Free Will

on fundamental matters such as existence, knowledge, values, reason, mind and ethics.

Moderators: Calilasseia, ADParker

Re: Free Will

#8881  Postby romansh » Aug 05, 2017 12:21 am

jamest wrote:
romansh wrote:
jamest wrote:Yeah, keep your head in the sand like everyone else.

Your answer has no quality James. You said so yourself.

I am surprised you would say something like:
    That's the point, romansh: that there is NO 'quality' of answer in repeatedly ignoring the fact that we're not Spock.

in that, it is like saying ... this statement is false

You have disqualified any statement that you [or anyone else] makes as requiring consideration. By definition in your world view you cannot back up your statement.

You've omitted the text and context in which I made that statement, which specifically referenced physicalist/scientific explanations for 'consciousness'. My point being that such narratives cannot repeatedly ignore our emotional disposition and treat us like mere logic machines. I made no reference to there being NO explanations at all for our 'being'.

Emotionally I see no quality in your response James.
"That's right!" shouted Vroomfondel, "we demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty!"
User avatar
romansh
 
Posts: 2491

Country: BC Can (in the woods)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Free Will

#8882  Postby jamest » Aug 05, 2017 7:17 am

Choosing the correct perspective should never be an emotional affair.

Your truth mill needs an overhaul.
They came, they saw, they concurred.
jamest
 
Posts: 17183
Male

Country: England
Jolly Roger (arr)
Print view this post

Re: Free Will

#8883  Postby romansh » Aug 05, 2017 1:14 pm

jamest wrote:Choosing the correct perspective should never be an emotional affair.

Your truth mill needs an overhaul.

OK rationally, emotionally nor intuitively do I find your position accurate.
"That's right!" shouted Vroomfondel, "we demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty!"
User avatar
romansh
 
Posts: 2491

Country: BC Can (in the woods)
Print view this post

Re: Free Will

#8884  Postby DavidMcC » Aug 05, 2017 1:42 pm

The_Metatron wrote:What's with the "...but anyone who knows amything about brains would realise this." crack? Is it necessary? Did that make you feel like you know more about this than I do?

...

This:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amygdala
The amygdala (plural: amygdalae; /əˈmɪɡdələ/; also corpus amygdaloideum; Latin, from Greek ἀμυγδαλή, amygdalē, 'almond', 'tonsil'[1]) is one of two almond-shaped groups of nuclei located deep and medially within the temporal lobes of the brain in complex vertebrates, including humans.[2] Shown in research to perform a primary role in the processing of memory, decision-making, and emotional reactions, the amygdalae are considered part of the limbic system.[3]
May The Voice be with you!
DavidMcC
 
Name: David McCulloch
Posts: 14913
Age: 65
Male

Country: United Kigdom
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: Free Will

#8885  Postby The_Metatron » Aug 05, 2017 3:40 pm

DavidMcC wrote:
The_Metatron wrote:What's with the "...but anyone who knows amything about brains would realise this." crack? Is it necessary? Did that make you feel like you know more about this than I do?

...

This:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amygdala
The amygdala (plural: amygdalae; /əˈmɪɡdələ/; also corpus amygdaloideum; Latin, from Greek ἀμυγδαλή, amygdalē, 'almond', 'tonsil'[1]) is one of two almond-shaped groups of nuclei located deep and medially within the temporal lobes of the brain in complex vertebrates, including humans.[2] Shown in research to perform a primary role in the processing of memory, decision-making, and emotional reactions, the amygdalae are considered part of the limbic system.[3]

Bullshit, and you know it. You made that crack to show off, to intimate that I didn't know something that you knew.

You could have simply included a helpful link, but you didn't. No, you thought it necessary to add that "...anyone who knows amything about brains would realise this.", didn't you?

That's exactly the sort of indirect attack that serves to anger people.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
I AM Skepdickus!

Check out Hack's blog, too. He writes good.
User avatar
The_Metatron
Moderator
 
Name: Jesse
Posts: 20293
Age: 55
Male

Country: United States
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: Free Will

#8886  Postby jamest » Aug 05, 2017 9:31 pm

Your complaint is legitimate, Metatron. Unfortunately, the FUA doesn't care unless he abuses you directly. And if you express that justified anger of yours freely, the keepers of the FUA will punish you, not him. I know this from multiple experiences. Although I do admire the diplomatic way in which you have expressed your anger thus far, even though it's obvious that you're pissed-off. Though, let's face it, you don't have to deal with such situations very often. So, perhaps, consider this situation in that light... and maybe be more understanding of those of us who have to deal with shit here nearly every time we post something serious. Just maybe.
They came, they saw, they concurred.
jamest
 
Posts: 17183
Male

Country: England
Jolly Roger (arr)
Print view this post

Re: Free Will

#8887  Postby DavidMcC » Aug 06, 2017 9:39 am

The_Metatron wrote:
DavidMcC wrote:
The_Metatron wrote:What's with the "...but anyone who knows amything about brains would realise this." crack? Is it necessary? Did that make you feel like you know more about this than I do?

