 Poster: A snowHead
|
|
Quite frankly, you'd be hard pushed to find a philosopher that has definitively proved anything at all. And as for neurologists, I wouldn't have thought that they had much to contribute on the specifics of free will, even if they have made an obvious contribution to the consciousness argument.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
Kramer, are we living in the Matrix then............come on Morpheus save our souls, give us freedom of choice...........
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
| Quote: |
Isn't this a bit of a contradiction? I think philosophers are those who arrive at their conclusions by disciplined, logical thought, rather than empirically.
|
Philosophers perform thought experiments, where they follow theories to their logical conclusion.
| Quote: |
Pre-determination vs free will, consciousness etc is in no way a done-deal scientifically...
_________________
|
The more that we find out about it, the more that it would seem that there is no such thing as free-will, as shown by the series of experiments on "two brained" people who have undergone resection of the corpus callosum.
(please could someone construct a suitable smiley for a "two brained" person) 
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
Steve Martin was in a film called 'The Man with Two Brains' does that count.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
Dan, funnily enough, there is a very good book on philosophy, relating it to blockbuster movies. The matrix features very highly in it, to do with the nature of reality. Can't remember the title off the top of my head though, sorry.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
Kramer, define free will then.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There is no such thing as free will, therefore it cannot be defined. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
So life is determined by fate?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
|
Paul, in a way yes. The way that we will respond to a given stimulus is predetermined upon that stimulus and various other physical factors. However the nature of the way that the response is determined is so complex as to be essentially unpredictable (as shown by chaos theory), therefore although our future is predetermined, it is still unpredictable.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Kramer wrote: |
...
Philosophers perform thought experiments, where they follow theories to their logical conclusion.. |
Hmm. Got me diving for my very battered copy of Chambers English Dictionary - where the definitons seemed to be somewhat contradictory. I wonder if oyou mean "behavioural scientists" in this context?
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
|
I did mean philosophers rather than behavioural scientists. A thought experiment is when a philosopher postulates a theorem and then thinks it through to it's logical conclusion - a very famous one being "I think, therefore I am."
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
|
If someone lights up in the middle of a forest (or piste) and no one is there to see them, are they really smoking?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
| Kramer wrote: |
| There is no such thing as free will, therefore it cannot be defined. |
You don't even have to invoke the inherent randomness of quantum mechanics to argue against determinism... but this is all rather far removed from the original topic, decidedly off-piste!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
Of course you can argue against determinism, in fact I knew that you would! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
Any references for this "two brained" study? I got hits for cylons in google but wasnt really convinced it was relevant...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
I would have to go and look them up Mark, not having a great memory for things like that. Basically it is to do with resecting the corpus callosum in severe refractory epilepsy. In effect you divide the left and right brain, these subjects are known as "two brained". If you then show one of them a word on their right side, they cannot pronounce it, however they can draw it with their left hand, and then name it once they have drawn it. The interesting bit comes when you ask them to name what they have drawn, they cannot remember seeing the original word, and insist they drew the object at random, due to their own free will. This is quite a neat demonstration of the fact that free will, although real to the subject, is very likely an illusion.
I just find it rather interesting that this experiment shows the illusion of free will in a brain damaged subject, when at the same time a school of philosophy claims to show that there is no such thing as free will.
One other question that I would ask, is that if there is such a thing as free will, how come that psychological tricks can so often influence our behaviour?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
Kramer, my particular take is that free will is illusory, and that QI (quantum indeterminacy) doesn't really challenge that position, at least not in any 'useful' sense. Still, free will's a pretty handy concept for certain belief systems - they would look rather silly without it.
QI is not to be confused with the randomness (ie chaos theory) that is often just our interpretation of the interaction of events too complex to compute, even if deterministic and relatively simple systems are at play. For all practical purposes then, I actually agree with you!
I'll always argue against 'cut-and-dried' positions though... even if I lean towards them myself...!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
PG - from what I know of QI and it's place withini M theorem, it is rendered irrelevant to the universe anyway. That is if M theorem is correct...
As for the cut and dried position, I will often take one to encourage discussion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
Like I said, this really could (should) be a thread of its own... sorry, I didn't help by asking questions about it. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Point taken flying squirrel - and me a moderator as well! 
