - a time where the survival of the group was likely our survival - but then rich people are making much of an effort to establish themselves as belonging to a special, different, group)
On the other hand, some lefties seem to only make this leap on account of romantic delusions.

 

[cardgame]

No, it is curtailed because it is punished. If there is an admittance of determinism then how can we still punish people? You see, it all falls apart.

 

[Terxpahseyton]

To be frank: You act like a small child bewildered by the thought that there was no magic making it all right.
Punishment needs no other justification than that it serves to prevent more of the deeds punished.
Yes this will ultimately call for victims "not entirely deserving it". But that IS the world we live in.
It always was. Right up to this moment.
There is no justice just as there is no responsibility. Those are magical concepts right out of a dumb Disney movie.
They know real-life-actual-manifestations. But those won't heal the word. They will merely explain it.

Really, I am not sure you aren't just pranking me to do pointless explaining because you realized I am in a mood to do so.

 

[timtofly]

Dumb is just another feeling that we use as a concept to justify the lack of responsibility.

 

[Terxpahseyton]

And moving goal posts is a standard tactic to divert those caring about something else than you do.
We are trying to have rational discussion here, in case you did not notice.

 

[timtofly]

Well I am not the one throwing out the whole football game and trying to start over from scratch. Justice and responsibility were destroyed by Disney, not made dumb.

 

[cardgame]

To be frank: You act like a small child bewildered by the thought that there was no magic making it all right.
Punishment needs no other justification than that it serves to prevent more of the deeds punished.
Yes this will ultimately call for victims "not entirely deserving it". But that IS the world we live in.
It always was. Right up to this moment.
There is no justice just as there is no responsibility. Those are magical concepts right out of a dumb Disney movie.
They know real-life-actual-manifestations. But those won't heal the word. They will merely explain it.

Really, I am not sure you aren't just pranking me to do pointless explaining because you realized I am in a mood to do so.

Well then what changes if we keep acting like free will does exist? If we're going to do that it might as well exist, rendering this conversation moot.

 

[Terxpahseyton]

"Nothing is perfect. Kill me!"
Of course people "matter".
Nothing I said changes that.
But what you are challenged with is that there is no higher system making everyone happy about it. Except the "bad" guys, of course.
Basically, your problem is to confuse meaning with personal meaning and when I smash that connection you act like meaning floated into emptiness. It did not. However, for you to still realize it beyond your chin, you need to dig into yourself to find it. Rather than some ridiculous idea of universal meaning.
If you do that, you will find much and potentially more of the love you decry I just burried.
The difference is knowing what you are even feeling and advocating. Which can make the difference between just following unfit old instincts and adhering to fitting modern codes.

 

[timtofly]

The whole point of living is to understand that nothing is perfect.

 

[Agent327]

They seem to matter a great deal since your genetics failed at providing you the necessary potential in reading comprehension.

Okay, that was mean, but seriously? That's what you took from what I said? You can have the greatest environment to ever bless a human's life and it won't mean diddily if you got handed the short stick genetically. They matter a lot.

I'm beginning to tend to agree with you... Nothing in your whole post suggested a connection between genetics and criminality. (You know, the actual topic.) Which, oddly, is confirmed by sociological studies. Criminologists, on the other hand, do seem to suggest such a connection exists. But you made no such distinction, as far as I can tell. Given the violent nature of humanity, such a revelation can hardly be shocking. However, violent tendencies can be channeled in other ways than criminal activity. This would suggest quite a bit more studies are needed before a seeming correlation can become a causal relation. (And then what? Will in future people be jailed because they may become criminals? One might think of possible terrorists here, for comparison.)

 

[Honor]

"The illusion of free will is so complete, that it may as well be real." -- Bozo Erectus

That is a great quote. Kudos to whoever is the originator.

No, it is curtailed because it is punished. If there is an admittance of determinism then how can we still punish people? You see, it all falls apart.

We still can punish people on practical grounds, if not moral. I believe accepting the deterministic nature of crime will only help to better the justice system, because people will understand the need to rehabilitate rather than punish, even if their nature seeks punishment on a personal level. Our justice system does stem from our nature as human beings, like most of our constructs, and theoretically and consequently our constructs should shape our nature in return.

The entire justice system may collapse because there is no more any moral basis for it, and chaos may ensue. However, after a while order will be restored until the next time we try to change things up. Change is rarely linear.

 

[Honor]

Justice is in a way a very fundamental feeling. But that feeling is not about what is right. It is about what keeps your group alive.

I think it is about both. "Right" is also a feeling, is it not? Depending on your brain chemistry, you will feel strongly connected to a human child, a cat or a dog, or a flower even (especially?) when your group is not in any sort of danger (=higher activity of certain brain chemicals - for example, oxytocin). And when you are in extreme survival mode, your connection to everything may actually weaken, rather than get stronger (=lower activity of certain brain chemicals). That is how "evil" and "wrong" manifest. That is why sometimes justice may be harsher and sometimes more lenient.

There is a balance between survival (the background feeling in harsher environments) and happiness (the background feeling in milder environments), and our perception and application of justice change with it.

 

[timtofly]

I'm beginning to tend to agree with you... Nothing in your whole post suggested a connection between genetics and criminality. (You know, the actual topic.) Which, oddly, is confirmed by sociological studies. Criminologists, on the other hand, do seem to suggest such a connection exists. But you made no such distinction, as far as I can tell. Given the violent nature of humanity, such a revelation can hardly be shocking. However, violent tendencies can be channeled in other ways than criminal activity. This would suggest quite a bit more studies are needed before a seeming correlation can become a causal relation. (And then what? Will in future people be jailed because they may become criminals? One might think of possible terrorists here, for comparison.)

Sounds fair, but most people who are genetically challenged enjoy life more than those whose genetics are closer to perfection. It seems quite unethical to say that those who are perfect take pleasure in maintaining that alleged perfection by eliminating inferior genetics. Those in the middle are free to choose which view they espouse, but saying that genetics "has to make a difference" is only playing into the hands of those who think that perfection is even achievable at the expense of those who point out that life is ok with imperfect genetics. Genetics will only make a difference as long as humans make the difference an issue, and to what extent that issue drives humanity.