a new argument against determinism

Disclaimer: I am currently engaged in a debate with Benjamin regarding  free will vs determinism. As this is outside that debate, and not even in the debate section, I do not want anyone to think I am posting this as an argument in that debate. I have concluded my arguments, though not all defenses, and do not post this as either. It's something that just occurred to me. I do not want anyone to think I am attempting to influence potential voters, so, beware to potential voters.

My subject regards human nature, and that it is, curiously, and demonstrably by experimentation, the habit of people of just about any culture who are without a map, or recognizable landmarks, when attempting to walk a straight line for a considerable distance, actually tend to walk in circles. https://outdoormeta.com/avoid-going-circles-lost-in-wild/

In fact, it seems such circles can have a limited size as small as a 20-meter circumference. Why?

Well, the why is not the subject of this post. But it is a natural phenomenon we humans appear to share. What has that to do with determinism? Simply this: Determinism would have our thoughts and actions predetermined, even when those thoughts and actions have specific purpose, such as walking in a straight line.  However, the condition of such an attempt, as noted above, fails. Seems to me, if determinism were at work, why would it have us defy the object of our attempt; to walk a straight line?

Determinism is the principle that each state of the universe precedes from a prior state based upon specific physical laws - such that you would be able to accurately predict the future if you knew enough of the state of the universe.

In your example, I can’t think of any reason your example violates determinism.

Specifically; the idea that you go around in circles would simply be the inevitable product of brain chemistry and structure; rather than some sort of true choice.

yes, predetermined chemistry and structure, to the effect that we walk in circles. It is also true that advocates of determinism also seem to prefer the notion of solipsism. Convenient.

Whereas, proponents of free will can easily solve the dilemma of walking in circles: get a map, and learn, by free will, how to use it.

The brain assess acquired and stored data, determines, and might or might not output options, which we might therefore regard as choices.

Under typical physiological circumstances the mechanisms and processes are set in stone....Predetermined.

We  do not choose to be born....And we possess a determination to survive.

Free will is the ability to make determined choices.

Trying to separate determinism and free will is an unnecessarily necessary philosophical exercise.

Actually, I believe, we do choose to be born as physical beings. Our existence does not begin at birth, nor even at conception, but existed previously as immortal, spirit children of God, our Father, which, of course, means we also have a Mother in Heaven, a perfect, resurrected female being as is God a male. Gender has purpose, and it is not an alphabet soup. Curious that among the officially-recognized soup, there is not an M or F, isn't it? But nothing and no one, but one, in mortality was ever intended to be perfect in mortality. Perfect, because only a perfect being to offer himself as sacrifice for our sins and sorrows to meet the demands of justice. God, by design,  did not create a perfect mortality. We are intended to become perfect, by our effort to be so. Having a physical body in which our spirit would reside was always the plan; a plan that was available to all, even to Satan and his minions, who are also spirit children of God, but who rejected the plan of God, choosing to not to be born in flesh, and now are damned forever to remain spirits, forever an imperfect state. Being our distant past, our destiny is divine, to die and resurrect as immortal, perfect physical beings, as did Jesus Christ, our elder brother, the firstborn in the spirit of God, our Father, and Mother.

That’s really not the break down here - I think you’re misunderstanding determinism. 

Determinism in this sense is that your choice to get a map, or walk in a circle (Thinking it is a straight line), is not a product of a true choice which you have control over; but the choice you make is the product of the physical chemistry in your brain, the state of the universe around you, and the laws of physics that govern it. Meaning that the choice to get a map, or not: is not something you control, but is determined by the chemistry in your brain reacting with the state of the universe around you; and if such a state is repeated exactly, it would be impossible for another state to occur.

I believe some things are predetermined,and some things arent. 

Basic things we do follow zipfs law, for instance (a ton of thigs we do,and that happen in the universrse follow this law, like city population sizes, word frequency,and formation of galaxies etc) and i think, everything follows math laws. Why?

My chemistry and the state of the universe? What a load of absolute, unmitigated bullshit defeatism! IIIII am the master if my destiny, no one and no  thing else, unless I allow it by my free choice, worlds without end. The greatest sin is to limit God. Don't do that. The second greatest sin is to limit ourselves. Don't do that, either.

Nope. What I said to Ram I say to all.

And people wonder why I say I come to bering havoc; that that is not a christian attitude. Well, Jesus did not come, the first time, to bring peace. He is peace, and he is the Prince of Peace, but we do not accept him as such, and, thereby, deserve no peace but by embracing him. He will come again and peace will follow in short order, but only for those who embrace peace because they happily choose to do so. In the kingdom of heaven, as now, no one is forced to be peaceful; they choose it, or they don't.

The devil made me do it is a defeatist attitude, protracted by all those who deny freedom of choice. I didn't make the rules, but I will profess them to my dying day.

So, determinism is false because you don’t like it?

No, determinism is false because the universe is not the creator of man. God is, and he granted us free agency, which is a law unto itself by which the universe does not operate nor understand.

To admit that we operate by determinism is defeatist and self-limiting. Argue for your limitations; they're yours. What, can't handle having the freedom your own agency? Too bad.

So, determinism is false because you say so.

When God placed Adam & Eve in the Garden of Eden, they were told [Gen 2: ] "...of every tree thou mayest freely eat." That's free agency. Their's, and ours, was and is the choice, to eat of all, some, or none. No determinism. God made one exception, the tree of knowledge of good and evil. Not that they could not choose it, for they were free to choose, but that its choice had a dire consequence, like us telling a young child to avoid touching a hot stovetop; that it had a dire consequence. Nevertheless, they were free to choose. Even Satan told them they would not surely die [God told them they would, in the day that they ate of that tree. ] Tells us, by the way, that "day" ["yom" in Hebrew] was not just a 24-hour day, but also an understanding of a longer period of time. But,  they did eventually die because one of the things they also learned is that by eating that particular fruit, they introduced mortality into the world; they would now die, eventually.

