Most Interesting Question.

[Pirate]

The problem with this discussion is that not every hypothesis that can be stated falls under the purview of science.

If this is so, then is it false to say that sceintifically speaking, there is no afterlife? My original argument to betazed's claim was that we can't think of an expieriment that would actually test for an afterlife. You seem to agree that this question may not be a scientific one.

 

[Mark1031]

You seem to agree that this question may not be a scientific one.

I most certainly do. But reason dictates that we do not accept as true things for which we see no positive evidence.

 

[Pirate]

This would not prove they exist on a planet far away. It would only prove the possibility... which is already a given, because anything is possible.

Well then why research anything if it is all possible? Lets just sit around and think.

It would do more than prove the possibility. It would establish a probability for its existence. That gives it a lot more scientific weight.

 

[Neomega]

An experiment in free will:

Raise your right arm. You can do it, great you must have free will. Or are you simply responding to my stimulus.

Now, if you're an atheist-- believe in God. Just do it for the experiment, you can will yourself back to being an atheist after that. If you're religious deny God.
Can you do it? I mean really do it so that you believe it not just that you activate the motor program to cause the appropriate statement to come out of your mouth.

You're in a bad mood. will yourself to be happy in the next five minutes.

You're a straight man, will yourself to find George Bush indescribably sexually attractive.

I think you'll find that there are really a lot of things that we quite clearly have no free will over.

Are you confirming then that a suicide is the ultimate example of free will, as it has denied all basic survival instincts? Are you saying our instincts limit our "free will?"

This proved nothing.

 

[Aphex_Twin]

Nothing like joining an argument late

Anyway, the most intresting question must be the third for reasons of practicality. Origin of the universe deals with a strictly philosophical question and can't be answered (something that created the universe-system should be part of the same uber-system [universe + creator] and there would still be no answer to who/what created the latter). Origin of civilisation is something among symilar lines.

 

[Mark1031]

Are you confirming then that a suicide is the ultimate example of free will, as it has denied all basic survival instincts? Are you saying our instincts limit our "free will?"

This proved nothing.

I don't get your point. Are you implying that the position of your arm at any given miment is not an instinct while your current mood at any given moment is?

 

[Neomega]

Well then why research anything if it is all possible? Lets just sit around and think.

It would do more than prove the possibility. It would establish a probability for its existence. That gives it a lot more scientific weight.

But is far, far from proof. And in a thread I started long ago, I didn't know it, but I was stating von Nägeli's paradox, that not only anything is possible, but using the laws of probababilty, and assuming an infinite space and time, anything and everything, not only has existed, but does exist, infinitely times over, and will continue to do so in the future.

 

[Neomega]

I don't get your point. Are you implying that the position of your arm at any given miment is not an instinct while your current mood at any given moment is?

No, where did I imply that.

You were implying that since we cannot fight our instincts, and will George Bush sexy, we have no free will.

I already stated much earlier a concrete striking point to this hypothesis. People who commit suicide defy the most basic of instincts, the survival instinct.

And a person's mood is completely controllable by that person. A person can also teach themselves to become less belligerent etc.

 

[Mark1031]

No, where did I imply that.

You were implying that since we cannot fight our instincts, and will George Bush sexy, we have no free will.

I already stated much earlier a concrete striking point to this hypothesis. People who commit suicide defy the most basic of instincts, the survival instinct.

And a person's mood is completely controllable by that person. A person can also teach themselves to become less belligerent etc.

First, I'm sure there are some men who find George Bush sexually attractive. Didn't you see him in that flight suit ? Do these individuals not have instincts or do they have stronger freewills?

You seem to imply that the ability to act against any instinct is a sign of freewill? Well I showed a number of examples were one is unable to act against what you would call an instinct which thereby proves my point that we do not have complete unfettered freewill.

Now I don't quite understand the significance of suicide. Suicide is caused by severe depression i.e. mood. You state also that this is completely controllable through freewill. So your interpretation of suicide is that an individual sitting home one night simply decides I will myself to be depressed I then further will myself to commit suicide. This is what you're saying not that this is an imbalance of brain chemicals that leads to the low mood? Or did the person simply will the serotonergic neurons in his brain to reduce their firing rate? I do not believe that your view of depression and suicide is supported by current neurobiology.

Finally, I seriously doubt your contention that you have complete control over your mood.

