First  Prev  1  2  3  4  Next  Last
Post Reply Science and Freewill
52465 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
31 / M / Riding sound waves
Offline
Posted 7/3/15
This is pure philosophy. Philosophers like to start with their conclusions, and work to prove them. When it came to trying to figure out what the world was like, philosophers tended to argue about what the world should be like. Science was born as a rejection of this method. Its goal was to figure out what the world was really all about, and its primary tool was actual experimentation.
209 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M / socal
Offline
Posted 7/3/15
Considering that free will and pre-destined paths will feel the exact same for someone living (that hasn't seen their pre-destined path) it's kind of pointless to "debate".

The only thing we can really debate is philosophy. So in my opinion that if a god pre-destines morally good people to suffer while morally bad people to enjoy life, I would say to that god it's sadistic. And we can't even assume that only bad stuff happens to bad people and that good stuff happens to good people because that is dis-proven by any act of murder or torture of innocent lives.

That's why I would rather assume that in this living hell of a chaotic world it's our personal actions that prove if we are good or bad.
15796 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 7/3/15
Well science and religion aside, I simply believe that life just is what it is and any time spent questioning that is just less time you have to actually live it
11599 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
30 / M / New York
Offline
Posted 7/3/15

HolyDrumstick wrote:

Something I always thought funny was an atheist who used science to deny religion, yet claimed to have freewill.

Not to get into a discussion of religion, because that isn't what this is. I am now Christian, and I used to be an atheist and thought this was just as funny then.

Why do I think it is funny? Because, scientifically speaking, everything is simply the result of cause and effect, a series of reactions. This means that everything in existence, including every thought and decision, is simply a result of these reactions, which, with the proper measurements and calculations, could easily be predetermined.

Actually, scientifically speaking... if there was anything that could connect with the entire universe, measure all of existence, and have the ability to calculate it properly, that something could know everything that ever was and everything that ever will be. This is an idea that lends itself to the thought (if nothing else) of an omniscient being.

Is there something I am missing? Is there a way, scientifically speaking, for anyone to have freewill?


The fact that you went from Atheism to Christianity implies that something tragic or shocking happened to you, because most people who think logically and not faith based dont do that. Its almost always the other way around. Your indoctrinated into a religion at birth and then as you grow your learn and see whats logical and what is not. Im just curious as to why you changed your belief?

FYI- I was the latter situation so i have plenty of experience with that.
209 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M / socal
Offline
Posted 7/3/15

HolyDrumstick wrote:


CKD-Anime wrote:
Theories lie in the realm of philosophy, while absolutes lie in science.


No, no, no, my friend. Just no. WOW....so much no here....gah...so no, I don't know what to say....except NO.

Let me be clear, I'm not saying it isn't philosophy. It is. It is just also science.

Well it's a science, but to debate science you need experimentation. So since none of us are studying metaphysical particles at this time and are sending 15 page papers about them back and forth, well then we are just talking about our subjective philosophies.
10263 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 7/3/15

RavingDragon wrote:

This is pure philosophy. Philosophers like to start with their conclusions, and work to prove them. When it came to trying to figure out what the world was like, philosophers tended to argue about what the world should be like. Science was born as a rejection of this method. Its goal was to figure out what the world was really all about, and its primary tool was actual experimentation.


You have a loose grasp on a few things you said, but mostly, no.

Philosophy and science, while two separate things, are almost always intertwined, for one.

Secondly, what I have stated as fact is based entirely in scientific evidence.

No, I have not applied the scientific method to it, because honestly, no one has the means... but, there are many sciences that remain merely theoretical.

Saying that it is purely philosophy and has no scientific merit simply has no merit.

It does nothing to present any evidence to the contrary, and only tries to undermine my statements with insult.
10263 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 7/3/15

screendoor wrote:
The fact that you went from Atheism to Christianity implies that something tragic or shocking happened to you, because most people who think logically and not faith based dont do that. Its almost always the other way around. Your indoctrinated into a religion at birth and then as you grow your learn and see whats logical and what is not. Im just curious as to why you changed your belief?


Nothing at all, actually.

In fact, I stayed an atheist my entire life, until only very recently. I went through tons of terrible things. Even flat-lined once. Still stayed an atheist.

I became a Christian because I let my guard down one day, turned to Him, and experienced Him. Not in a crisis or anything. Perhaps that is why I let my guard down, because I was comfortable with where I was in life.

I also know all of the theories as to why a Christian may think they have "experienced" God. But, I'm pretty sane and logical... even now it is a burden on my faith. But, since I have became Christian, I have felt Him several times. It is not quantifiable, but is completely undeniable.

For me, I know all of the atheist arguments, because I used to be the one using them. Science will always win the debate, no doubt about it. I've always needed that evidence, to believe anything. But... when I opened myself up, and experienced Him, that was all the proof I needed.
10263 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 7/3/15

jvempire wrote:
Well it's a science, but to debate science you need experimentation. So since none of us are studying metaphysical particles at this time and are sending 15 page papers about them back and forth, well then we are just talking about our subjective philosophies.


No, to prove science you need experimentation. Lord help us if the great scientists of the world refused to discuss anything without experimenting on every statement during the conversation. Nothing would have gotten done.

No, nothing subjective, here, at all. In fact, the subjective is what I've been trying to avoid.
10263 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 7/3/15

superflydanfry wrote:

Well science and religion aside, I simply believe that life just is what it is and any time spent questioning that is just less time you have to actually live it


You lucky bastard. I soooo wish I could do that, and just turn it off.
7009 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M
Offline
Posted 7/3/15

HolyDrumstick wrote:




First, no, it does NOT imply freewill. It implies that everything is inherently somewhat random, that is all. I have no idea how you came to the conclusion you came to.


