Why I am not an atheist.

[John D. Brey]

The stuff about "freewill" (sic )
makes no sense at all, that I can detect.

Maybe a simple direct statement can be coaxed forth.

The idea of "freewill" is at least problematic for Einstein's block universe (or any theory that time is symmetrical: no arrow going one direction).

If there's no arrow of time pointing from past to future, then decision made by freewill agents seemingly couldn't affect the future since the future is just as set as the past. In this sense, through normal logic, freewill has to be an illusion in a block universe without an arrow of time.



John

 

[Audie]

The idea of "freewill" is at least problematic for Einstein's block universe (or any theory that time is symmetrical: no arrow going one direction).

If there's no arrow of time pointing from past to future, then decision made by freewill agents seemingly couldn't affect the future since the future is just as set as the past. In this sense, through normal logic, freewill has to be an illusion in a block universe without an arrow of time.



John

is "freewill" some special
Religious thing? Everyone else calls it free will.

And nobody knows what time is.

In the event, dragging that in as something
contrary to ToE is kinda ridiculous.

 

[Audie]

Why wouldn't proving it wrong be subject to the same principle as proving it right? It appears you're prejudiced against proving something right, but not about proving something wrong? <s>



John

Not a bad question but it's Ike this.

The word is disprove or falsify.
Not prove as in prove wrong.

One contrary fact shows the theory is wrong.

Its very simple. Dont try to complicste it.

 

[Audie]

As I said to Audie, I'll accept that I'm thinking of the technical meaning of "theory" in an incorrect manner. Furthermore I'll accept the accepted meaning as you and she are putting it forth.


John

You said , " maybe technically", which is no concession at all.

 

[Audie]

I think we're getting tangled up in semantics.

If I hypothesize that if I let go of this coffee cup it will drop to the table and smash, and then I let go of the coffee cup and it drops to the table and smashes, it could be said that I "proved" my hypothesis.



John

"WE" are not. You are simply wrong as any
reference will show.

You can demonstrate that a hypothesis was correct every time you tried it a certain way.

You " proved" ( demonstrated) with your example that you still don't get it.

Informal use of the word proof is tangling you in confusion.

Just don't use the word at all in connection with science, if you want to
be taken seriously.

Try Google since you can't bring yourself to
believe that I know what I am talking about.

 

[Audie]

I've been studying and debating evolution and Dawinism for decades and in that time it's been my observation that most people, scientists and laymen, tend to believe that evolutionary advance occurs when environmental niches "select" which organisms survive versus which don't.

In my humble opinion, when Professor Lewontin speaks of, "the picture of evolution that postulates an autonomous external world of `niches’ into which organisms must fit by adaptation," he's speaking of a picture that can be accurately painted with a pretty wide brush.

I'm not trying to be argumentative about this. It's just that the most important part of the argument I want to posit revolves around a corrected understanding of the relationship between an "environment" versus the organisms that live in it.

Professor Richard Lewontin seems to imply, and I would concur, that the environment is at least as much in the organism's genes as the organism is in the environment.



John

It is hard to fathom that you have studied for decades
and didn't even learn that a theory cannot be proven true.
How is that even possible?

I don't think you get it now either.

And you are confused about what is said re niches.

It is simple common sense. IF an organism is better suited to EXISTING CONDITIONS than
another, THAT ONE organism lives to reproduce. It cannot prepare its habitat in advance.

Its genetics may spread, and said offspring may then begin to modify the environment in a feedback loop.

I'm sorry but, decades of study, and you think it is ' evolution and dsreinism'?
And you have not learned the most basic things?

I can try to help you but you have to make an effort, instead you are trying not to learn.

 

[Tiberius]

Why wouldn't proving it wrong be subject to the same principle as proving it right? It appears you're prejudiced against proving something right, but not about proving something wrong? <s>



John

No.

If your theory is that gravity pulls things down, then you only need one example of something going up to prove it wrong.

But you can't prove that gravity always pulls things down. No matter how much testing you do, it could always be the next test that proves it wrong.

 

[night912]

The idea of "freewill" is at least problematic for Einstein's block universe (or any theory that time is symmetrical: no arrow going one direction).

If there's no arrow of time pointing from past to future, then decision made by freewill agents seemingly couldn't affect the future since the future is just as set as the past. In this sense, through normal logic, freewill has to be an illusion in a block universe without an arrow of time.

