Archaeology of the New Testament

[Dutch Uncle]

I'm not opposed to it at all, there's just no reason, based on the neurological functionality of our brain, to believe it exists.

So why do you object to me classifying you as someone who thinks they are a meat robot with no ability to determine their own future? A strict determinist?

FWIW, per the definition below, I'm a soft determinist. I believe normal, rational people have a modicum of free will. Amount TBD.

Determinism | Religion and Philosophy | Research Starters | EBSCO Research

<p>Determinism is a philosophical concept suggesting that all events, including human actions, are determined by preceding events in accordance with natural laws. Proponents, such as philosophers and scientists like Leucippus and Pierre-Simon Laplace, argue that if one had complete knowledge of...

www.ebsco.com

Determinism is a philosophical concept suggesting that all events, including human actions, are determined by preceding events in accordance with natural laws. Proponents, such as philosophers and scientists like Leucippus and Pierre-Simon Laplace, argue that if one had complete knowledge of these laws, it would be possible to predict all future events. Determinism is often categorized into hard and soft versions. Hard determinism posits that all actions are the result of scientific laws and that free will is an illusion; thus, individuals cannot be held morally responsible for their actions. In contrast, soft determinism allows for a form of free will, suggesting that while choices may be predetermined, individuals can act freely when external constraints do not impede their desires. An opposing view, indeterminism, argues that not all events are causally determined, allowing for genuine free will and moral responsibility. This debate raises important questions about human agency and the nature of responsibility, appealing to diverse perspectives across philosophical and psychological fields.

There really is no way it COULD exist.

Wow. You're all knowing too. Awesome!

 

[Jerry Mathers]

Saying there is a choice implies there's more than one option that you could have chosen. While it may appear there are two or more choices (chocolate or vanilla ice cream?), since the ultimate decision is completely out of your control, there was no choice to do other than what you ultimately decided.

you can refuse either and devise your own third option.

you lack balls and creativity if you think there is no free will.

pussy talk.

 

[Jerry Mathers]

So why do you object to me classifying you as someone who thinks they are a meat robot with no ability to determine their own future? A strict determinist...

... a neo-calvinist fuckwhistle?

 

[Into the Night]

1. all neocons are shiteaters,

What is a 'neocon shiteater'?

regardless of party affiliation..

2. globalization is a race to the bottom for the people of all nations, only oligarchs benefit over time.

Conducting international business is not a 'race to the bottom'. It is not an oligarchy.

3. AI is oversold on capabilities and over leveraged by so many times that BIS is issuing warnings on the bubble.

What 'bubble'?

4. AI is to put people out of work. they say so. thats the selling point. only evil people embrace AI.

AI does not put people out of work.

5. Satan wants to replace people with AI and robots like libertarian Nazis.

Nazi fallacy.
Robots have no politics.
Robots have no party affiliation.
Robots are only capable of perform repetitive operations.
This frees people of drudgery or working in dangerous or hazardous environments.

enjoy hell, little bitch.

Okay.

 

[Into the Night]

A tire, not correctly attached, would eventually fly off without any conscious intervention.

A conscious being incorrectly attached the tire.
A conscious being gave the tire energy.

No conscious being would have to push/pull it off.

A conscious being improperly attached the tire.
A conscious being gave the tire energy.

 

[Into the Night]

Yes. My brain makes decisions, but there are no "choices" for "me" to make because a) there is no "me" to make choices and b) the thoughts that go into the decision are out of my control. There's no "me" creating the thoughts or filtering the thoughts, preventing thoughts, etc.

Denial of self fallacy.

 

[Into the Night]

And it came off without any direct intervention by a conscious being.

A conscious being improperly attached the tire.
A conscious being gave the tire energy.

It certainly is not.

Lie. Denial.

Once it has left the vehicle, no conscious being has any control over the movement of the tire or the physics that determine its path.

Yes they do.

People can intervene to stop the tire or to direct it to a safe place to lose its energy.
One particularly effective technique has been in use on freeways and many highways for awhile now. It's called a Jersey Barrier.
For the driver that loses the tire, if he detects it coming lose, he can even impart some direction to it before it actually leaves the vehicle.
I have known police to use their own vehicle to deflect a runaway tire to a safe direction.

 

[Into the Night]

I agree, unless an AI robot is involved, it would be an error by a being that would eventually result in the tire coming off.

A conscious being programmed the robot.

But, again, the fact that every spin, bounce and movement can be explained after the fact does not make it automatically true that the tire was put into motion by a conscious being.

The tire was put into motion by a conscious being.

Cypress is arguing that the incredibly complex mathematical explanations for what what happens in the universe means that there is a being who designed the universe with this specific, complex calculations in mind.

Non-sequitur fallacy. This has nothing to do with tires.

 

[Into the Night]

There is no you. We use terms like me, I, you, etc for communication, but there is no separate part of your body that is the "you" or the self.

Denial of self fallacy.

 

[Into the Night]

Saying there is a choice implies there's more than one option that you could have chosen.

That is correct.

While it may appear there are two or more choices (chocolate or vanilla ice cream?),

Those are two choices. There is no 'appearance'. It is two actual choices.

since the ultimate decision is completely out of your control,

The ultimate decision on your choice of ice cream flavor you consume is up to you, and you alone.

there was no choice to do other than what you ultimately decided.

Denial of self fallacy.

 

[Into the Night]

I'm not opposed to it at all, there's just no reason, based on the neurological functionality of our brain, to believe it exists.

There really is no way it COULD exist.

Denial of self fallacy.

 

[Into the Night]

you can refuse either and devise your own third option.

you lack balls and creativity if you think there is no free will.

pussy talk.

It's worse than that. He is denying he even exists.

 

[ZenMode]

Denial of self fallacy.

Show me where the your "self" is?

 

[Jerry Mathers]

Show me where the your "self" is?

holy fuck.

you're very dumb.

not deep at all.

a fool.

 

[ZenMode]

The ultimate decision on your choice of ice cream flavor you consume is up to you, and you alone.

Except there is no "you" that sits outside of your stream of consciousness that is able to choose. Your ultimate decision comes from a place in your brain that you don't control and have no visibility, so there is no true choice. Your brain was going to make whatever choice it was going to make.

 

[ZenMode]

holy fuck.

you're very dumb.

not deep at all.

a fool.

Then show me. Where in the body is the "self".

 

[Jerry Mathers]

Except there is no "you" that sits outside of your stream of consciousness that is able to choose. Your ultimate decision comes from a place in your brain that you don't control and have no visibility, so there is no true choice. Your brain was going to make whatever choice it was going to make.

retarded.

 

[ZenMode]

Denial of self fallacy.

So, you have nothing to contribute as usual.

 

[Jerry Mathers]

Then show me. Where in the body is the "self".

the self is the whole body and the brain.

is that too hard for you to wrap immense intellect around?

 

[ZenMode]

Yes they do.

People can intervene to stop the tire or to direct it to a safe place to lose its energy.
One particularly effective technique has been in use on freeways and many highways for awhile now. It's called a Jersey Barrier.
For the driver that loses the tire, if he detects it coming lose, he can even impart some direction to it before it actually leaves the vehicle.
I have known police to use their own vehicle to deflect a runaway tire to a safe direction.

"Do" and "can" aren't the same thing.