Satan told them by eating that fruit, their eyes were opened to an understanding of both good and evil. From these, God later told them, they were also free to choose. Their actions would not be forced. "Wherefore, the Lord God gave unto man that he should act for himself," [II Nephi 2: 16]

That's a belief.

I believe that  Planet T2X4 of the Antus4 system, is a chocolate planet with a 50km chocolate crust, and a custard and nut core.

Prove me wrong.

And all that humping and heaving

And BOOM.

Two gametes fused.

And that was you.

Free willy.

it's a better explanation than better living through chemistry, universal style. Yeah, flower-power style. Somebody just never got off the bus, still acid-heading.

Life is Chemistry.

Even if it was a GOD what did it.

And if it was a GOD what did it.....Then free will's straight out of the window.....Cause and effect and all that stuff. 

As for buses, flower power and acid heading.......You've lost me there.

Mind you........I'm convinced Abraham was off his head......Altitude sickness perhaps..... But more than likely, some popular Middle Eastern Shamanic abuse substance.

Hey Man...Give me a chizel and I'll just jot that down.

Do you believe that the first premise of the Kalam Cosmological argument is true? Namely, everything that exists has a cause. 

How high can you jump? What does gravity have to say about that?

You will have to prove you can defeat gravity.

There are limits. If only in these bodies, in this realm.

Is the first premise of the KCA true, that everything in the universe has a cause? I do, but not in the way you would approach traditional KCA, because there is also, in the universe, no cause. They are coexistent. First, I believe the question, why is there something rather than nothing is virtually impossible to answer with the knowledge we currently have. I’m not saying it’s an impossible question, that it has no logical answer, but just that we lack the necessary knowledge, to date, to give it an answer.
 
Creation, is, perhaps, the wrong word because of its implications that something did come from nothing. I prefer the term, organizing, as in matter and energy. The Bible describes things before “creation” as “without form, and void.” Disorganized matter and energy, needing organization from chaos. If you want to put a name on it, I’d call it junkyard.Junkyards are civilization’s refuse; things that have broken down, or never were organized in the first place, yet, like the contents of some peoples’ desks. Junkyards can be anywhere, just that they are composed of chaos where order is the preferred state.
 
The universe is composed of junkyard, disorganized matter and energy, and order; organized matter and energy. Form “without form, and void,” God organized to be form, and place.
 
Is that cause, and effect? Yes. And it is order opposed to the junkyard.
 
Therefore, there is, always, chaos and order, coexistent. Therefore, there is opposition in all things, We deal with opposition by learning how to organize order from chaos. It cannot be learned without their being a means to effect organization from chaos. The means is agency, and that agency must have freedom to engage it, else there is no means to organize order from chaos. God is also a free agent.
 
Yes, that necessarily sets up an infinite regress, because this opposition of chaos and order has always existed; it had no beginning, and there is no end to it. It is, mathematically, a line, only, it is, in fact, infinite lines in all directions. There is no center to it, because there are no edges.
 
Infinite regress cannot be contemplated because no one has a pencil sharp enough to continue the regress, as if it needed to be drawn, at all. It doesn’t. We think regress must have a center, but only because we demand the pencil to illustrate it. Don’t use a pencil. Use thought. Thought drives action. It’s an eternal principle and cannot be confined to such clumsy tools as a pencil. Thought-to-action is the organizing of matter and energy in chaos. It is a process.
 
The KCA is not a completely correct principle because it demands a beginning where there is none. What happened before the Big Bang? A regression from a previous cycle of expansion and contraction of the universe. It has always done this, and always will. Chaos, and order. Rinse and repeat
 
We speak of God as the original organizer, or creator. I say, which God? There have always been Gods in infinite regress, and infinite progress. It’s an eternal family. We are one branch of that family, and the tree, of course, is, itself, infinite.

So, what exactly do we define as "straight line"?

If we have learned derivatives in High School, we would know that every point on a curve of a 2d plane would have a tangent line, and if we have learned physics in HS we would know that the direction an object is going at a moment is along the tangent line of the point of the curve(and if it is straight, along the entire line). So, we are technically always going straight forward, even if those lines are infinitesimal in length.

I wouldnt say disorganized or organized. I would say balanced or imbalanced energy.

Semantics.

Paraphrasing usually misses original intent. It's the nature of editing.

You're close, and far, with. little to justify either position, but excessively DiSoRgAnIzEd. That type, for example, does not help. So. why do it?

A line is defined as being without dimension, and infinite in both directions. At least it was when I went to school. Any truncated line is no longer a line; it's a ray, having an origin point, which a liner, by definition, does not have.

Because you’re in the science forum, you offered an argument that purported to be one thing; then when challenged simply decided to throw out a large volume of religious Mumbo jumbo in lieu of an argument. 

It seems you don't have Either a logical or scientific point here; so there’s not much else that’s possible to say.

It is not semantics. I beleive it was made to be that way.

I believe that not only are science and religion on the same coin, I believe true science and true religion are the same side of a coin, and, therefore, can use either forum. 

Obviously, you do not.  That's okay.  I, unlike some, do not believe anyone should be banned from either forum for their thinking.

You say tomato, I say tomato, short or long 'a,' we say the same