What do you believe in?

[BlackJester]

For anyone having difficulties with the idea of a universe arising from nothing:
A Universe from Nothing: Why There Is Something Rather than Nothing: by Lawrence Krauss http://www.amazon.com/Universe-Nothing-There-Something-Rather/dp/145162445X

It's an excellent read.  It does get a little heavy on physics at times, but if you can handle MtG you will be fine.

As far as faith goes, I have faith in the repeatability, predictability, and self-evaluation if the scientific community as a whole.  Ideas are based on repeatedly measured values, theories are tested and thoroughly questioned before they are accepted.  That instills a sense of trust and faith in me.

Also, if you need God to explain how something was created, you still need to explain what created God, by the very same argument.

[Dudecore]

Be it a chemical like caffeine. Your brain is still producing testosterone, estrogen, dopamine, norepinephrine, serotonin, oxytocin, and vasopressin.

I don't believe you had the "choice" to consume your first ever cup. You consumed a cup of coffee due to a myriad of factors preceding your conscious desire for a cup. A desire that originated in your brain, by your brain.

Wait, so "an original desire" that became an action?    Sounds like Free Will to me.

I can't admit that I know what your saying.
Your brain has the desire. You only say "oh I would like coffee, that is my idea, my choice." but your brain had figured out what to look at, which smells to process all nanoseconds before "you" (your conscious brain, sensory experience). You're just the mere witness to the goings on in your brain.

I'm at a difficulty to explain this without being verbal. I can only try typing the same things, different ways, so often.

[Kuberr]

Sometimes free thought makes us a higher being as a human. Some people will never ascend to this state as it's impossible to tell how we each get to it.  Sociology shows us that not even 1% of the human population will ever get to abstract thought.

But then there are some who have obtained it already. 

My point being that some people aren't Scientologists, BlackJester, and don't need to read a book that just talks about opinions.  Sometimes, people with said abstract thought can think for themselves and come up with a rational theory. 

Your "great reads" are merely someone else's thoughts. 

I know you probably don't intentionally want to make yourself to seem like a Scientologist, but after continually reading page after page of this and realizing your best supporting arguments come from NOVELS, makes me wonder how truly smart you are.

Does the free medical make up for the lack of education in Canada?

[Coffee Vampire]

Reading other peoples' opinions makes you smarter. It's good to read books, even if we don't agree with the person's opinion. In Bible class at my high school, my class studied other literature just as much as the Bible. It's important.

Also you seem way too mad and a bit offensive.

[Kuberr]

Reading other peoples' opinions makes you smarter. It's good to read books, even if we don't agree with the person's opinion. In Bible class at my high school, my class studied other literature just as much as the Bible. It's important.

Also you seem way too mad and a bit offensive.

You miss the point.

Reading OPINION when a person has abstract thought, is counteractive.  Reading FACT when a person has abstract thought makes the person come up with THEIR OWN theory.  Which is way more important than re-reading someone else's thought, and coming up with the same thought. 

Oh, and by no way am I mad. I'm stating FACT. 

If you do not know what abstract thought is, please refer to a reliable source of the term.  Wikipedia is NOT credible, and it never will be.



On another note.  Knowing different religions is NOT important to everyone.  Maybe to you, someone who has the faith of whatever you do.  To me, who believes in scientific fact over theory, doesn't feel studying any religion is important.  Because to me, it's irrelevant to the said FACT.  If there were anything that could be proven true, I may swing one way a little, and might be able to do more research.  Until then, it will be theory and nothing more.

[Piotr]

So what. It's not like my world of choices isn't absolutely mindboggingly huge. The fact that I cannot choose to be Japanese born in 1410 doesn't limit my free will in the slightest.

Being born in 1410 in japan would make you a completely different person. That's essentially what I'm saying.

(...)

If we all have free will, what's our excuse for obesity? Why should someone's free mind fail them in that regard?

I would have free will then as well, that's what I'm saying. Being who you are is part of your environment, environment in which you execute your free will.

Don't get me started on loosing weight, I have no problem loosing pounds when I decide so

[Piotr]

You forgot
*according to the current science
as it changes quite often 😉 Good story to read: Big Bang by Simon Singh.

Mayhap, but does it converge toward a more and more accurate number as more data is collected, analyzed, and tested against current knowledge?

Not sure, I remember from the book there are a couple of arbitrary constants based or rather dodgy assumptions. Prove them wrong, and the number is off by serious percentage, if not completely.

[Coffee Vampire]

Reading other peoples' opinions makes you smarter. It's good to read books, even if we don't agree with the person's opinion. In Bible class at my high school, my class studied other literature just as much as the Bible. It's important.

