the problem with Neo is he is hard wired into the system and dependent on the hard wiring Allan
On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 1:05 AM, gabbydott <[email protected]> wrote: > How about old Jesus' speed at ascension? Wouldn't he count as unconstrained > by agency at that point in time? Without the being Neo burden, I mean? > > > On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 11:30 PM, Vam <[email protected]> wrote: > >> " If you think you have free will >> because you can choose between varieties of toy and other ADMASS >> drivel then pass on by - free will for me would concern beating >> Einstein's speed of light and its constrictions - but even then I >> would not know I was free rather than selecting from pre-programmed >> alternatives or being switched." >> >> Are you still identified with Neo, in Matrix ? >> >> What has free will to do with anything concerning Einstein or speed of >> light ? >> I find the association demented. >> >> How is free will, the exercise of choice, in a toy shop any different >> from the same in any other situation ? >> >> The Wiki says : Free will is the apparent ability of agents to make >> choices free from certain kinds of constraints. Isn't it what you are >> speaking of ? >> >> >> On Aug 3, 5:34 am, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: >> > Much wise in what you say RP and indeed, Orn, many believe they have >> > no dreams at all. I note Polkid is beginning his serial killer trip. >> > I'm not very keen on these tricky questions we can't answer but can >> > use to expose naive and unexamined lives. I went on a long walk with >> > some old colleagues who moved into brain science some years back and >> > it was noticeable that they are all more convinced free will does not >> > exist than I. Humankind seems generally pathetic against the vastness >> > we seem to have some awareness of and nothing is given to us as to >> > what to do >> > >> > I have little interest in pursuing the question of free will - in >> > normal dialogue of words, concepts, shapes and patterns I see no end >> > to it and many sides. Humankind does little in any of this as far as >> > we can guess and has no direction on what to seek to achieve we can >> > guess. We may know more in the future, but also may not be the >> > future. We accede to five senses, though 20 may be more accurate and >> > at least 2 more are known in dolphins than we possess. I can tell a >> > story of cooling hydrogen molecules and H3+ in the forming of stars >> > which were our birth that suggest some form of 'shaping knowledge' >> > even in the inorganic and the tale of the most, that that must be but >> > which we cannot see and yet I can only describe my own free will in >> > comparison with uninspiring robots. Some god might unplug us at any >> > time. >> > Much of the brain science going on finds that human beings do not make >> > rational decisions. I suspect they may have been wasting their >> > electrodes, as most of us are so poor at critical reasoning it >> > wouldn't make sense for us to use it. We may not be far off a robot >> > programmed with emotional responses that match or exceed our own. I >> > believe most people are tranced and cannot think their way out of a >> > wet paper bag. This is not unusual in pack and herd conditions.This >> > is a biological trance in my view. >> > For me there has to be more than the striving of science and I don't >> > want this to be a religious crock. If you think you have free will >> > because you can choose between varieties of toy and other ADMASS >> > drivel then pass on by - free will for me would concern beating >> > Einstein's speed of light and its constrictions - but even then I >> > would not know I was free rather than selecting from pre-programmed >> > alternatives or being switched. >> > The questions come after this 'indecision' as do those of what is >> > observing and its picture. >> > >> > On Aug 2, 10:59 pm, "pol.science kid" <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > i killed a dog.. my zombieness made me do it.... >> > >> > > On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 11:21 PM, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: >> > > > "We have access to a technology that would have looked like sorcery >> in >> > > > Descartes's day: the ability to peer inside someone's head and read >> > > > their thoughts. Unfortunately, that doesn't take us any nearer to >> > > > knowing whether they are sentient. "Even if you measure brainwaves, >> > > > you can never know exactly what experience they represent," says >> > > > psychologist Bruce Hood at the University of Bristol, UK. If >> > > > anything, brain scanning has undermined Descartes's maxim. You, too, >> > > > might be a zombie. "I happen to be one myself," says Stanford >> > > > University philosopher Paul Skokowski. "And so, even if you don't >> > > > realise it, are you." Skokowski's assertion is based on the belief, >> > > > particularly common among neuroscientists who study brain scans, >> that >> > > > we do not have free will. There is no ghost in the machine; our >> > > > actions are driven by brain states that lie entirely beyond our >> > > > control. "I think, therefore I am" might be an illusion. >> > > > So, it may well be that you live in a computer simulation in which >> you >> > > > are the only self-aware creature. I could well be a zombie and so >> > > > could you. Have an interesting day." (from a recent New Scientist) >> > >> > > > We range over debates in free will and what it is to be human. So >> far >> > > > we haven't established free will or even that we are not merely >> > > > avatars in 'something else's game'. >> > >> > > > I wonder whether there are advantages in considering ourselves as >> > > > creatures limited by programming and also capable of it? >> > >> > > -- >> > > EverComing >> > > -- ( ) I_D Allan If you can bear to hear the truth you've spoken Twisted by knaves to make a trap for fools,
