Absolute Determinism

Watch
miguelalves
Badges: 4
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 4 years ago
#1
I've got thinking in this for a while , and for me it has a little sense... the determism might be possible. Like anyother view for life , a observer life can be a prespective. Like, everything is known and we just think we think and that we can't predict the future, but what it is just our view of the things, because, if you think in time and the mind**** it is, the future as no sense, and so predicting it . I'm quite confused with this and after some research I could only find stuff about Laplace's Deamon...
0
reply
FortitudeBank
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#2
Report 4 years ago
#2
Personally I am a fierce defender of liberty and self-making but Spinoza introduced very strong arguments on determinism. You should read his work or at least Wiki him.
1
reply
miguelalves
Badges: 4
Rep:
?
#3
Report Thread starter 4 years ago
#3
(Original post by PMC01234)
Personally I am a fierce defender of liberty and self-making but Spinoza introduced very strong arguments on determinism. You should read his work or at least Wiki him.
just for curiosity , in what is based your believing in free-will / liberty :? i would like to hear every side of the story so I could have a better opinion in this arguement. btw, thank for answering
0
reply
FortitudeBank
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#4
Report 4 years ago
#4
(Original post by miguelalves)
just for curiosity , in what is based your believing in free-will / liberty :? i would like to hear every side of the story so I could have a better opinion in this arguement. btw, thank for answering
Taking Sartre philosophy, this believing takes roots in the fact that we assume the mankind existence has no purpose. In fact, we build cars to drive them. Its "essence" (goal) comes before its "existence". For the mankind, its "existence" comes before its "essence", and that its existence is truly due to coincidental natural phenomenas.

Assuming that, the mankind is born without preconceptions and free from any purpose. It is called "tabula rasa": our mind is an empty paper and it is ourselves who write our life on this paper. We are the only ones committed to our choices. To summarise, we are what we do. Our actions dictate our morals and our perception from the others. A coward has decided to become a coward, and a hero has decided to be a hero.

__

I believe in it because it is really optimistic: your life is not written in advance and you can make it the best as you can. It is also a more "scientific" approach so I believe it appeals me better (I am a maths student at ICL).
1
reply
bobby147
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#5
Report 4 years ago
#5
I am pretty sure Quantum mechanics refutes Laplace's demon.
0
reply
miguelalves
Badges: 4
Rep:
?
#6
Report Thread starter 4 years ago
#6
(Original post by bobby147)
I am pretty sure Quantum mechanics refutes Laplace's demon.
Yes, probably, but like just a concept , is that it?
0
reply
miguelalves
Badges: 4
Rep:
?
#7
Report Thread starter 4 years ago
#7
(Original post by PMC01234)
Taking Sartre philosophy, this believing takes roots in the fact that we assume the mankind existence has no purpose. In fact, we build cars to drive them. Its "essence" (goal) comes before its "existence". For the mankind, its "existence" comes before its "essence", and that its existence is truly due to coincidental natural phenomenas.

Assuming that, the mankind is born without preconceptions and free from any purpose. It is called "tabula rasa": our mind is an empty paper and it is ourselves who write our life on this paper. We are the only ones committed to our choices. To summarise, we are what we do. Our actions dictate our morals and our perception from the others. A coward has decided to become a coward, and a hero has decided to be a hero.

__

I believe in it because it is really optimistic: your life is not written in advance and you can make it the best as you can. It is also a more "scientific" approach so I believe it appeals me better (I am a maths student at ICL).
Hm , i find it really interesting but , what do you think about manipulation, like being unconsciously manipulated by every thing that happens, and that everything has a repercussion that will shape the future diferently and won't make your choices fully free .
0
reply
FortitudeBank
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#8
Report 4 years ago
#8
(Original post by miguelalves)
Hm , i find it really interesting but , what do you think about manipulation, like being unconsciously manipulated by every thing that happens, and that everything has a repercussion that will shape the future diferently and won't make your choices fully free .
"everything has a repercussion that will shape the future diferently" Indeed, but when you face a choice you do it freely. And every time you have to make a choice there is an infinity of possibilities, regardless of your previous choices. It's just another infinity between others.

"unconsciously manipulated by every thing that happens" Very good argument, but Sartre philosophy assumes that our existence is a "natural accident" and hence, there is no God that can manipulate our existence.
0
reply
miguelalves
Badges: 4
Rep:
?
#9
Report Thread starter 4 years ago
#9
(Original post by PMC01234)
"everything has a repercussion that will shape the future diferently" Indeed, but when you face a choice you do it freely. And every time you have to make a choice there is an infinity of possibilities, regardless of your previous choices. It's just another infinity between others.

"unconsciously manipulated by every thing that happens" Very good argument, but Sartre philosophy assumes that our existence is a "natural accident" and hence, there is no God that can manipulate our existence.
Thank you very much ! What your saying is very reasonable Thank for all the conversation, I'll keep searching in the subject but with this you quite opened my eyes TY
0
reply
FortitudeBank
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#10
Report 4 years ago
#10
(Original post by miguelalves)
Thank you very much ! What your saying is very reasonable Thank for all the conversation, I'll keep searching in the subject but with this you quite opened my eyes TY
This is just a compulsory course I had in the French equivalent of year 13 and I HATED IT but it seems some things are still quite interesting!

