Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to The Lounge |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I've not read up on either subject, but have heard discussions on them (using different descriptions. Do I believe in them? I guess the winds of life blow constantly;but to assume you have no control of life isn't so. You set your sail in the general direction you wish to steer, and make your own luck in life." But is it free will or was the path you chose to steer down 'making your own luck' already chosen at the beginning of time ? Was it determined that you would believe in free will ? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I've not read up on either subject, but have heard discussions on them (using different descriptions. Do I believe in them? I guess the winds of life blow constantly;but to assume you have no control of life isn't so. You set your sail in the general direction you wish to steer, and make your own luck in life. But is it free will or was the path you chose to steer down 'making your own luck' already chosen at the beginning of time ? Was it determined that you would believe in free will ?" My head hurts | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I've not read up on either subject, but have heard discussions on them (using different descriptions. Do I believe in them? I guess the winds of life blow constantly;but to assume you have no control of life isn't so. You set your sail in the general direction you wish to steer, and make your own luck in life. But is it free will or was the path you chose to steer down 'making your own luck' already chosen at the beginning of time ? Was it determined that you would believe in free will ? My head hurts" Ahhh but you chose to read this, and now face the consequences of your free will. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I've not read up on either subject, but have heard discussions on them (using different descriptions. Do I believe in them? I guess the winds of life blow constantly;but to assume you have no control of life isn't so. You set your sail in the general direction you wish to steer, and make your own luck in life. But is it free will or was the path you chose to steer down 'making your own luck' already chosen at the beginning of time ? Was it determined that you would believe in free will ? My head hurts Ahhh but you chose to read this, and now face the consequences of your free will." Ahhhhhh but did he choose or does he only think he chose. Was it already written that it was his destiny to choose that choice that he thinks he chose ? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I've read quite a bit on the topic. I'm not a believer in determinism or fatalism, but I have heard some interesting contributions to the theories - from science as opposed to religion. It's pretty interesting. The Teaching Company did a really good lecture series on the debate between free will and determinism a while back. There are some really good philosophers on the subject, too. Who have you read, so far? " To be honest just a series of debates and lectures on YouTube. I've not been convinced by any of the arguements against free will but i was wondering if that's because they aren't very good or because i didn't understand them. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"From what perspective or discipline are you reading under ? Psychological and Philosophical arguments will differ somewhat. Determinism , loosely , is the belief that everything is predestined. e.g. it's all in the stars, your fate was written at the time of the big bang and no matter what you do your end will be the one that is written for you. Fatalism differs slightly in that it is the acceptance of determinsim. Or , again put loosely, it's a Fuck it attitude. A , There's fuck all I can do about it attitude. Some believe that determinism devalues humanity, arguing that we can indeed steer a path for ourselves. There is value in both arguments. It's a study well worth undertaking to broaden the mind. Just remember that there is no one single truth and that all that is required of you is to understand the argument and be able to see merits in and dichotomies in both. It's thought provoking and without end. " Well the debates i listened to were around the justice system and how we treat criminals. If a criminal didn't have free will then the way you treat them has very different implications to if they did. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I've not read up on either subject, but have heard discussions on them (using different descriptions. Do I believe in them? I guess the winds of life blow constantly;but to assume you have no control of life isn't so. You set your sail in the general direction you wish to steer, and make your own luck in life. But is it free will or was the path you chose to steer down 'making your own luck' already chosen at the beginning of time ? Was it determined that you would believe in free will ? My head hurts Ahhh but you chose to read this, and now face the consequences of your free will. Ahhhhhh but did he choose or does he only think he chose. Was it already written that it was his destiny to choose that choice that he thinks he chose ?" Touche! But will a laissez-faire attitude steer you? The universe is way beyond our comprehension. I've seen people die tragically and unexpected, then others emerge from what was certain death. Is it not just organised chaos with no tangible equation to events or simply impossible to study any pattern due to sheer numbers. Whatever the answers, there's so many wonderful things to see and experience on the journey to wherever you're going. Too many forget to appreciate and look. An old cliché I know, but I believe it's true. