Total posts: 14,582
-->
@Shila
What if the truth is “Ice cream is delicious".
only about 79% of humans enjoy eating ice cream
Created:
-->
@Lemming
But, isn't incitement also a concern?
is "incitement" a good reason to have your phone service cut ?
Created:
-->
@Lemming
False or harmful claims?
you mean like claims that the jesus will get you into heaven ?
Created:
-->
@Lemming
There's also the fact of private business not wanting to do business with certain people.
that's why each account can create personalized blacklists or whitelists
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Ehyeh
as a pantheist, you might say the "big i" (the whole, the source, the god we are all parts of) is "uncaused" or at least, the "cause" is "unknowable" from our human perspective
but each of us humans has an origin
we were born at a time and a place
and with certain capacities
and subjected to certain experiences
and our "decisions" are manifestations of those collective influences
if we were "uninfluenced" then our actions could not possibly be contextual
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
Created:
-->
@Tarik
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TWS1405
Thanks for proving you’re a part of the problem and not the solution.
the final solution ?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Username
I would say that Nazism is not super coherent,
it's just basic "in-group" versus "out-group" behavior
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
It's not a flawed premise.
please explain the logic of "free-will" ?
at what point are your actions free of previous influence ?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
Control is not a made up concept, we experience it everyday. Understanding where it comes from does not change that.
we can certainly FEEL like we are "in control"
Created:
-->
@Vici
a debate vote is simply an opinion
and it is almost impossible to "qualify" an opinion
the moderation team plays favorites because they are human
Created:
Created:
this is the best commentary on the current state of censorship that i've seen yet
paypal
aws
trump
alex jones
andrew tate
and now kanye west (ye)
we need a neutral network
just like a telephone network
can you imagine if the phone company started cutting off service to anyone who said words they don't like ?
Created:
-->
@Username
And it's really incorrect to conflate all ethics that don't centrally focus God.
And it's really incorrect to conflate all ethics that do centrally focus God.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@K_Michael
Personal opinion of who won? Yes.
exactly
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lemming
Well, if there were 'no rules to voting, yes,'Some rules though require one justify their vote, which becomes more difficult, depending on the rules and how greatly an argument strays from the rules.
i've been told "the-RFD-rules" are to designed to "prove" someone "read the entire debate" and has "good-reasons" for identifying "key-points"
the whole thing is just layers of opinion on top of layers of opinion
and the lack of perfectly-clear guidelines (or a form of some kind) discourages participation
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@K_Michael
all debate votes boil down to pure, uncut, personal opinion
pretending otherwise is simply ridiculous
Created:
-->
@Shila
Moses did!!
by what logic did moses support the claim "god told me" ?
Created:
-->
@Shila
Moses did!!
there are older books that make different claims
Created:
-->
@Shila
Moses could claim the moral standard came from God and not conceived of some unknowable "objective" moral-standard.
anyone can make that claim
but nobody can support that claim
Created:
-->
@TWS1405
if you honestly believe your opinions are "objective"
i do so wish you the best of luck
Created:
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
Just as a small tip for the future, if someone says "X is good because Y completely unrelated thing is bad" there are better ways of arguing against X than by arguing in favor of Y(In this context the X was dictatorship and the Y was circumcision, but the same is true no matter what X and Y are).
phenomenal
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Castin
I imagine it's hard to feel betrayed by someone you never really believed in.
agreed
Created:
-->
@TWS1405
Your continued denialism and inability to admit you’re wrong = intellectual cowardice.
Created:
-->
@TWS1405
your "scathing-critique" in [POST#35]
contains a few naked declarative statements
and personal opinions
sprinkled with uncreative insults
none of which add up to a "sound-argument"
Created:
-->
@Shila
the concept of moral-impulse defined as merely a reflection of personal-preference makes much more sense than trying to conceive of some unknowable "objective" moral-standard
Created:
-->
@TWS1405
personal insults in the middle of an otherwise sound argument
you're missing that last part
Created:
-->
@Shila
morality does not make sense unless it is objective.
please explain
Created:
-->
@Shila
it's just strange to find so many "debaters" who try to defend their own ad hominem attacks
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Ehyeh
I don't think we need to think in black and white terms in regards to free will, we can have free will to act in some circumstances,
i hesitate to make broad statements here, but some seem to be suggesting that nobody is arguing that a human decision is free from all previous influences. i think this is a fair statement. the best attempts at explaining free-will seem to suggest that there is some kind of influence-gap. that is to say, it has been suggested that a human decision is influenced up to some unknown point less than 100% and then there is some i-gap of unspecified quantity and free-will lives there spreading magic fairy dust, however small or improbable that i-gap might be. i have never heard anyone propose a way to measure this i-gap in order to perhaps somehow gauge how much free-will someone might have, or to figure out if children have it, and if not, when do they get it? the i-gap sounds to me more like an ignorance-of-influence gap (this would also seem like the compatibilist's opinion). if this is the case we should be able to dial up free-will by dialing up ignorance.
the main problems i see with this proposal are as follows:
1) there is no way to measure the influence-gap. it is in all likelihood merely a knowledge-of-influence-gap or lack-of-precision-gap.
