Turn on thread page Beta

What is "Chance"? watch

Announcements
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Zaki)
    And you can ONLY ever have such a situation where you have Spontaneity, is this not so? There MUST be something capable of INDEPENDENTLY CHOOSING between the alternatives before it - otherwise how could there EVER be a specific outcome from such a situation?
    i would argue that there doesnt always need to be a choice for it necessarily to be chance
    but i dunno...:confused:
    • Very Important Poster
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    Chance is a girl who was tricked by a mad god.

    Not something which can be explained in psychological jargon which I will never understand.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Zaki)
    Yes, but what does it MEAN? Or are you one of these people who don't believe that meaning exists?
    I believe that words have meaning, but the meaning of 'chance' is more likely to do with the possiblity of something happening...
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    A ****e version of the community chest!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Determinism is an old theory.

    It's been discredited by Prigogine, and even Einstein admitted albeit disgruntingly that determinism is not valid in either physics or concepts of reality.

    Determinism is the proverbial denial of the arrow of time, and ergo entropy.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Zaki)
    Indeterminism makes sense ONLY as free will. As MAGIC it is pure nonsense! Insanity!
    As I said, I'm not going to present arguments to you or deal with your inability to comprehend anything beyond determinism.

    By your own views, (i.e. determinism), you cannot believe in free will. But I won't get into that either because, yet again, you seem to wrongly believe in the existence of free will by also believing that the world is deterministic.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Belizibub)
    Determinism is an old theory.

    It's been discredited by Prigogine, and even Einstein admitted albeit disgruntingly that determinism is not valid in either physics or concepts of reality.

    Determinism is the proverbial denial of the arrow of time, and ergo entropy.

    Zaki is pretty much correct here, to disagree with this, well makes you in the dark of current knowledge or stubbornly resigned to old false beliefs.
    Then he would be bound to accept indeterminism - and he doesn't agree with indeterminism.

    So... He apparently doesn't believe in any "way the world is".

    I'd also like to point out, that there is no proof determinism is wrong. It's still an ongoing metaphysical debate. And in fact, most metaphysicians prefer determinism over indeterminism.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by NYU2012)
    Then he would be bound to accept indeterminism - and he doesn't agree with indeterminism.

    So... He apparently doesn't believe in any "way the world is".

    I'd also like to point out, that there is no proof determinism is wrong. It's still an ongoing metaphysical debate. And in fact, most metaphysicians prefer determinism over indeterminism.
    Yeah my bad, I read through this thread and he doesn't I thought he did by the first post, lazy on my part.

    I'll just edit that out..
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by redmonkey7)
    i would argue that there doesnt always need to be a choice for it necessarily to be chance
    but i dunno...:confused:
    This is correct.

    Suppose a rock randomly falls from a cliff and kills someone standing at the bottom of the cliff. No moral agent or conscious agent ever had a choice as to whether or not to make the rock fall. It just so happened, without any acting agent, that the rock did fall.

    There was a chance that it would fall, there was a chance that it would not. There was a chance it would kill someone, there was a chance it would not. However, it just so happens that it did fall and that it did kill someone.

    I'd also like to point out that it is difficult to examine "chance" by reflecting on past events. It's far easier to examine "chance" in the context of things that have not yet happened.

    I.e. there is a chance that you could, within the next five minutes, suffer a heart attack and die. There is also a chance that this will not happen.
    • Study Helper
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Study Helper
    (Original post by Zaki)
    Clearly, something which is at the Beginning of ALL BEING cannot be the sort of thing that comes to be. It is something ETERNAL! And it also CANNOT be matter which is fundamentally characterised by INERTIA - and thus lacks ALL ability to act itself.
    Zaki, what's inertia?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by NYU2012)
    Then he would be bound to accept indeterminism - and he doesn't agree with indeterminism.

    So... He apparently doesn't believe in any "way the world is".

    I'd also like to point out, that there is no proof determinism is wrong. It's still an ongoing metaphysical debate. And in fact, most metaphysicians prefer determinism over indeterminism.
    There is proof, entropy.

    To believe in determinism is to deny the fact of irreversiblity in the explanation of individual variability. The first documentation of this into a field of study is statistical mechanics, which shows evidence of irreversiblity. Something determinism objects to; in deterministic physics all processes are time reversible; meaning they can literally move, forward back and through time.

    Determinism, and comparatively corner-stoned by deterministic physics is the denial of entropy, the arrow of time. It is simply wrong.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Belizibub)
    There is proof, entropy.