...

This:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amygdala
The amygdala (plural: amygdalae; /əˈmɪɡdələ/; also corpus amygdaloideum; Latin, from Greek ἀμυγδαλή, amygdalē, 'almond', 'tonsil'[1]) is one of two almond-shaped groups of nuclei located deep and medially within the temporal lobes of the brain in complex vertebrates, including humans.[2] Shown in research to perform a primary role in the processing of memory, decision-making, and emotional reactions, the amygdalae are considered part of the limbic system.[3]

Bullshit, and you know it. You made that crack to show off, to intimate that I didn't know something that you knew.

You could have simply included a helpful link, but you didn't. No, you thought it necessary to add that "...anyone who knows amything about brains would realise this.", didn't you?

That's exactly the sort of indirect attack that serves to anger people.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Well, those who want to be angered, will always find a way, I guess. I haven't produced any BS.
Perhaps you have your own theory of the functioon of the amygdala, that you could share with us. :dunno:
If not, I will have to assume that this is just bluster.

Oh, and perhaps you could inform the biology sites about your breakthrough in science.
May The Voice be with you!
DavidMcC
 
Name: David McCulloch
Posts: 14913
Age: 65
Male

Country: United Kigdom
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Free Will

#8888  Postby The_Metatron » Aug 06, 2017 3:59 pm

DavidMcC wrote:
The_Metatron wrote:
DavidMcC wrote:
The_Metatron wrote:What's with the "...but anyone who knows amything about brains would realise this." crack? Is it necessary? Did that make you feel like you know more about this than I do?

...

This:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amygdala
The amygdala (plural: amygdalae; /əˈmɪɡdələ/; also corpus amygdaloideum; Latin, from Greek ἀμυγδαλή, amygdalē, 'almond', 'tonsil'[1]) is one of two almond-shaped groups of nuclei located deep and medially within the temporal lobes of the brain in complex vertebrates, including humans.[2] Shown in research to perform a primary role in the processing of memory, decision-making, and emotional reactions, the amygdalae are considered part of the limbic system.[3]

Bullshit, and you know it. You made that crack to show off, to intimate that I didn't know something that you knew.

You could have simply included a helpful link, but you didn't. No, you thought it necessary to add that "...anyone who knows amything about brains would realise this.", didn't you?

That's exactly the sort of indirect attack that serves to anger people.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Well, those who want to be angered, will always find a way, I guess. I haven't produced any BS.
Perhaps you have your own theory of the functioon of the amygdala, that you could share with us. :dunno:
If not, I will have to assume that this is just bluster.

Oh, and perhaps you could inform the biology sites about your breakthrough in science.

Alternatively, I could ignore your ass and go read a book on the topic. Perhaps a book written by an author whose goal is to illuminate, rather than show off.

I'm thinking Carl Sagan. I'd read your stuff, but you can't get past throwing in those generalized personal attacks in your attempts to show everyone how much you know.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
I AM Skepdickus!

Check out Hack's blog, too. He writes good.
User avatar
The_Metatron
Moderator
 
Name: Jesse
Posts: 20293
Age: 55
Male

Country: United States
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: Free Will

#8889  Postby DavidMcC » Aug 08, 2017 3:51 pm

The_Metatron wrote:
DavidMcC wrote:
The_Metatron wrote:

Bullshit, and you know it. You made that crack to show off, to intimate that I didn't know something that you knew.

You could have simply included a helpful link, but you didn't. No, you thought it necessary to add that "...anyone who knows amything about brains would realise this.", didn't you?

That's exactly the sort of indirect attack that serves to anger people.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Well, those who want to be angered, will always find a way, I guess. I haven't produced any BS.
Perhaps you have your own theory of the functioon of the amygdala, that you could share with us. :dunno:
If not, I will have to assume that this is just bluster.

Oh, and perhaps you could inform the biology sites about your breakthrough in science.

Alternatively, I could ignore your ass and go read a book on the topic. Perhaps a book written by an author whose goal is to illuminate, rather than show off.
...

It's good that you have decided to read up on the amygdala. I'm sure toy will find that they have to do with processing fear.