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"From what perspective or discipline are you reading under ? Psychological and Philosophical arguments will differ somewhat. Determinism , loosely , is the belief that everything is predestined. e.g. it's all in the stars, your fate was written at the time of the big bang and no matter what you do your end will be the one that is written for you. Fatalism differs slightly in that it is the acceptance of determinsim. Or , again put loosely, it's a Fuck it attitude. A , There's fuck all I can do about it attitude. Some believe that determinism devalues humanity, arguing that we can indeed steer a path for ourselves. There is value in both arguments. It's a study well worth undertaking to broaden the mind. Just remember that there is no one single truth and that all that is required of you is to understand the argument and be able to see merits in and dichotomies in both. It's thought provoking and without end. Well the debates i listened to were around the justice system and how we treat criminals. If a criminal didn't have free will then the way you treat them has very different implications to if they did. " I think we all have free will. Are they merely suggesting that the individual was placed in that situation, then left with a choice of what pathway? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"From what perspective or discipline are you reading under ? Psychological and Philosophical arguments will differ somewhat. Determinism , loosely , is the belief that everything is predestined. e.g. it's all in the stars, your fate was written at the time of the big bang and no matter what you do your end will be the one that is written for you. Fatalism differs slightly in that it is the acceptance of determinsim. Or , again put loosely, it's a Fuck it attitude. A , There's fuck all I can do about it attitude. Some believe that determinism devalues humanity, arguing that we can indeed steer a path for ourselves. There is value in both arguments. It's a study well worth undertaking to broaden the mind. Just remember that there is no one single truth and that all that is required of you is to understand the argument and be able to see merits in and dichotomies in both. It's thought provoking and without end. Well the debates i listened to were around the justice system and how we treat criminals. If a criminal didn't have free will then the way you treat them has very different implications to if they did. I think we all have free will. Are they merely suggesting that the individual was placed in that situation, then left with a choice of what pathway?" The ideas become even more interesting when applied to criminology. Think about sociopaths...... Some may be created but some definitely are born. If they are born with numbed emotion or raised without love or empathy... are they really responsible for their choices ? We don't blame lions for killing animals. We don't blame birds for shitting on our cars. If a sociopath or psychopath lack the necessaries of empathy, reasoning , logic etc..... Are they responsible in the eyes of a law devised to punish those who have those traits and understandings but make a choice to go against them. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"From what perspective or discipline are you reading under ? Psychological and Philosophical arguments will differ somewhat. Determinism , loosely , is the belief that everything is predestined. e.g. it's all in the stars, your fate was written at the time of the big bang and no matter what you do your end will be the one that is written for you. Fatalism differs slightly in that it is the acceptance of determinsim. Or , again put loosely, it's a Fuck it attitude. A , There's fuck all I can do about it attitude. Some believe that determinism devalues humanity, arguing that we can indeed steer a path for ourselves. There is value in both arguments. It's a study well worth undertaking to broaden the mind. Just remember that there is no one single truth and that all that is required of you is to understand the argument and be able to see merits in and dichotomies in both. It's thought provoking and without end. Well the debates i listened to were around the justice system and how we treat criminals. If a criminal didn't have free will then the way you treat them has very different implications to if they did. I think we all have free will. Are they merely suggesting that the individual was placed in that situation, then left with a choice of what pathway? The ideas become even more interesting when applied to criminology. Think about sociopaths...... Some may be created but some definitely are born. If they are born with numbed emotion or raised without love or empathy... are they really responsible for their choices ? We don't blame lions for killing animals. We don't blame birds for shitting on our cars. If a sociopath or psychopath lack the necessaries of empathy, reasoning , logic etc..... Are they responsible in the eyes of a law devised to punish those who have those traits and understandings but make a choice to go against them. " True, and certainly in the case of offences where intent or recklessness is needed to convict. However, does a civilised society not have a responsibility to protect itself from offenders? Though the sentencing maybe should reflect individuals own individual needs, bizzare as that sounds? And in addition , certain offences will always create more empathy than others thus eradicating people's desire to seek understanding. Though I'm off track now....by choice! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"From what perspective or discipline are you reading under ? Psychological and Philosophical arguments will differ somewhat. Determinism , loosely , is the belief that everything is predestined. e.g. it's all in the stars, your fate was written at the time of the big bang and no matter what you do your end will be the one that is written for you. Fatalism differs slightly in that it is the acceptance of determinsim. Or , again put loosely, it's a Fuck it attitude. A , There's fuck all I can do about it attitude. Some believe that determinism devalues humanity, arguing that we can indeed steer a path for ourselves. There is value in both arguments. It's a study well worth undertaking to broaden the mind. Just remember that there is no one single truth and that all that is required of you is to understand the argument and be able to see merits in and dichotomies in both. It's thought provoking and without end. Well the debates i listened to were around the justice system and how we treat criminals. If a criminal didn't have free will then the way you treat them has very different implications to if they did. I think we all have free will. Are they merely suggesting that the individual was placed in that situation, then left with a choice of what pathway? The ideas become even more interesting when applied to criminology. Think about sociopaths...... Some may be created but some definitely are born. If they are born with numbed emotion or raised without love or empathy... are they really responsible for their choices ? We don't blame lions for killing animals. We don't blame birds for shitting on our cars. If a sociopath or psychopath lack the necessaries of empathy, reasoning , logic etc..... Are they responsible in the eyes of a law devised to punish those who have those traits and understandings but make a choice to go against them. True, and certainly in the case of offences where intent or recklessness is needed to convict. However, does a civilised society not have a responsibility to protect itself from offenders? Though the sentencing maybe should reflect individuals own individual needs, bizzare as that sounds? And in addition , certain offences will always create more empathy than others thus eradicating people's desire to seek understanding. Though I'm off track now....by choice!" Nobody is saying we wouldn't remove people from the streets if they pose a threat, but it's more about what you do with them. Sometimes you could treat crime like a disease. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Fatalism differs slightly in that it is the acceptance of determinsim. Or , again put loosely, it's a Fuck it attitude. A , There's fuck all I can do about it attitude. " That's extremely close to a 'Nihilist'. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"From what perspective or discipline are you reading under ? Psychological and Philosophical arguments will differ somewhat. Determinism , loosely , is the belief that everything is predestined. e.g. it's all in the stars, your fate was written at the time of the big bang and no matter what you do your end will be the one that is written for you. Fatalism differs slightly in that it is the acceptance of determinsim. Or , again put loosely, it's a Fuck it attitude. A , There's fuck all I can do about it attitude. Some believe that determinism devalues humanity, arguing that we can indeed steer a path for ourselves. There is value in both arguments. It's a study well worth undertaking to broaden the mind. Just remember that there is no one single truth and that all that is required of you is to understand the argument and be able to see merits in and dichotomies in both. It's thought provoking and without end. Well the debates i listened to were around the justice system and how we treat criminals. If a criminal didn't have free will then the way you treat them has very different implications to if they did. I think we all have free will. Are they merely suggesting that the individual was placed in that situation, then left with a choice of what pathway? The ideas become even more interesting when applied to criminology. Think about sociopaths...... Some may be created but some definitely are born. If they are born with numbed emotion or raised without love or empathy... are they really responsible for their choices ? We don't blame lions for killing animals. We don't blame birds for shitting on our cars. If a sociopath or psychopath lack the necessaries of empathy, reasoning , logic etc..... Are they responsible in the eyes of a law devised to punish those who have those traits and understandings but make a choice to go against them. True, and certainly in the case of offences where intent or recklessness is needed to convict. However, does a civilised society not have a responsibility to protect itself from offenders? Though the sentencing maybe should reflect individuals own individual needs, bizzare as that sounds? And in addition , certain offences will always create more empathy than others thus eradicating people's desire to seek understanding. Though I'm off track now....by choice! Nobody is saying we wouldn't remove people from the streets if they pose a threat, but it's more about what you do with them. Sometimes you could treat crime like a disease. " psychopaths and sociopaths are quite capable of making choices. they enjoy the choices they make and that is why they make them. would they have been sociopaths/psychopaths if their social backgrounds had been different? we do not know for sure but suspect not. they seem to have deficits in the amygdala that are present quite early on and before a diagnosis of pathos. do they have free will? yes. do they have the tools to understand, and enjoy, the pain they give to others. yes. do they try to hide what they do? yes, and it is this particularly that makes us believe they fully understand what they are doing in the first place is wrong. you could look into incompatibilism for more in depth thoughts on this though. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Has anyone been convinced by the arguements against free-will? " . No my wife says I'm a firm believer in free will  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Has anyone been convinced by the arguements against free-will? . No my wife says I'm a firm believer in free will "I'm not convinced but I'm open minded to the debate. One thing i find interesting is that people who have their sense of free will diminished act worse than they otherwise would have! The studies have included them being more likely to cheat in a maths test, less likely to help a stranger and more likely to give a taste tester hot sauce! However this could be explained by the external influences placed upon them, but there's where the debate gets ultra academic for me. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I've read quite a bit on the topic. I'm not a believer in determinism or fatalism, but I have heard some interesting contributions to the theories - from science as opposed to religion. It's pretty interesting. The Teaching Company did a really good lecture series on the debate between free will and determinism a while back. There are some really good philosophers on the subject, too. Who have you read, so far? " Have you seen much of 'Sam Harris' who argues free will is an illusion? I don't find him very convincing but other people do. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"At the quantum level the uncertaincy principle tells us that the future is not deterministic but probabalistic. We need to make progress on the understanding of gravity/time granularity before making pronoucements. We can debate the ethics and morality but most writers conveniently ignore the underlying scientific problems." See probability is always how I've seen the future and im amazed to have never heard that word in all the stuff I've seen on the subject. Sam Harris just debates deterministic vrs randomness but surely its probabilistic as you say. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I'm not going to quote previous comments as it's getting hard to read. As for psychopaths/sociopaths, it reminds me a horizon documentary on BBC2 a few weeks back about schizophrenia and psychosis. The research suggests that some people are predisposed towards those conditions but, depending on the environmental factors, they may or may not develop those conditions. " Which ties nicely into probability | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Seen far to much of this world to believe in fate .......it's utter claptrap ". Your wife's told you too hey! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I'm not going to quote previous comments as it's getting hard to read. As for psychopaths/sociopaths, it reminds me a horizon documentary on BBC2 a few weeks back about schizophrenia and psychosis. The research suggests that some people are predisposed towards those conditions but, depending on the environmental factors, they may or may not develop those conditions. And it's suggested that psychopaths/sociopaths are similar. I'm not sure how that fits into determinism vs free will. " yes. this is called epigenetics. where the gene for a mental illness can be switched on by variant factors. psychosis is different in that this is not the actual person who exists at that time. it is a person who is existing in an environment that their brain has made sense of but is not seeing the true environment. they are hallucinating and their brain is producing chemicals that flood the brain. no person going through psychosis would be able to be responsible for their actions as they are not 'themselves' in any sense. they also would not remember the event afterwards.they do not have free will. a personality disorder is different. it is the personality of a person we are talking about -a persons thought process. we know many things affect a person psychologically. we know that personality is different to how a person reacts to an environment or situation. although personality probably will be the basis for how they first approach either of these things. i think free will exists, but is mostly limited and is dependent on circumstances. i believe morality can exist based on this and do not think anyone is so 'helpless'/fated they cannot have morals. i do not believe in fate and that things are meant to happen, i think they just happen and we are meant to deal with them or not. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I'm not going to quote previous comments as it's getting hard to read. As for psychopaths/sociopaths, it reminds me a horizon documentary on BBC2 a few weeks back about schizophrenia and psychosis. The research suggests that some people are predisposed towards those conditions but, depending on the environmental factors, they may or may not develop those conditions. And it's suggested that psychopaths/sociopaths are similar. I'm not sure how that fits into determinism vs free will. yes. this is called epigenetics. where the gene for a mental illness can be switched on by variant factors. psychosis is different in that this is not the actual person who exists at that time. it is a person who is existing in an environment that their brain has made sense of but is not seeing the true environment. they are hallucinating and their brain is producing chemicals that flood the brain. no person going through psychosis would be able to be responsible for their actions as they are not 'themselves' in any sense. they also would not remember the event afterwards.they do not have free will. a personality disorder is different. it is the personality of a person we are talking about -a persons thought process. we know many things affect a person psychologically. we know that personality is different to how a person reacts to an environment or situation. although personality probably will be the basis for how they first approach either of these things. i think free will exists, but is mostly limited and is dependent on circumstances. i believe morality can exist based on this and do not think anyone is so 'helpless'/fated they cannot have morals. i do not believe in fate and that things are meant to happen, i think they just happen and we are meant to deal with them or not. " Thank you, that was very informative. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I'm not going to quote previous comments as it's getting hard to read. As for psychopaths/sociopaths, it reminds me a horizon documentary on BBC2 a few weeks back about schizophrenia and psychosis. The research suggests that some people are predisposed towards those conditions but, depending on the environmental factors, they may or may not develop those conditions. And it's suggested that psychopaths/sociopaths are similar. I'm not sure how that fits into determinism vs free will. yes. this is called epigenetics. where the gene for a mental illness can be switched on by variant factors. psychosis is different in that this is not the actual person who exists at that time. it is a person who is existing in an environment that their brain has made sense of but is not seeing the true environment. they are hallucinating and their brain is producing chemicals that flood the brain. no person going through psychosis would be able to be responsible for their actions as they are not 'themselves' in any sense. they also would not remember the event afterwards.they do not have free will. a personality disorder is different. it is the personality of a person we are talking about -a persons thought process. we know many things affect a person psychologically. we know that personality is different to how a person reacts to an environment or situation. although personality probably will be the basis for how they first approach either of these things. i think free will exists, but is mostly limited and is dependent on circumstances. i believe morality can exist based on this and do not think anyone is so 'helpless'/fated they cannot have morals. i do not believe in fate and that things are meant to happen, i think they just happen and we are meant to deal with them or not. Thank you, that was very informative. " you're welcome. it's a very basic explanation really, psychology really isn't that complicated and most people will already know from experience a lot of how it works, just the terminologies can be confusing as a fair few words change their meaning from how we usually use them when used in a psychological context. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" psychosis is different in that this is not the actual person who exists at that time. it is a person who is existing in an environment that their brain has made sense of but is not seeing the true environment. they are hallucinating and their brain is producing chemicals that flood the brain. no person going through psychosis would be able to be responsible for their actions as they are not 'themselves' in any sense. they also would not remember the event afterwards.they do not have free will. " Or it could be argued that it is only when they are in that state they can excercise their free will without the constraints society places upon them. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" psychosis is different in that this is not the actual person who exists at that time. it is a person who is existing in an environment that their brain has made sense of but is not seeing the true environment. they are hallucinating and their brain is producing chemicals that flood the brain. no person going through psychosis would be able to be responsible for their actions as they are not 'themselves' in any sense. they also would not remember the event afterwards.they do not have free will. Or it could be argued that it is only when they are in that state they can excercise their free will without the constraints society places upon them." Sorry that went straight over my head! Could you rephrase it because I'm interested in your point? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" psychosis is different in that this is not the actual person who exists at that time. it is a person who is existing in an environment that their brain has made sense of but is not seeing the true environment. they are hallucinating and their brain is producing chemicals that flood the brain. no person going through psychosis would be able to be responsible for their actions as they are not 'themselves' in any sense. they also would not remember the event afterwards.they do not have free will. Or it could be argued that it is only when they are in that state they can excercise their free will without the constraints society places upon them." they don't even know what is real. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