    To believe in determinism is to deny the fact of irreversiblity in the explanation of individual variability. The first documentation of this into a field of study is statistical mechanics, which shows evidence of irreversiblity. Something determinism objects to; in deterministic physics all processes are time reversible; meaning they can literally move, forward back and through time.

    Determinism, and comparatively corner-stoned by deterministic physics is the denial of entropy, the arrow of time. It is simply wrong.
    And there are plenty of causal chains of events that one can use to argue for determinism. Like I said, neither has been proven - the debate over determinism and indeterminism has been going on for a very very long time. And most metaphysicians prefer determinism over indeterminism - as indeterminism leads to some very very strange things.

    I'll also ask how it is that entropy presents any argument for indeterminism? I'm may not be familiar enough with physics possibly to understand what you're trying to get at? However, I'm curious as to how entropy supports a thesis of a world that doesn't have causation relationships?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by NYU2012)
    And there are plenty of causal chains of events that one can use to argue for determinism. Like I said, neither has been proven - the debate over determinism and indeterminism has been going on for a very very long time. And most metaphysicians prefer determinism over indeterminism - as indeterminism leads to some very very strange things.
    I can see what you mean by the merit of metaphyscians still debate it, it doesn't make it something right though.

    The casual chains all fail at the premise of causality once linked to anything within conservation of energy or entropy though.

    But either way, this is a discussion for another topic, and this thread has died really.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I'll also ask how it is that entropy presents any argument for indeterminism? I'm may not be familiar enough with physics possibly to understand what you're trying to get at? However, I'm curious as to how entropy supports a thesis of a world that doesn't have causation relationships?[/QUOTE]


    I already answered above; determinism is the lack thereof proving it works in the vicinity of the second law of thermodynamics, ergo entropy.

    It's the refusal of time essentially, deterministic physics makes the claim, as Newton, Einstein and Schrodinger did by evidence of their expressions of theories in deterministic equation.

    The problem is that all thing's are reversible in a deterministic reality, time no longer exists, for this to be possible irreverisblity can not simply exist; something we know is true, seeing as statistical mechanics proved on an individual scale gas' undergo irreversible process'.

    Oh and stochastic atomic principles such as radioactive decay, which evidenced by quantum theory; "It is impossible to predict when an atom will decay" is further proof. Determinism just really does not exist.

    Entropy proves validation for in-determinism for it follows a strict adherence to the arrow of time; entropy does and can change, and in-determinism is the validation of this realization.

    Metaphyscians may study, and object to it all they want, but physics is quite clearly in follow suit against determinism in physics, and ultimately the question of reality/deterministic or not is a physics question, the pre-supposition of free will thereafter if the philosophical one.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Belizibub)
    I already answered above; determinism is the lack thereof proving it works in the vicinity of the second law of thermodynamics, ergo entropy.

    It's the refusal of time essentially, deterministic physics makes the claim, as Newton, Einstein and Schrodinger did by evidence of their expressions of theories in deterministic equation.

    The problem is that all thing's are reversible in a deterministic reality, time no longer exists, for this to be possible irreverisblity can not simply exist; something we know is true, seeing as statistical mechanics proved on an individual scale gas' undergo irreversible process'.

    Oh and stochastic atomic principles such as radioactive decay, which evidenced by quantum theory; "It is impossible to predict when an atom will decay" is further proof. Determinism just really does not exist.

    Entropy proves validation for in-determinism for it follows a strict adherence to the arrow of time; entropy does and can change, and in-determinism is the validation of this realization.

    Metaphyscians may study, and object to it all they want, but physics is quite clearly in follow suit against determinism in physics, and ultimately the question of reality/deterministic or not is a physics question, the pre-supposition of free will thereafter if the philosophical one.
    I'm not entirely sure you're understanding the full concept of determinism.

    For example, determinism doesn't require that one be "able to predict when an atom will decay".

    And "the way the world is" is not really entirely a physics question. It's a metaphysical one. Thus metaphysicians study "the way the world is". Metaphysics studies "the way the world is" and "why the world is the way it is". Metaphysicians are typically quite educated in physics and quantum mechanics. Say, for example, there were a "selector" which determines the way the world is, such that it determines how things behave or are they way they are - that's a metaphysical question.


    But, as I said, the current concepts of quantum mechanics do not support indeterminism or determinism. It's very easy to argue both. I highly recommend trying to find some books or papers on quantum mechanics and the debate of indeterminism and determinism. I think you might find some very interesting things.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by NYU2012)
    I'm not entirely sure you're understanding the full concept of determinism.

    For example, determinism doesn't require that one be "able to predict when an atom will decay".