I'm sorry if you interpret my posts as "showing off", because their real intent is simply to correct the errors of science that sneak into this site from time to time.
May The Voice be with you!
DavidMcC
 
Name: David McCulloch
Posts: 14913
Age: 65
Male

Country: United Kigdom
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: Free Will

#8890  Postby cyghost » Aug 08, 2017 4:12 pm

DavidMcC wrote:I'm sorry if you interpret my posts as "showing off", because their real intent is simply to correct the errors of science that sneak into this site from time to time.

oh sweet mother of god :roll:
cyghost
 
Posts: 253

South Africa (za)
Print view this post

Re: Free Will

#8891  Postby DavidMcC » Aug 10, 2017 10:24 am

cyghost wrote:
DavidMcC wrote:I'm sorry if you interpret my posts as "showing off", because their real intent is simply to correct the errors of science that sneak into this site from time to time.

oh sweet mother of god :roll:

Does that mean you are not actually interested in science?
Could be - after all, this IS the philosophy forum. :lol:
May The Voice be with you!
DavidMcC
 
Name: David McCulloch
Posts: 14913
Age: 65
Male

Country: United Kigdom
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: Free Will

#8892  Postby romansh » Aug 10, 2017 5:20 pm

I have started reading Sapolsky's tome called Behave. Anyway he tackles free will somewhere around page 540. But he is not a believer. Based on the little I have read Sapolsky is highly qualified to speak about neurobiology and resultant behaviour. At least quite a bit more than us weekend warriors. Anyway here is a interview with him on free will.

https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/mbqw ... -free-will

Also the video on the address he gives to Stanford graduates on behavioral similarities and differences between humans and other primates is excellent. Well worth watching.
"That's right!" shouted Vroomfondel, "we demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty!"
User avatar
romansh
 
Posts: 2491

Country: BC Can (in the woods)
Print view this post

Re: Free Will

#8893  Postby LucidFlight » Aug 10, 2017 6:47 pm

Ah, but does he know about thalamo-cortical loops? I think not!

(Excellent read, by the way.)
OFFICIAL MEMBER: QUANTUM CONSTRUCTOR CONSCIOUSNESS QUALIA KOALA COLLECTIVE.
User avatar
LucidFlight
RS Donator
 
Name: Luv
Posts: 9849
Female

Country: UK/US/AU/SG
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: Free Will

#8894  Postby romansh » Aug 10, 2017 6:52 pm

LucidFlight wrote:Ah, but does he know about thalamo-cortical loops? I think not!

(Excellent read, by the way.)

Eighty pages and Appendix 1 into the book.
If I can retain 1% of all the salient points I'll be brilliant.
"That's right!" shouted Vroomfondel, "we demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty!"
User avatar
romansh
 
Posts: 2491

Country: BC Can (in the woods)
Print view this post

Re: Free Will

#8895  Postby jamest » Aug 13, 2017 11:55 pm

romansh wrote:
LucidFlight wrote:Ah, but does he know about thalamo-cortical loops? I think not!

(Excellent read, by the way.)

Eighty pages and Appendix 1 into the book.
If I can retain 1% of all the salient points I'll be brilliant.

If you can retain so little from his points, then it actually means that you're a dunce. Otherwise, it means he talks incomprehensible bollocks 99% of the time. :tongue:
They came, they saw, they concurred.
jamest
 
Posts: 17183
Male

Country: England
Jolly Roger (arr)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Free Will

#8896  Postby romansh » Aug 14, 2017 12:23 am

jamest wrote:
romansh wrote:
If you can retain so little from his points, then it actually means that you're a dunce. Otherwise, it means he talks incomprehensible bollocks 99% of the time. :tongue:

If retention is important to you then I will go with dunce.
"That's right!" shouted Vroomfondel, "we demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty!"
User avatar
romansh
 
Posts: 2491

Country: BC Can (in the woods)
Print view this post

Re: Free Will

#8897  Postby jamest » Aug 14, 2017 12:27 am

romansh wrote:
jamest wrote:
romansh wrote:
If you can retain so little from his points, then it actually means that you're a dunce. Otherwise, it means he talks incomprehensible bollocks 99% of the time. :tongue:

If retention is important to you then I will go with dunce.

The obvious third option was just to laugh, so maybe you are. :mrgreen:
They came, they saw, they concurred.
jamest
 
Posts: 17183
Male

Country: England
Jolly Roger (arr)
Print view this post

Re: Free Will

#8898  Postby romansh » Aug 14, 2017 12:38 am

jamest wrote:
romansh wrote:
jamest wrote:
romansh wrote:
If you can retain so little from his points, then it actually means that you're a dunce. Otherwise, it means he talks incomprehensible bollocks 99% of the time. :tongue:

If retention is important to you then I will go with dunce.