What exactly do you mean by your idea of "freewill?" Please give your definition and an example. There's no one definition of "freewill" amongst everyone.

 

[John D. Brey]

The idea of "freewill" is at least problematic for Einstein's block universe (or any theory that time is symmetrical: no arrow going one direction).

If there's no arrow of time pointing from past to future, then decision made by freewill agents seemingly couldn't affect the future since the future is just as set as the past. In this sense, through normal logic, freewill has to be an illusion in a block universe without an arrow of time.​

What exactly do you mean by your idea of "freewill?" Please give your definition and an example. There's no one definition of "freewill" amongst everyone.

In the context I presented, "freewill," or "free will," speaks of the ability of a sentient agent to make a decision, in a moment of time, that will change the course of future events according to the decision freely made.



John

 

[ppp]

In the context I presented, "freewill," or "free will," speaks of the ability of a sentient agent to make a decision, in a moment of time, that will change the course of future events according to the decision freely made.

If someone holds a gun to my head, and says eat this boiled okra or die, is either choice freely made?

 

[John D. Brey]

If someone holds a gun to my head, and says eat this boiled okra or die, is either choice freely made?

I don't know why it wouldn't be. If you eat the okra you live. If you don't you die. Maybe you were in the process of searching high and low for someone to break the law and euthanize you; so that you refuse to eat the boiled okra with your arms crossed defiantly over your chest and a sneaky gleam in your eye?


John

 

[ppp]

I don't why it wouldn't be. If you eat the okra you live. If you don't you die. Maybe you were in the process of searching high and low for someone to break the law and euthanize you; so that you refuse to eat the boiled okra with your arms crossed defiantly over your chest and a sneaky gleam in your eye?


John

But I despise boiled okra. I find it to be utterly repugnant in taste and in texture, in smell, shape and style. Boiled okra is not worth the water molecules it takes to grow. If forcing me to eat okra at gun point is not a decision unfreely made, then what it?

 

[John D. Brey]

But I despise boiled okra. I find it to be utterly repugnant in taste and in texture, in smell, shape and style. Boiled okra is not worth the water molecules it takes to grow. If forcing me to eat okra at gun point is not a decision unfreely made, then what it?

I would say duress and freedom can exist in the same thought experiment.



John

 

[ppp]

I would say duress and freedom can exist in the same thought experiment.



John

But what is a decision unfreely made? An example that has nothing to do with gods or demons.

 

[Audie]

If someone holds a gun to my head, and says eat this boiled okra or die, is either choice freely made?

The secret is, don't cut the okra, for lo,
ye sap emerges and with water makes slime.

Sorta like a hagfish. See YouTube if ya don't know about hsgfish.

Or fried okra, Good with egg plant.

Bitter melon and salty black bean paste..
Good Asian foods.

Okra is fun to grow, too.

 

[Audie]

But I despise boiled okra. I find it to be utterly repugnant in taste and in texture, in smell, shape and style. Boiled okra is not worth the water molecules it takes to grow. If forcing me to eat okra at gun point is not a decision unfreely made, then what it?

You would like it if I prepare it for you.
Lots of things are yucky if prepared wrong.
Is Hong Kong conveniently nearby?

Also, recipes are way more interesting than sudofil.

 

[John D. Brey]

But what is a decision unfreely made? An example that has nothing to do with gods or demons.

Having a choice between two unsavory, so to say, decisions, doesn't, in my estimation, take away from the fact that you're free to decide.



John

 

[ppp]

Having a choice between two unsavory, so to say, decisions, doesn't, in my estimation, take away from the fact that you're free to decide.



John

But what is a decision unfreely made? An example that has nothing to do with gods or demons.

If you don't want to answer the question, then just say so.

 

[ppp]

You would like it if I prepare it for you.
Lots of things are yucky if prepared wrong.
Is Hong Kong conveniently nearby?

Also, recipes are way more interesting than sudofil.

I have had orka in all sorts of dishes from all sorts of countries and cuisines. Not crazy out it at all. But boiled okra blows. The only place I sort of like it is in gumbo. No idea what sudofil is.

 

[Audie]

I have had orka in all sorts of dishes from all sorts of countries and cuisines. Not crazy out it at all. But boiled okra blows. The only place I sort of like it is in gumbo. No idea what sudofil is.

Pseudophilosophy