So back to the topic - I think that banning smoking in ski resorts is a good thing, even though I am one myself. (A smoker that is, not a ski resort, obviously!)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
Nick Zotov is it really? Even when we speak of not being able to see your fag end under the goggle edge, and the resulting ash falling off and burning the wrong zipper through?
Fortunately, the -rest- of the pants were Gore-Tex.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
|
It is a public safety issue. No one should undergo secondhand frenzied mitten whisking.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Quote: |
No one should undergo secondhand frenzied mitten whisking
|
I dunno, sounds kind of fun.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
Sounds like it produces I scream.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
A sense of social responsibility has had little to do with the very high level of compliance with non-smoking (in public places) legislation in North America. The principal factor that caused most bar and restaurant proprietors to enforce non-smoking on their premises was the danger of being sued by employees claiming long-term helath detriment as a result of having to work in a smoke-filled environment.
Kramer is obviously referring to natural philosophers, whose conclusions are based on experiment, rather than moral philosophers whose conclusions tend to be drawn from (frequently faulty) logic. (Does this make them immoral philosophers?).
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
Just to put my oar in on the smoking bit (I smoke & do so on open lifts, but my ciggies are rollies and biodegradable).
I saw a bit on TV a couple of months ago. They were saying how many people die each year in the Uk from passive smoking. I can't remember the number, but it was quite small. The next day they did a peice on hospital superbugs and the numbers who die from these each year was about 3 times the number from passive smoking!
Therefore logic (faulty or otherwise) will tell you that going into hospital is 3 times as dangerous as passive smoking?
I don't understand the workers "forced" to breathe in smoke argument: they could get a job in an establishment which is non-smoking. If they stay with a job which they feel is threatening their health then they don't have a case in my view.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
| Kramer wrote: |
| In effect you divide the left and right brain, these subjects are known as "two brained". If you then show one of them a word on their right side, they cannot pronounce it, however they can draw it with their left hand, and then name it once they have drawn it. The interesting bit comes when you ask them to name what they have drawn, they cannot remember seeing the original word, and insist they drew the object at random, due to their own free will. This is quite a neat demonstration of the fact that free will, although real to the subject, is very likely an illusion. |
I think this shows that if you cut someone's brain in half, they're liable to forget things. I would accept that there may be many cases where people think they have exercised free will but haven't; but that's a long way from demonstrating that it doesn't exist.
My own take is that free will may not exist in an absolute sense, but that it is a useful concept nonetheless, because without it people can deny all moral responsibility for their actions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| easiski wrote: |
| ....They were saying how many people die each year in the Uk from passive smoking. I can't remember the number, but it was quite small. ... |
Well. Depends what you mean by quite small. The footnote to this article states the number as 120,000 per year.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| Nick Zotov wrote: |
| easiski wrote: |
| ....They were saying how many people die each year in the Uk from passive smoking. I can't remember the number, but it was quite small. ... |
Well. Depends what you mean by quite small. The footnote to this article states the number as 120,000 per year. |
no, it doesn't, it repeats estimates of 120,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
ise, Er yup. Fair point. It would be hard to know an exact number. But even if the estimaters have over-estimated by - say - 100%, it is still more (by a long shot) dying of passive smoking than I would have guessed at.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
easiski wrote:
| Quote: |
I don't understand the workers "forced" to breathe in smoke argument: they could get a job in an establishment which is non-smoking. If they stay with a job which they feel is threatening their health then they don't have a case in my view.
|
But then you're not an American litigation specialist!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Nick Zotov wrote: |
| ise, Er yup. Fair point. It would be hard to know an exact number. But even if the estimaters have over-estimated by - say - 100%, it is still more (by a long shot) dying of passive smoking than I would have guessed at. |
I'd ignore it, it offers no source for the number at all, it may as well come from a bloke they met on the tube that morning.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
| ise wrote: |
| ...I'd ignore it, it offers no source for the number at all, it may as well come from a bloke they met on the tube that morning. |
Maybe so. The Royal College of Physicians and 17 other medical colleges talked about 1000 adult deaths per year (presumably in the UK). Not good if you are one of the 1000 - but a huge reduction of the death rate compared to the other article.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Zotov, sounds more reliable. Which makes you wonder what the figures would be for car fumes or other forms of pollution.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