 

[Neomega]

First, I'm sure there are some men who find George Bush sexually attractive. Didn't you see him in that flight suit ? Do these individuals not have instincts or do they have stronger freewills?

You seem to imply that the ability to act against any instinct is a sign of freewill? Well I showed a number of examples were one is unable to act against what you would call an instinct which thereby proves my point that we do not have complete unfettered freewill.

Now I don't quite understand the significance of suicide. Suicide is caused by severe depression i.e. mood. You state also that this is completely controllable through freewill. So your interpretation of suicide is that an individual sitting home one night simply decides I will myself to be depressed I then further will myself to commit suicide. This is what you're saying not that this is an imbalance of brain chemicals that leads to the low mood?

Absolutely. Neurobiology may disagree because they have found chemical patterns in the brain associated by depression, does not mean teh depression is not being guided.

I am firmly against any form of anti-depressant, and I had a feeling, from your profile, it would come down to this. Those who choose to be depressed do so because they have not taken a clear and well thought out observation of their life. In psychology I am sure you ran across the entire reality/perception disparity, and how that can be directly linked to one's mood.

Moreso, I could, if I wanted to, do something so absolutley currently, and personally repugnant, begin to will myself to love George Bush, and then find him sexually attractive. I once posted at these forums a dream I had about him, where I had feelings of great admiration. However, I am not going to take the time, or effort to do so, to prove someone over the internet wrong. My free will tells me there are other things I'd rather concetrate on.

Ghandi went on a hunger strike, and people have starved themselves to death.
The mind as a whole is more powerful than any single instinct.

My girlfriend, when I met her, had taken every single anti-depressant you could name, and surprise, none of them really worked. I convinced her, that the only thing that control these feeling is her own free will. She has not used them for 3.5 years, allthough her entire family keeps telling her how great they are, as they are all still on them. A very unstable bunch as well... There is much to be said about the power of excercising free will, and the positive effects it has on your mind.

There are many things I have done, scared to death, but curious at the same time. I have done many stupid things out of curiosity, I have talked myself into doing things, just to prove to myself my mind can control any instinct I have.

Weekness of the mind is a personal choice, and shows lack of character. I am not about to feel sorry for anyone who is depressed or even psychotic... for I have been to the edge and back many times, sometimes due to drugs such as LSD. For a while I had nightmares 2 or 3 times a week for years. I had to train myself to recognize bad dreams, and awake from them, or I was doomed to insanity. I still sleep deeply, yet if abad dream begins to occur, I wake up immediately.

 

[Neomega]

Now I don't quite understand the significance of suicide. Suicide is caused by severe depression i.e. mood. You state also that this is completely controllable through freewill. So your interpretation of suicide is that an individual sitting home one night simply decides I will myself to be depressed I then further will myself to commit suicide. This is what you're saying not that this is an imbalance of brain chemicals that leads to the low mood? Or did the person simply will the serotonergic neurons in his brain to reduce their firing rate? I do not believe that your view of depression and suicide is supported by current neurobiology.

The person who commits suicide has time and time again decided the feelings of hurt and loneliness make them feel better, and gradually slipped into a despair they did not recognize. But at the same time, at any moment, tehy could have got up, snapped tehir fingers, and come to this realization, that depression is not an illness, it is a weakness of character. Some prefer to be weak.

I know, because I let myself be depressed for three years, and then one day, I snapped out of it. Using a rubber band, I snapped it against my wrist everytime I thought disparaging thoughts. Within weeks, I had forgotten about "her, and was ready to move on with my life.

What instincts were pulling that rubber band?

 

[Mark1031]

The person who commits suicide has time and time again decided the feelings of hurt and loneliness make them feel better, and gradually slipped into a despair they did not recognize. But at the same time, at any moment, tehy could have got up, snapped tehir fingers, and come to this realization, that depression is not an illness, it is a weakness of character. Some prefer to be weak.

Yes I have seen this argument before and I think it is quite damaging and hurtful to those who are depressed. I would hope that you would advise anyone you know who's depressed to use their freewill on their own to seek professional help. You'll be happy to know that psychotherapy is equally effective in many cases to drug therapy for treating depression. And certainly drugs do not work in all cases. Also electroshock therapy can be effective in severe cases and seeking these treatments would also be an exercise of freewill.

Well I'm clearly not going to convince you that you don't have free will if you feel that you could get yourself to be sexually attracted to George Bush . OTOH I would hazard to guess that most straight males would find this impossible. Same for the religion and mood questions I would say for most people. You'll grant me though that you couldn't do this instantaneously so that at least you don't have absolute complete control over all of your thoughts and feelings but could only mold them over extended periods of time.

 

[betazed]

Well I'm clearly not going to convince you that you don't have free will if you feel that you could get yourself to be sexually attracted to George Bush .

mark, I must say I am convinced. That was a unique and insightful experiment. No matter how hard I try I just can't get attracted to Dubya.

There, and all this time i thought I had free will

 

[Neomega]

Well I'm clearly not going to convince you that you don't have free will if you feel that you could get yourself to be sexually attracted to George Bush . OTOH I would hazard to guess that most straight males would find this impossible. Same for the religion and mood questions I would say for most people. You'll grant me though that you couldn't do this instantaneously so that at least you don't have absolute complete control over all of your thoughts and feelings but could only mold them over extended periods of time.

Absolutely. You are correct. It would take years of self deprivation of sexual satisfaction, an immersion in gay culture, reading of gay pornography, and .... .... becoming a neocon.

But this is because I have built much of my own mind to behave the way it does. I would have to deconstruct much of my own mentality. The entire time, I would still be excercising free will. At any moment I could stop my self-logcabinizing, or I could start today.

I do not understand the logic, that if it took a long time, it would not be free will. I still would choose to begin down that path. I would tip the scale in that direction. I would begin my own retraining.

 

[Neomega]

Yes I have seen this argument before and I think it is quite damaging and hurtful to those who are depressed.

The depressed tend to like where they are at. It can be hurtful, but to a depressed person, what isn't?

If they wanted to, they could see it as a sign of hope, adn say, "YES, he's right! What am I doing! It is all up to me! I HAVE FREE WILL!"

And perhaps a depressed person reading this will understand.

You can base your perceptions on the actions and reports of others, or you can accept your experience for what it is. As I ahve said before.... YOU may not have free will, but I most certainly do. It is almost as if you are trying to convince me you do not exist!

 

[Birdjaguar]

"The doctrine of the ghost in the machine is that people are inhabited by an immaterial soul that is the locus of free will and choice and which can’t be reduced to a function of the brain."

The question of interest to me is what determines the events that we find happening to or around us? The people we meet, the friends we have, the string of bad or good events etc. Is it all chance? How does free will play into play into it all. How do the interactions that make up a life actually come together?

 

[Birdjaguar]

Agriculture was the single biggest factor in the rise of towns and cities from hunter gather cultures. Depending upon geography domesticated plants quickly to neighbors, epecially those in a simlar latitude without major barriers between.

Domestication and earliest known date:
SW Asia: Wheat, pea, olive, sheep, goat 8500 BC
China: Rice Millet, pig, silkworm 7500 BC
Mesoamerica: Corn, Beans, Squash, Turkey 3500 BC
Andes/Amazonia: Potato, manioc, llama, guinea pig 3500 BC
Eastern US: Sunflower 2500 BC
Sahel: Sorghum, African rice, guinea fowl 5000 BC
New Guinea: Sugar Cane, Banana 7000 BC

Data from "Guns, Germs and Steel" the current most definitive source for information on the rise of civilization.

 

[Fifty]

I voted other, specifically:

Why do I find Scandanavian girls (the ones I've met, at least) to be so insanely attractive?

 

[Pirate]

Ah spam. Addiing a bit of levity to otherwise interesting conversations for the past 20 years.

Anyway,

The question of interest to me is what determines the events that we find happening to or around us? The people we meet, the friends we have, the string of bad or good events etc. Is it all chance? How does free will play into play into it all. How do the interactions that make up a life actually come together?

Kurt Vonnegut's "Cat's Cradle" is an excellent satirical perspective on that question. Read it, you'll love it.
To follow up on your question, what do you consider to be the relationship between chance and free will? You can exercise all the free will you want but that doesn't mean you can control things outside your own head. Another person's free will is your chance.

 

[Neomega]

I had another thought... if it is all predetermined, surely identical siamese twins would have similar dreams, no? Surely only experiencing everything a foot to the left would not have such drastic impact on relaxed thought processes in comparison to their sibling 1 foot to the right?

Or is our mind more of a random thought generator?