The obvious third option was just to laugh, so maybe you are. :mrgreen:

But the scary option is, I might be smarter than you.
"That's right!" shouted Vroomfondel, "we demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty!"
User avatar
romansh
 
Posts: 2491

Country: BC Can (in the woods)
Print view this post

Re: Free Will

#8899  Postby jamest » Aug 14, 2017 8:00 am

And I'm probably better looking than you.
They came, they saw, they concurred.
jamest
 
Posts: 17183
Male

Country: England
Jolly Roger (arr)
Print view this post

Re: Free Will

#8900  Postby zoon » Aug 14, 2017 9:07 am

romansh wrote:I have started reading Sapolsky's tome called Behave. Anyway he tackles free will somewhere around page 540. But he is not a believer. Based on the little I have read Sapolsky is highly qualified to speak about neurobiology and resultant behaviour. At least quite a bit more than us weekend warriors. Anyway here is a interview with him on free will.

https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/mbqw ... -free-will

Also the video on the address he gives to Stanford graduates on behavioral similarities and differences between humans and other primates is excellent. Well worth watching.

There’s another 2017 interview with Robert Sapolsky on free will here, with the same message, that we have no free will and that we need to adjust our social behaviour accordingly. In particular, we need to stop blaming and punishing people, according to Sapolsky (if I’m reading him correctly).

I think Sapolsky is being irresponsible and claiming authority while speaking outside his subject, so he’s doing what he criticizes others for. OK, he’s a brilliant interdisciplinary neuroscientist and researcher in animal behaviour, but he has no expertise in criminal law or in the theory of government of humans by humans. He has spent decades at the cutting edge of research into the behaviour of baboons and the mechanisms of our brains, not grappling with the ethical and practical problems of keeping human societies (consisting overwhelmingly of normal people without major mental health issues) ticking over in the here and now, not in some future world when we know exactly how brains work.

For one thing, he gives the impression of supposing that human brains are fixable by surgery in our current state of knowledge, going by his comment in the link you give:
Robert Sapolsky in interview wrote:The analogy I always use, which is so difficult for people to swallow when it comes to the criminal justice system, is that if a car has faulty brakes, you fix the brakes. If the brakes are not fixable, you put the car in the garage for the rest of the time, and your primary responsibility is to make sure this car with the faulty brakes doesn't hurt anybody. But nobody is saying you're punishing the car. Nobody is accusing your car of having a moral failing. Somehow, we have to reach that mindset.

So if someone commits a criminal act, for example by driving a car with dangerous brakes, then that person needs their brain fixing by surgery???? Or alternatively, they should be locked away in a mental health ward until their brains get surgically fixed?? This is probably not a person with a major mental health problem, most of us have skirted with similar misdemeanours. So far, we simply don’t know how to fix that kind of antisocial behaviour by surgery (and that’s disregarding all the ethical issues involved). What we do know is that hauling that person into court, and fining them and/or taking away their driving licence for a time, does, usually, work. That person is likely to be more careful about their car brakes in future, and other people reading the report of the punishment in the paper are suitably influenced to keep their cars well-maintained. If you are caught driving a car with faulty brakes, would you prefer to have surgery/be locked up, as Sapolsky appears to be recommending, or to pay a fine/be prevented from driving for a time, i.e. to be punished, as happens at present? Why is he saying our current system is radically wrong? His ideas look much worse to me.

We don’t yet know how brains work in anything like the kind of detail needed to fix them in the way that we fix cars. So saying that we ought to have the same emotional response to people as to cars is not necessarily the best way to go. Our evolved system of using punishment for antisocial behaviour works better than anything Sapolsky has to offer, as far as I can tell. If all he’s saying is that people with serious mental health problems should have more resources than at present, then I could agree. But he’s going very much further, he’s saying we need radical change in the way we respond to normal people when (as most of us do fairly frequently) they behave in antisocial ways, and at that point I disagree strongly with him.

In the future, when much more is known about neuroscience, then we may (or may not) start treating people like cars. Meanwhile, in my view, it’s not a good idea to attempt to treat people like cars, our evolved systems of reward and punishment, so far, are doing a better job than that.
Last edited by zoon on Aug 14, 2017 1:02 pm, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
zoon
 
Posts: 2968

Print view this post

PreviousNext

Return to Philosophy

Who is online

Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 1 guest