Scientism

The first thing to note, is that there is no self that is "you". There's no separate part of your brain that exists outside your stream of consciousness. The feeling of a self is just what it's like to experience your stream of consciousness. That fact is really the basis for the impossibility of free will - there is no separate self that exists outside of your stream of consciousness. "You" are equal to the stream. There is no thinker of thoughts - there are only thoughts.

So, "you" aren't desperate because there is no you to be desperate.
Where did you learn that POV, Mode? Did someone teach it to you or did you have a vision?

First, while you are free to believe life is an illusion and that you don't really exist, if you are convicted of a crime, reality will come to you very quickly.

Second, your "stream of consciousness" is you, but I'm open to seeing your evidence that it's some outside force controlling you. If you don't have Free Will, who or what do you think is controlling your choices and actions?
 
The source of ethics and morality is a much bigger conversation but, yes, our understanding of ethics does change as we not only evolve but mature from birth.

No, it's not. It's real fucking simple: ethics and morality come from people.
 
If that is true, then you'd have to expect the bear to have the same sense of right and wrong as a person and be able to exercise free will in the same manner as a person. Is that the case?

No. Harm is harm. If a bear attacks me, I can contact the US Forest Service and they may need to kill the bear if it is a continuing threat.
The person with the ax is exactly the same. Hunt the person down. Maybe not kill him, but certainly detain the person and prosecute.
 
Where did you learn that POV, Mode? Did someone teach it to you or did you have a vision?
There's a lot of information out there regarding the illusion of the self and the illusion of free will. Part of an understanding of/experience of meditation is the understanding that there is not self.
First, while you are free to believe life is an illusion and that you don't really exist, if you are convicted of a crime, reality will come to you very quickly.
I'm not able to believe that which I do not believe any more than I'm free to not understand that which I do understand. If I understand the basics of mathematics, i.e. 2+2=4, I'm not free to not understand it...because there is no free will. If free will existed, I'd be able to will myself to not understanding that 2+2 is 4, right?
Second, your "stream of consciousness" is you, but I'm open to seeing your evidence that it's some outside force controlling you. If you don't have Free Will, who or what do you think is controlling your choices and actions?


What controls you is your thoughts. Every intentional action you make originates with a thought. The decision to take action, or to not take action, on that initial thought is the result of subsequent thoughts. There is no "self" creating those thoughts. There is no self that is sitting outside of the stream of thoughts. You and the stream are on in the same.

There is no thinker of thoughts. There are only thoughts.

If there were a self, that consciously generated our thoughts, then you'd know what you were going to think before you thought it.
 
Yes they do. What magical source do you believe they come from if not human beings, Mode?

A mixture of genes and everything you've experienced in life. If you had Jeffrey Dahmer's genes, and the entirety of his life experiences, you'd be him and do all of the terrible things he did.
 
No. Harm is harm. If a bear attacks me, I can contact the US Forest Service and they may need to kill the bear if it is a continuing threat.
The person with the ax is exactly the same. Hunt the person down. Maybe not kill him, but certainly detain the person and prosecute.

I think you're confusing consequences with feelings toward the thing that is wronging you.
 
There's a lot of information out there regarding the illusion of the self and the illusion of free will...

...What controls you is your thoughts. Every intentional action you make originates with a thought.
Yes there is. A lot of speculation, philosophy, etc. It's the spiritual/philosophical side of human beings to wonder about such things. Unfortunately, unlike the physical side, and to a lesser extent the psychological side, they are human constructs.

Disagreed on being controlled by thoughts as discussed in the "thought" to kill one's boss. The forebrain decides what to do with thoughts AKA ideas that pop into our minds.
 
A mixture of genes and everything you've experienced in life. If you had Jeffrey Dahmer's genes, and the entirety of his life experiences, you'd be him and do all of the terrible things he did.

Disagreed as psychology "Twin" experiments prove.
 
I am not at all referring to "feelings."

Right. I am. If you would consider your feelings in both situation, I suspect you'd realize that you have much different thoughts toward a bear or human. If you wake on your couch and wake up to a bear in your house, you're going to be fully aware that you have to do something or risk death. If you wake up on your couch to an axe-wielding psychopath in your house, you're going to be fully aware that you have to do something or risk death. However.... after the fact, and assuming you lived, your view of the bear's actions would be different than your view of the psycho's actions because you'd attribute free will do that person. You'd tell yourself that the psycho had a choice in trying to kill you. With the bear, you'd likely have an feeling of "well, it's a bear. what else are bears going to do but try to kill me?"
 
What do twin experiments prove regarding the impact of genes and life experience ?

Identical twins have identical genes. The moment they are born means they have different experiences. Your theory that a person with identical genes and identical experiences is impossible to prove. Therefore, it's a nice theory, but not science.
 
Identical twins have identical genes. The moment they are born means they have different experiences. Your theory that a person with identical genes and identical experiences is impossible to prove. Therefore, it's a nice theory, but not science.

I don't believe there is really anything else that can shape us beyond genes and experience, but I guess there could be.
 
Identical twins have identical genes. The moment they are born means they have different experiences. Your theory that a person with identical genes and identical experiences is impossible to prove. Therefore, it's a nice theory, but not science.

Nobody is 100 percent genetically identical to anyone else, even twins. There is always some small amount of genetic mutation between individuals.
 
Right. I am. If you would consider your feelings in both situation, I suspect you'd realize that you have much different thoughts toward a bear or human. If you wake on your couch and wake up to a bear in your house, you're going to be fully aware that you have to do something or risk death. If you wake up on your couch to an axe-wielding psychopath in your house, you're going to be fully aware that you have to do something or risk death. However.... after the fact, and assuming you lived, your view of the bear's actions would be different than your view of the psycho's actions because you'd attribute free will do that person. You'd tell yourself that the psycho had a choice in trying to kill you. With the bear, you'd likely have an feeling of "well, it's a bear. what else are bears going to do but try to kill me?"

No. I agree with none of that.
 
Back
Top