Also you seem way too mad and a bit offensive.

You miss the point.

Reading OPINION when a person has abstract thought, is counteractive.  Reading FACT when a person has abstract thought makes the person come up with THEIR OWN theory.  Which is way more important than re-reading someone else's thought, and coming up with the same thought. 

Oh, and by no way am I mad. I'm stating FACT. 

If you do not know what abstract thought is, please refer to a reliable source of the term.  Wikipedia is NOT credible, and it never will be.



On another note.  Knowing different religions is NOT important to everyone.  Maybe to you, someone who has the faith of whatever you do.  To me, who believes in scientific fact over theory, doesn't feel studying any religion is important.  Because to me, it's irrelevant to the said FACT.  If there were anything that could be proven true, I may swing one way a little, and might be able to do more research.  Until then, it will be theory and nothing more.

Are you saying that reading is useless unless you are reading something like a school book that only has things in it that are proven already? I say that it's good for people to read others' opinions even if they are not proven. It helps the mind. It is good to think critically.

As for your second thought, I never said you have to study "religions" like you imply. All I said was that I don't only study one thing. No one should be confined to their own views, but learn about how others think.

And also, I do not need to prove something to come to a conclusion. It is a thought process of critical thinking and elimination, combined with facts that are proven.

And by the way I was referring to your comment about canada as mean.

[BlackJester]

(...and then Kuberr came along...)

The fact that you refer to me as a Scientologist because I make reference to science leads me to question your understanding in this area.

[Piotr]

Be it a chemical like caffeine. Your brain is still producing testosterone, estrogen, dopamine, norepinephrine, serotonin, oxytocin, and vasopressin.

I don't believe you had the "choice" to consume your first ever cup. You consumed a cup of coffee due to a myriad of factors preceding your conscious desire for a cup. A desire that originated in your brain, by your brain.

I believe I had it. My choice was affected by the environment, but it was mine.

[Jbombard51]

If people were to believe as a common ideology that nothing is free will, then there would be anarchy stemming from the excuse of 'it wasn't my choice'.  No one would be able to be held accountable for their actions.  To me, there is more proof of free will than a scripted response to any stimuli someone may be subjected to.

Sure, there are some things that are scripted, such as the fight or flight mechanism, basic life functions such as breathing, heartbeat etc that we have no control over (in the sense of free willing yourself to not breathe and still survive).  A more enlightening argument could be a debate of genetics vs environment vs education vs free will, not that there is a total absence of it.

[Piotr]

(...) Maybe I'm just psychotic.

I think I've said it before. I'm with BJ on this one

[Jbombard51]

Punch Kub in the face and claim that free will doesn't exist so therefore it's not your fault

[Coffee Vampire]

Punch Kub in the face and claim that free will doesn't exist so therefore it's not your fault

Kuberr was not arguing about free will nor was that very appropiate :x

Anyways...about all the free will arguments:

I have a brain. It doesn't make decisions for me. It is merely the primary tool that I use to make decisions. It's like a crane. Without it bob the builder (copyright I do not own bob the builder or profit from it ) cannot make a building. Yet when you ask who made it, people say "bob the builder". Same thing with my brain. I need it to make decisions, but I am the one making them.

I make decisions based on my enviornment and experience. They do not determine them though.

[Dudecore]

If people were to believe as a common ideology that nothing is free will, then there would be anarchy stemming from the excuse of 'it wasn't my choice'.  No one would be able to be held accountable for their actions.  To me, there is more proof of free will than a scripted response to any stimuli someone may be subjected to.

Sure, there are some things that are scripted, such as the fight or flight mechanism, basic life functions such as breathing, heartbeat etc that we have no control over (in the sense of free willing yourself to not breathe and still survive).  A more enlightening argument could be a debate of genetics vs environment vs education vs free will, not that there is a total absence of it.

I can't type enough to show you how wrong you truly are. I feel like I typed at least an essay worth of reasons why free will doesn't exist, and isn't compatible with our knowledge of the way our brains work.

We don't kill because people "we choose not to kill people", we don't kill people because it's against everything in our genes. Some people kill others, because perhaps the potions of their brains (the medial pre-frontal cortex) that regulate that type of behavior is damaged, stunted, they could have been raped or abused as children, the lessons theyve learned in life have been poor ones, circumstances have much to do with it too.

Its the weakest of all arguments, and one that is often used against atheists. "if god isn't real, then why don't you run around killing people?". It's because it's not in me to kill people, we don't need a book to tell you that killing people is wrong.