[OT] Plato's Pub and Philosophical Society

[Jack Simth]

Those are decent working definitions for now.

[dogscoff]

quarian: your emergent properties would still result from physical laws. The fact that no human could ever collect enough data to apply those laws and make a prediction is irrelevant. it's stilldetermined.

acording to a determinist...

just for the record, I'm not a determinist. I prefer to believe in the quantum stuff. God does play dice.

Krsqk: Your definitions fit nicely.

[QuarianRex]

Originally posted by Suicide Junkie:
Also, what are you referring to about the speed of light? All of the reports I've seen were basically media-hyped illusions.

I was referring to the fact that the theory of relativity does not apply to anything going past lightspeed. Physical(?) laws after that point would be qualitatively different.

Originally posted by dogscoff:
quarian: your emergent properties would still result from physical laws. The fact that no human could ever collect enough data to apply those laws and make a prediction is irrelevant. it's stilldetermined.

Perhaps, I was pointing out that the sometimes drastic changes that occur with emergent properties would nullify previous predictions based on the prior qualities. For example, projections based on the entropic qualities of quantities of matter are moot when said quantities acquire the anti-entropic qualities of life.

Perhaps this would be a better argument against prophecy. As complex systems grow in complexity they inevitably qualitatively change, thus nullifying existing predictions. Determinism is a little more annoying since it relies on supernatural influence (whether it be a god, a set of laws, etc.) and so is exempt from most rational arguments (it can always claim omniscience).

[Suicide Junkie]

I was referring to the fact that the theory of relativity does not apply to anything going past lightspeed. Physical(?) laws after that point would be qualitatively different

Ok, but I don't see what you're getting at...

[Krsqk]

Perhaps this would be a better argument against prophecy. As complex systems grow in complexity they inevitably qualitatively change, thus nullifying existing predictions. Determinism is a little more annoying since it relies on supernatural influence (whether it be a god, a set of laws, etc.) and so is exempt from most rational arguments (it can always claim omniscience).

Although, that would make prophecy under a free-will system all the more remarkable. BTW, I don't see the existence of the supernatural as contradictory to the operation of free will; they operate in different spheres (although supernatural could override/negate the effects of free will if necessary).

[Kamog]

There seems to be at least two points of view in regards to how our thoughts originate. (1) There is the biochemistry view that says thoughts are a result of chemical reactions in the brain; i.e. the different chemical and electrical processes are what thought is. If this is so, free will would be an illusion. (2) Another view is that we have a soul or spirit which is separate from physical matter. Thoughts originate from this non-physical spirit, and the chemical processes in the brain are a secondary phenomenon caused by the thought. Then free will is possible because thoughts can originate independently of the arrangement of chemicals and atoms in the physical brain.

Even if quantum mechanics allow random processes to occur, that does not necessarily mean that we can have free will. If the reactions in the brain occur randomly, then we don't have a choice as to what the outcome is, and therefore we are not in control. Our thoughts would be a consequence of random quantum fluctuations, not a result of free will.

[dogscoff]

thus nullifying existing predictions.

Quarian, you're still not getting it it. The predictions are irrelevant. Under determinsism, you are just a bunch of particles bouncing around, following the only path through history they possibly could have from their random creation in the Big Bang. The universe doesn't care whether you "predict" or "know" things or not, because your "knowledge" is just a complex pattern of matter in your "brain", which itself is nothing more than a bunch of atoms that happen to be hanging out together for a while because physics put them there.
Under determinism, you have no free will because in any given set of circumstances your atoms can only take one path- the path determined by the laws of physics. There is no possible alternative, no choice, no decision and no free will.

Determinism is a little more annoying since it relies on supernatural influence

No it doesn't. It absolutely does NOT. Determinism is the absolute extreme non-spiritual, absolutely physical view of the universe. It is the logical extreme of the assumption that everything in the universe is governed by a set of utterly consistent physical laws and nothing else- an assumption that has been central to science for centuries. The introduction of any supernatural presence would mean something affecting events from outside those laws, and so introduce unknown variables and screw everything up.

As for the speed of light, even if the way things react to circumstances change under those conditions, they will still be bound by a set of consistent rules.

Quantum mechanics introduces doubt to the determinist argument by taking the "utterly consistent" out of the physical laws. That's why it's so contraversial and ground-breaking. It still doesn't necessarily introduce a god or soul, although it doesn't rule them out completely either.

EDIT: I hadn't read Kamog's post. Good point.

[ March 21, 2003, 08:57: Message edited by: dogscoff ]