If you really like philosophy you should read Meditations on First Philosophy which is the first masterpiece of modern Western philosophy written by Descartes, Existentialism and Humanism by Sartre and An Essay towards a New Theory of Vision of Berkeley which are really good and not hard to read for a beginner. Russell's writing is also easy to understand. The three of them explain very different things; the first is on doubting everything (yep! but you'll see that one thing can not be doubted), the second on what we have discussed before and the third saying that the truth resides in our senses and not in our mind!
0
reply
92hannah
Badges: 5
Rep:
?
#11
Report 4 years ago
#11
in hindsight you could claim anything was predetermined. As soon as some famous scientists makes a big noise and gets lots of attention for it "intellectual" students will believe it as 100% proven even if they understand none of the "evidence"
0
reply
FortitudeBank
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#12
Report 4 years ago
#12
(Original post by 92hannah)
in hindsight you could claim anything was predetermined. As soon as some famous scientists makes a big noise and gets lots of attention for it "intellectual" students will believe it as 100% proven even if they understand none of the "evidence"
"in hindsight you could claim anything was predetermined" Of course you can, but it is the branch of determinism. It is different from the one of liberty. Determinism arguments are still widely accepted in the philosophy world. I just find determinism a bit too pessimistic. If you agree with determinism than you should Google Spinoza And determinism if far from not being scientific. At the contrary, in science nature is dictated by equations and laws and no one can escape them :beard:
0
reply
deeplyastrocyte
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#13
Report 4 years ago
#13
There can never be absolute determinism, insofar as we are dynamically recreated again and again according to a biological history of natural selection of symmetry states that mediate the emergence of our normal experience.

Humans need to come to terms with their animality - with ideas like 'homeostasis', and 'coherence' and 'incoherence', and 'symmetry' and 'asymmetry', because these are the terms which reflect the basic point-counterpoint dynamic of living.

C.S Peirce - as anyone who reads him knows, was an utter genius - described the reality we know as being at the bare minimum "natures habits". This is what science is, and so, it shoulsd not be surprising that evolution, which began 3.8 billion years ago in a deep sea alkaline ocean vent, in nano-sized hole, grew autocatalytic chemical loops within a phospholipid vacuole. This whole idea is elaborated upon in today's origin of life research, and so it serves as the epistemological foundation for thinking about the nature of human being, inasmuch as human being is framed by the same sort of autocatalytic logic, or feedback loop logic, where perception feeds into action through the flow of affect and motivation in acting. This internal movement is a parallel, and indeed, a higher level fractal expression, of the autotcalysis within each of our cells, such as the TCA cycle (aka citrus acid cycle).

The human mind is best thought of as a "halo", or "summation" of the dynamical status of our bodily operations, in interaction with the external fields which act upon our body's affective relation to the salient objects in the environment. So there is simultaneously a "determined" nature whch arises from the body, in dynamically recreating itself from one moment to the next, the mind is always 'fed' the quality of its own internal becoming, again and again. On the other hand, there is this 'centrigufal' force which propels us into social relations, and so the world of human others becomes the 'triggering' mechanism of which states are bodily dynamics become entrained to. Determinism? Very much so. But that isn't it.

Neuroscience, philosophy, and phenomenology, allow us to peer in and understand what it is we mean when we talk about free will. The Buddhists, or buddhist psychology, seems to have a more nuanced understanding of what can be changed, and what can't be changed, as told through the parable of the '2 arrows'. The first of which constitutes the perception of a feeling. Neuroscientific research shows that the right hemisphere of social mammals is biodynamically concentrated on translating the biodynamical constraints and flows of bodily dynamics into an affective state (feeling), while at the same time reflexively entraining to the external cues that are relevant in your social environment. Both of these process constitute ecological extensions away from the ego, or the agentic dimension of us. The right hemisphere is thus the "master", which guides the perspective of the left hemisphere's reasoning processes through the cues created by feeling - or the right brain.

Since we are animals, we respond mostly to the meaning of the cues which we feel, even if we confabulate an explanation for the feeling which occludes the real cause, the feeling exists because some historical interaction aroused a feeling-meaning state that has since left its imprint - like water flowing and shaping the riverbed - which makes that particular interpretation feel coherent or necessary at the moment that its enacted.

We are still free, though, to exercise mindfulness. The original bond of mother and baby is older, and more basic, and indeed, the root of all cognition, so if we can't muster a feeling of positivity and goodness in us, we can't counter those feelings which motivate destructive thoughts, motivations, and desires.

So when we are in a state of subjective 'being', we are under complete control of structural material rules of transformation. Determinism. However, if we increase our left-brains focus, and orient properly to the right-brains internal signalling and cuing, we can make a very high level decision on what to do or how to act that explicitly takes into account what we want, itself a function of what we value.

What of this? If it is determned, it is determined because reality has a point-counterpoint structure, as in the yin-yang symbol. Fear is the root emotion in the evolution of animals; and indeed, in humans it reaches its apogee. But at the same time, humans have developed and honed an awareness of being that allows for universal love - an ability to identify with being a unique being that can take in the whole, and appreciate and value it, and realize that it is the only being able to do this, and do this it must, because its in its nature to value this.

So, what is undetermined, is how we will act, and in taht sense, everyone has free will. We can act according to habit, or we block habit, and act differently.
1
reply
Farm_Ecology
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#14
Report 4 years ago
#14
(Original post by bobby147)
I am pretty sure Quantum mechanics refutes Laplace's demon.
Only in some interpretations. Either way, that's an issue with knowability than principles of determinism.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Feeling behind at school/college? What is the best thing your teachers could to help you catch up?

Extra compulsory independent learning activities (eg, homework tasks) (2)
5.88%
Run extra compulsory lessons or workshops (6)
17.65%
Focus on making the normal lesson time with them as high quality as possible (4)
11.76%
Focus on making the normal learning resources as high quality/accessible as possible (3)
8.82%
Provide extra optional activities, lessons and/or workshops (11)
32.35%
Assess students, decide who needs extra support and focus on these students (8)
23.53%

Watched Threads

View All