2) even if the influence-gap is considered to be a real thing, wouldn't that gap simply increase the value of the other influences? how could the influence gap possibly be considered an influence? it's a gap that is by definition non-influential.
3) let's consider based on at least a small shred of logic, what could be in that pesky i-gap that might actually be an influence. well, whatever is in that i-gap can't be influenced since it is inside something defined as an influence-gap. so maybe there's an uninfluenced-influence in that i-gap; we could call it something mysterious like, an uncaused-cause, or maybe a first-cause, or better yet ex-nihilo. could that uncaused-cause be influenced or originated by anything at all? no, of course not because it's in the i-gap and it is defined as being uncaused. so could a human take credit for a decision or action that emerged from the i-gap? how could they possibly take credit or be responsible for something they had no conceivable control over? anything emerging from the i-gap would be indistinguishable from a random event. and randomness is incompatible with choice.
4) but what if it's the essence of "me" that is in the i-gap. are you kidding me?! i don't care if it's your grandmother, your dead child, or your ever lovin' god. if you put them in the i-gap they are at-best indistinguishable from random noise and at worst non-existent.
5) what if the gap is not an influence-gap but instead a black box? if the gap is not an influence-gap, there is no place for mr. free-will to spread his magic fairy dust because the gap instantly fills with influence and is then no longer properly described as a gap. additionally if the output of the i-gap is non-random, that is to say it emits some identifiable pattern, then whatever is happening in the i-gap must have some way of knowing what the hell is going on outside of the i-gap and this knowledge is definitely influencing its output thereby introducing influence into the i-gap which would then promptly disappear in a cute little puff of logic.
i think it's important to fully comprehend this influence-gap. imagine, if you will, that i am constructing a human being. when the recipe calls for me to add "a dash of free-will" i can't just add any old thing, willy nilly; i have to first construct a proper influence-gap to protect my human from the evil determinism. this would be some container that is impervious to all conceivable influence. i probably have a sound-proof, shock-proof, opaque, air-tight, empathy-proof, magic-proof, momentum-proof, time-proof capsule of some sort just laying around my house, i'll just set that to the side for now. ok, adding an empty box to the mix isn't going to do anything of course so we have to put something in it. since whatever is in this i-gap is supposed to advise me on important moral decisions my selection is of critical importance. well, the most intelligent and moral person i know of is my friend george, so since i don't seem to have a better option, i throw george in the i-capsule and seal him in tight. now days, weeks, and months have gone by and i've pretty much forgotten about george until one afternoon i am confronted with an intractable dilemma. i am faced with a decision with staggeringly profound moral implications and i must make a decision immediately. what do i do? well this sounds like a case for the magnificent george! so i locate my everything-proof capsule on which i have scrawled the descriptive term "i-gap" with my handy wax pencil, and i ask my question. i exhaustively explain all of the known factors leading up to and logical implications of this monumental decision to george, my moral, spiritual and financial advisor, and then i wait for an answer, any answer at all. nothing happens. things are getting desperate, so i beg george to give me an answer, to point me in the right direction. nothing happens. i light some candles and wave a magic wand over the i-gap, but still i can't divine any response from george. i realize there is a problem with the i-gap's design. so i quickly scour my garage for spare parts and retrofit a one way intercom system onto the i-gap so i can hear what george has to say. mind you he still can't hear anything or in any way perceive anything that i have to say, thus preserving the integrity of the influence-gap, but now he can speak directly to me, thus becoming an uncaused-cause. of course george has causes, he was born and raised and had both happy and sad experiences, but i'll just ignore all that for now. george is pretty much an uncaused-cause now that he is housed in the exclusive and luxurious, new and improved i-gap. so i ask george again to answer my plea for guidance. nothing happens. every once in a while george does actually say something but it's usually along the lines of "let me out of this f#cking box you god#amned muth#rf#cking muth#rf#cker!" heh, that george is such a kidder!
obviously george is constrained by the parameters of his confinement and is therefore incapable of offering any advice that would be requested from him.
the same would be true if you put jesus, or krishna, or a unicorn, or any conceivable entity or event in the modified i-gap.
ipso-facto, no free-will.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Ehyeh
I believe the world is such a horrible place for 80% of the worlds population precisely because of this sense of separation from one another.