The universe cannot be determined thus a concept of predestination cannot exist. I call human beings who make choices that cannot be determined from a physical perspective until the choice is in fact made, agents who are exercising free will. Of course free will is a rather poorly defined concept as biological influences can be brought into the question(is the mind merely the plaything of the body?), yet from a physical standpoint my above statements on quantum mechanics suffice for me.

On the existence of a god. I personally am an atheist in belief and an agnostic in practice. Can we actually prove the existence or not of a deity? No, although to my mind the concept of a god let alone a god that conforms to all the rules in the Christian bible is, very improbable.

With that said good night all, I must thank HolyDrumstick for the thread. I don't interact on forums,but now I did.
10263 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 7/3/15 , edited 7/3/15

Emperor_Azmodius wrote:
The universe cannot be determined thus a concept of predestination cannot exist. I call human beings who make choices that cannot be determined from a physical perspective until the choice is in fact made, agents who are exercising free will. Of course free will is a rather poorly defined concept as biological influences can be brought into the question(is the mind merely the plaything of the body?), yet from a physical standpoint my above statements on quantum mechanics suffice for me.

Well, as of now, I would go as far as to say we have reason to believe that everything is inherently somewhat random, which, if true(though I still think we just aren't able to understand it well enough), would disprove predestination. However, disproving predestination is a long way from proving freewill. It only proves that our choices are random and cannot be entirely predicted. :)
Not going to going into our mind playing tricks with us, etc, because it is irrelevant at this point in the argument.



With that said good night all, I must thank HolyDrumstick for the thread. I don't interact on forums,but now I did.


No problem. Was awesome talking with you.
11599 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
30 / M / New York
Offline
Posted 7/3/15

HolyDrumstick wrote:


screendoor wrote:
The fact that you went from Atheism to Christianity implies that something tragic or shocking happened to you, because most people who think logically and not faith based dont do that. Its almost always the other way around. Your indoctrinated into a religion at birth and then as you grow your learn and see whats logical and what is not. Im just curious as to why you changed your belief?


Nothing at all, actually.

In fact, I stayed an atheist my entire life, until only very recently. I went through tons of terrible things. Even flat-lined once. Still stayed an atheist.

I became a Christian because I let my guard down one day, turned to Him, and experienced Him. Not in a crisis or anything. Perhaps that is why I let my guard down, because I was comfortable with where I was in life.

I also know all of the theories as to why a Christian may think they have "experienced" God. But, I'm pretty sane and logical... even now it is a burden on my faith. But, since I have became Christian, I have felt Him several times. It is not quantifiable, but is completely undeniable.

For me, I know all of the atheist arguments, because I used to be the one using them. Science will always win the debate, no doubt about it. I've always needed that evidence, to believe anything. But... when I opened myself up, and experienced Him, that was all the proof I needed.


I respect your decision from the bottom of my heart, but you already know that i cant agree with you but thats ok. Not all atheist are judging and combative as religious people make us out to be but you already knew that. I was in the church from the day i was born until i was about 17, im now 28.

Im happy that you are happy and thats all that matters im not here to judge you. I just hope that the enlightenment that you have found is true and not just false hope or blind faith that i have for far to long look to.
10263 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 7/3/15

screendoor wrote:
I respect your decision from the bottom of my heart, but you already know that i cant agree with you but thats ok. Not all atheist are judging and combative as religious people make us out to be but you already knew that. I was in the church from the day i was born until i was about 17, im now 28.

Im happy that you are happy and thats all that matters im not here to judge you. I just hope that the enlightenment that you have found is true and not just false hope or blind faith that i have for far to long look to.


Thanks, and I truly do hope you find your way back to Him. But, I'm not about to beat you with the Bible, either.
21448 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
46 / M / Between yesterday...
Online
Posted 7/3/15
You are in the wrong field of science quantum mechanics has about as much to do with free will as neuroscience has to do with determining the placement and spin of an electron. One deals with the study of space time and the universe the other deals with the study of the mind and how it works which is where freewill lays. Not even closely related.

No really wrong field of science.

I don't use science to deny religion I use it to ask questions about the universe and to figure out how it and the world around me work and function. I ignore religion since it doesn't provide answers as to how the world and universe work it just says stop asking question. No really no answer there as to how things actually work and the answer when you asked the question is normally it is god's will.

Science requires proof not belief I have no belief in science I have knowledge in the proof it provides, and when that answer is proven wrong as it is sometimes that understanding and knowledge changes. Example I don't have belief that gravity will hold me to the ground I know it will I can prove it using simple experiments. Example of belief I believe that the world is only 5000 years old. Now I can attempt to prove that belief using science and if it proves out to be incorrect which it is with lead uranium dating which is how you date rocks not fossils which hold carbon 16 and can be dated that way.

Science no belief needed just look at the proof and the facts.

Nope don't believe in science I know that I can find the answers using it there is a major difference between knowing and believing.
32290 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / St.Louis - USA
Online
Posted 7/3/15 , edited 7/3/15


Its called the philosophy of science (or something like that, didn't pay attention much in philo classes); which is more of a grey zone since it includes metaphysical things, which you call them theories but they fall more under the philosophy umbrella than the science one.
But said theories can become actual science.

But the theory that was given was a philosophical one since you are trying to disprove a metaphysical thing using scientific reasons, thus it is not quite a scientific theory.

Back to Topic
And to answer your original question, yes you are missing something, just go look up some theories trying to proving freewill, because the example you gave was just a theory trying disproving freewill. You will find a lot articles for both "scientific" theories.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.