    And "the way the world is" is not really entirely a physics question. It's a metaphysical one. Thus metaphysicians study "the way the world is". Metaphysics studies "the way the world is" and "why the world is the way it is". Metaphysicians are typically quite educated in physics and quantum mechanics. Say, for example, there were a "selector" which determines the way the world is, such that it determines how things behave or are they way they are - that's a metaphysical question.


    But, as I said, the current concepts of quantum mechanics do not support indeterminism or determinism. It's very easy to argue both. I highly recommend trying to find some books or papers on quantum mechanics and the debate of indeterminism and determinism. I think you might find some very interesting things.
    I do know about the subject quite well.

    And as I outlined, deterministic physics does make that claim, determinism falls on that claim also, albeit not entirely, it still makes it untrue.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by n1r4v)
    Okay, basically what happens is that I try and go along with what you say, but instead of helping me understand your point of view, all you do is say "No" all the time add something new to the mix

    So I'm not going to bother to work out what you're saying, instead you can say it for me, so can you explain a few things so I understand:

    1) Explain the mechanism by which a radioactive nucleus decays / a "random" event works. In other words, explain how randomness works

    2) Explain the mechanism by which conscious entities (humans) make choices or decisions. In order words, explain how we make "spontaneous" decisions.

    3) Explain the mechanism of free will and what it "is". In other words, explain as detailed as possible what free will is, and how it works

    4) Explain the function of the brain if it does not subserve cognitive functions like consciousness and human decision making (ie why is it that the mind is so entwined to the brain?)

    5) How does this all tie together? Why does this intelligence work at the subatomic level (radioactive decay), and then the macroscopic level (human free will)? How can "intelligence" work at levels which are smaller than an atom, yet this same "intelligence" works at levels where enormous amounts of atoms come together (life)
    1. I have already said to you that Spontaneity is responsible for ANY and ALL actions that are INITIATED - throughout the Universe. Matter, obeying the Law of Inertia, is utterly INCAPABLE of INITIATING anything and can only RESPOND!

    ANYTHING can arise out of Spontaneity - providing ALL the necessary preceding conditions are fulfilled FIRST - by Spontaneity. And there are no external hinderances to prevent manifestations. This is what the double-slit experiment of quantum mechanics demonstrates.

    2 Genuine decision-making is by definition a spontaneous process. This means it is not reducible to a more basic process. If it could, we would not be dealing with Spontaneity at all but merely an EFFECT that it produces. It is inherent in the nature of Spontaneity itself.

    3. Free Will is Spontaneity.

    4. The brain is a material tool used by the Mind for its activity. It is somewhat like the computer that you use to be active on this forum. Without it you could not be active on this forum - unless you had a replacement with equal or greater capabilities. But its loss by you would not mean you have ceased to exist or could not be active in other ways. You'd only be unable to communicate on this forum - that's all.

    5. Spontaneity is the fundamental nature of Being! ALL things - including Space-Time - arise out of It. ALL things - however minute or stupendous - are merely its expressions and nothing more.

    Sorry about the delay in responding. It was way to busy yesterday and too tired afterwards to spend any significant time on this forum at the end of the day.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Hype en Ecosse)
    Zaki, what's inertia?
    Reluctance to move and resistance to being moved. Again, it too is a state of being that can ONLY be generated and maintained by Spontaneity. - fundamentally.

    Psychologically and intellectually, you can observe it in people who have accepted a dogma - an assumption they never bother to question anymore. It is all but impossible to get them to think rationally about this dogma. In ALL their thinking, they ALWAYS presuppose it. Just look at this statement from someone who is subject to a dogma:



    ‘We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism.

    It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is an absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door.

    The eminent Kant scholar Lewis Beck used to say that anyone who could believe in God could believe in anything. To appeal to an omnipotent deity is to allow that at any moment the regularities of nature may be ruptured, that Miracles may happen.
    " - Professor Richard Lewontin



    Now here the effect of inertia upon the Mind. (formatting is mine)
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by C_B_C)
    Calm down youngster.

    And no, we barely have free will.
    In fact, most of what we call our "Rational Decisions" in fact are strongly influenced by the situation and by instinct.
    Someone's decisions in life are all extremely predictable, including your own.

    This illusion you have of controling your own life won't last long.
    Of course people who weigh down and hem in their free will with all kinds of vices will in the end not be able to even recognise it anymore. Naturally, as a defense mechanism, to avoid appearing despicable to society, they may then claim that this is the natural condition of man. It is not.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Zaki)
    3. Free Will is Spontaneity.
    You just claimed that free will follows the law of indeterminism. But you apparently don't agree with indeterminism? Please make up your mind.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: December 14, 2011
Poll
Who is most responsible for your success at university
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.