100% THIS
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Ehyeh
just necessarily become limited
and therefore "not-free"
also, how do you determine who has "more" "free-will" and who has "less" "free-will" ?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Ehyeh
If free will exists we have control to make of ourselves what we want of ourselves.
please explain how each one of us can become a millionaire
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Shila
Causality is not fate or necessity.Causality is simply cause and effect.
the idea of fate does not exist without cause-and-effect
cause-and-effect makes every event not only inevitable but also necessary
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
So why is this conversation fundamental again?
the pervasive concepts of "blame" and "guilt" and "punishment" are based on this fundamentally flawed premise
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Public-Choice
I could write it.
please give it a shot
and then we might be able to MEEP it
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Public-Choice
After two of my votes were reported and removed, I just figured I had no idea how voting worked on this site because I am newer and only ever voted on DDO. I figured with time I would figure it out and also had a lengthy conversation with whiteflame about how to properly vote on this site.But now that Undefeatable, Oromagi, Vici, and others who have come to be known as staples on this website have also had their votes reported and removed, I am beginning to suspect that nobody on this site other than the mods can actually come away with understanding the voting policy clear enough to cast a proper vote for a debate.I think a very straightforward, detailed rewriting of the Voter Policy covering what is and is not proper for each voting category -- based on a pre-defined, agreed-upon standard -- would make a HUGE difference and give mods time to engage in more pressing matters than constantly having to review and remove votes and then debate with users over whether there was vote manipulation from the removals or not and other things related to people casting their ballots.
this is a MAJOR PROBLEM
and why i don't participate in the debating system
Created:
-->
@Shila
You should visit the case for the historicalJesus for any validation.
the jesus is really really realzies
now what ?
Created:
-->
@K_Michael
This was not a general statement in that it was made in the context of our discussion of the Bible, and while it might be generally applicable to other subjects and contexts, it would be disingenuous to claim that it is inapplicable to the Bible being the word of God. It is clear from your previous interactions in this thread (quoting scripture for things like whether God punishes nonbelievers) that you take the Bible to be a credible document that can accurately inform your religious beliefs. And if you believe the Bible, then you must believe that the Bible is truthful when it states
bingo
Created:
-->
@TWS1405
CRITIQUE = RESPECT
name-calling is not a critique
Created:
-->
@Shila
you have thoroughly and completely misread my intentionHere you go complaining again!!
making a statement of fact is not a complaint
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Shila
the power of acting without the constraint of necessity or fate; the ability to act at one's own discretion.
the power of acting without the constraint of [CAUSALITY] necessity or fate; the ability to act at one's own discretion [FREE FROM ALL INFLUENCE].
Created:
-->
@Shila
you have thoroughly and completely misread my intention
Created:
-->
@Shila
But here you are complaining you don't find a lot of people debating 1 + 1 = 2.
i'm simply mentioning it as an example
this does not even remotely qualify as "complaining"
Created:
-->
@TWS1405
I guess we can use the word, "debater" resorts to ad hominem statements to convey discontent with an opponent's contention. What a concept..When the observation is true, it is not a fallacious ad hominem.
declaring "You are an IDIOT!!!"
is clearly a statement of opinion
and not a statement of fact
and as such, holds no "truth value"
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
I've always found the free will conversation pointless. If we have it then it's settled, we can all move on. If we don't have it then not only does that change nothing, but it means that what we're actually talking about is something that no human being has ever experienced so we have no basis to point to it because we have no recognition of what we're even pointing to.
this topic is fundamental
because it is the core of nearly all human suffering
if you deny causality, then free-will doesn't make any sense, because without causality, your actions don't necessarily lead to specific consequences
if you embrace causality, then free-will doesn't make any sense, because with causality, your actions are caused by previous events
and if you mix the two, sometimes causality and sometimes not causality, then you can never be sure which events are caused and which are uncaused
if you decide a specific event is uncaused, then free-will cannot apply, because you cannot cause (with your free-will) an uncaused event
if you decide a specific event is caused, then free-will cannot apply, because you cannot (with your free-will) cause all of the contributing causes that lead to any caused event
sure, people "experience" free-will, but only in the way they "experience" "god's love"
you can "feel" it, but that doesn't mean it is anything more than a mere emotion
Created:
-->
@Shila
But here you are complaining you don't find a lot of people debating 1 + 1 = 2.
please be slightly more specific
Created:
-->
@Shila
Are you implying objecting matters like morality are less debated?
you don't find a lot of people debating 1 + 1 = 2
Created: