Cite the offense I've given. I'm sure you've misread me again, Gnomon. — 180 Proof
I don't remember. Apparently, you've mis-read me. I don't take offense at the occasional "pissy" attitudes on this forum. I just can't take philosophical speculations into the unknown that seriously. It should be a fun tug-of-war without the warlike grimness. But, I'm aware that some posters are more rigid & fragile than me, so I use smilies and emoticons liberally, to indicate that I mean no harm, and in many cases I'm just kidding. Seriously! :joke:
Pissy : arrogantly argumentative.
TPF : Free Will vs Determinism
Re: TPF : Free Will vs Determinism
I've always felt in charge, and that seems to have added to the pleasure. — PoeticUniverse
Yes, but is that feeling of being in control of your life a truism or an illusion? That is the underlying question of this thread. The arguments typically come down to siding with Science or Religion. And most world religions, especially Christianity, make human Free Will mandatory, to govern a God who holds us responsible for our ethical behavior. Since, modern Science has demoted Freedom of Will to a "persistent illusion", it would seem that morality is optional. Unless, they can find a viable substitute for an intrinsic feeling of responsibility.
Secular Humanism has rejected the universal lawmaker, and placed the burden of maintaining order -- among people who feel free to sin -- on mundane, politically divided Society. Which typically relies on fear of temporary incarceration instead of eternal incineration. Therefore, it seems that even without an all-seeing eye-in-the-sky, our sense of freedom must still be constrained by extrinsic rules, and menacing threats. So, is man-made morality more Just than just fear of divine retribution? And is Free Will compatible with the restraints of social responsibility?
"The idea of free will, the skeptics say, is a holdover from a naïve worldview that has been refuted by science, just as ghosts and spirits have been refuted."
https://bostonreview.net/articles/chris ... free-will/
"if you are in charge, you have control over someone or something and are responsible for them."
https://www.macmillandictionary.com
"You, your joys and your sorrows, your memories and your ambitions, your sense of personal identity and free will, are in fact no more than the behavior of a vast assembly of nerve cells and their associated molecules." ___Francis Crick,
Note -- if Free Will is innate, what is the "more than" which makes a mere network of neurons to be free from the Determinism of Causation? Perhaps, rational moral agents have become a Cause unto themselves, resulting in the freedom of Self-determinism. :chin:
Yes, but is that feeling of being in control of your life a truism or an illusion? That is the underlying question of this thread. The arguments typically come down to siding with Science or Religion. And most world religions, especially Christianity, make human Free Will mandatory, to govern a God who holds us responsible for our ethical behavior. Since, modern Science has demoted Freedom of Will to a "persistent illusion", it would seem that morality is optional. Unless, they can find a viable substitute for an intrinsic feeling of responsibility.
Secular Humanism has rejected the universal lawmaker, and placed the burden of maintaining order -- among people who feel free to sin -- on mundane, politically divided Society. Which typically relies on fear of temporary incarceration instead of eternal incineration. Therefore, it seems that even without an all-seeing eye-in-the-sky, our sense of freedom must still be constrained by extrinsic rules, and menacing threats. So, is man-made morality more Just than just fear of divine retribution? And is Free Will compatible with the restraints of social responsibility?
"The idea of free will, the skeptics say, is a holdover from a naïve worldview that has been refuted by science, just as ghosts and spirits have been refuted."
https://bostonreview.net/articles/chris ... free-will/
"if you are in charge, you have control over someone or something and are responsible for them."
https://www.macmillandictionary.com
"You, your joys and your sorrows, your memories and your ambitions, your sense of personal identity and free will, are in fact no more than the behavior of a vast assembly of nerve cells and their associated molecules." ___Francis Crick,
Note -- if Free Will is innate, what is the "more than" which makes a mere network of neurons to be free from the Determinism of Causation? Perhaps, rational moral agents have become a Cause unto themselves, resulting in the freedom of Self-determinism. :chin:
Re: TPF : Free Will vs Determinism
Illusion. "More than" hasn't been found. — PoeticUniverse
In my blog, I hypothesize that the "more than" is a holistic effect of causal feedback loops, and the consequent complexification-of-causation. The result of that multiplication is a holistic Cybernetic system, that is more than the sum of sensory inputs. Such a complex integrated system may have novel properties (e.g. awareness) that are not found in its parts (e.g. neurons). Those internal loops in the chain of causation, might even permit Self-Causation (autonomy, freedom).
If so, the Feeling of Freedom is not an external illusion, but an internal belief -- that's just as real as your mental model of the real world. Of course, this is a conjecture based on implications of a few brain studies. And, since the feeling is subjective, there is no objective proof that it is anything more than an illusion. So, it's true that the "more than" has not been found . . . by those looking at neuronal wiring diagrams.
However, there's also no way to empirically prove that you are Conscious, except to ask you to affirm your awareness. Likewise, if you believe you are free, you will act as-if you are in control. So, as street philosopher Dirty Harry so perceptively inquired, "you've got to ask yourself one question: Do I feel <lucky> free? Well, do ya, punk?". :grimace:
Cybernetic System :
Cybernetics is the study of control, communications and information processing within systems of all kind, biological, mechanical and social. Norbert Wiener(one of the founders of the subject) defined cybernetics as “the scientific study of control and communication in the animal and the machine.”[1] The word cybernetics comes from Greek word meaning “governance” or “to steer, navigate or govern”. Cybernetics formed out of – and is closely related to – the areas of systems theory, information theory, computer science, robotics, mechanical and electrical engineering. The primary object of study within cybernetics are control systems that are regulated by negative feedback loops.[2]
https://www.systemsinnovation.io/post/cybernetics
Note -- Feedback loops are used in Robotics to allow for Self-Control. So, wouldn't feedback in a human mind allow for intrinsic Self-Governance, without the necessity for extrinsic control inputs? A cybernetic organism is not free from physical laws, but from external mind-control (unless brain-washed, of course).
Feedback Loops :
The human brain is a negative feedback loop system. This means that whenever there is a difference between what a person experiences in reality that is different from the ideal set point established by this person’s brain, an urge to behave to correct the situation is created by the brain. https://www.funderstanding.com/brain/br ... op-system/ [my bold]
Every Effect has a Cause, but not all causes come from the environment. When faced with an incongruency, humans are able to "leap" to a conclusion that seems reasonable, in light of our prior beliefs of what ought to be true. So, what seems reasonable is not just pure Logic, but can also be determined by any prejudices, premises, and presumptions in our belief system. Those inner beliefs are not in any sense physical objects. Instead, they are meta-physical causes of our mental behavior. You might say that beliefs are indirect motives of behavior (emotions, feelings), because they result from feedback loops in the chain of incoming information. Those information loops add to the complexity of a simple linear cause & effect system. But out of the apparent chaos comes the novel (butterfly) effect that we call "Free Will". The proof of the freewill pudding is in the effects of your voluntary actions.
In my blog, I hypothesize that the "more than" is a holistic effect of causal feedback loops, and the consequent complexification-of-causation. The result of that multiplication is a holistic Cybernetic system, that is more than the sum of sensory inputs. Such a complex integrated system may have novel properties (e.g. awareness) that are not found in its parts (e.g. neurons). Those internal loops in the chain of causation, might even permit Self-Causation (autonomy, freedom).
If so, the Feeling of Freedom is not an external illusion, but an internal belief -- that's just as real as your mental model of the real world. Of course, this is a conjecture based on implications of a few brain studies. And, since the feeling is subjective, there is no objective proof that it is anything more than an illusion. So, it's true that the "more than" has not been found . . . by those looking at neuronal wiring diagrams.
However, there's also no way to empirically prove that you are Conscious, except to ask you to affirm your awareness. Likewise, if you believe you are free, you will act as-if you are in control. So, as street philosopher Dirty Harry so perceptively inquired, "you've got to ask yourself one question: Do I feel <lucky> free? Well, do ya, punk?". :grimace:
Cybernetic System :
Cybernetics is the study of control, communications and information processing within systems of all kind, biological, mechanical and social. Norbert Wiener(one of the founders of the subject) defined cybernetics as “the scientific study of control and communication in the animal and the machine.”[1] The word cybernetics comes from Greek word meaning “governance” or “to steer, navigate or govern”. Cybernetics formed out of – and is closely related to – the areas of systems theory, information theory, computer science, robotics, mechanical and electrical engineering. The primary object of study within cybernetics are control systems that are regulated by negative feedback loops.[2]
https://www.systemsinnovation.io/post/cybernetics
Note -- Feedback loops are used in Robotics to allow for Self-Control. So, wouldn't feedback in a human mind allow for intrinsic Self-Governance, without the necessity for extrinsic control inputs? A cybernetic organism is not free from physical laws, but from external mind-control (unless brain-washed, of course).
Feedback Loops :
The human brain is a negative feedback loop system. This means that whenever there is a difference between what a person experiences in reality that is different from the ideal set point established by this person’s brain, an urge to behave to correct the situation is created by the brain. https://www.funderstanding.com/brain/br ... op-system/ [my bold]
Every Effect has a Cause, but not all causes come from the environment. When faced with an incongruency, humans are able to "leap" to a conclusion that seems reasonable, in light of our prior beliefs of what ought to be true. So, what seems reasonable is not just pure Logic, but can also be determined by any prejudices, premises, and presumptions in our belief system. Those inner beliefs are not in any sense physical objects. Instead, they are meta-physical causes of our mental behavior. You might say that beliefs are indirect motives of behavior (emotions, feelings), because they result from feedback loops in the chain of incoming information. Those information loops add to the complexity of a simple linear cause & effect system. But out of the apparent chaos comes the novel (butterfly) effect that we call "Free Will". The proof of the freewill pudding is in the effects of your voluntary actions.
Re: TPF : Free Will vs Determinism
But ‘determined’s opposite is an impossible currency. — PoeticUniverse
Fortunately for us humans, Self-Determination is not the "opposite" of Determinism, but a "complement" (complete-ment). The output of a complex system is not the same as the input. The system re-arranges the incoming energy/information into novel forms and meanings. Most important of those novelties is a meaningful relationship to Self (observer). Meaning is not a natural "currency", it is a preter-natural evaluation. Nature is indifferent to me. But my personal meanings & beliefs are the "difference that makes a difference" (i.e. Information).
PS__Thanks for your challenging responses. They inspire new ways to view stale ideas.
Complement : 1. something that makes whole or better
i.e. the je ne sais quoi (qualia) that makes a random collection into a functional integrated holistic system
Fortunately for us humans, Self-Determination is not the "opposite" of Determinism, but a "complement" (complete-ment). The output of a complex system is not the same as the input. The system re-arranges the incoming energy/information into novel forms and meanings. Most important of those novelties is a meaningful relationship to Self (observer). Meaning is not a natural "currency", it is a preter-natural evaluation. Nature is indifferent to me. But my personal meanings & beliefs are the "difference that makes a difference" (i.e. Information).
PS__Thanks for your challenging responses. They inspire new ways to view stale ideas.
Complement : 1. something that makes whole or better
i.e. the je ne sais quoi (qualia) that makes a random collection into a functional integrated holistic system
Re: TPF : Free Will vs Determinism
The inboard motor of neuronal analysis still does what it has to as what it was meant to do. — PoeticUniverse
Hmmm! Meant by whom to do what? :chin:
I wasn't familiar with the tech term "neuronal analysis". Can they interpret the neural patterns to reveal the subjective meanings being processed? Can they read subjective intentions from those tea leaves? If not, how would they know that neuronal changes can motivate the body to turn toward a specific goal, rather just moving indiscriminately hither thither and yon -- like an outboard motor with no one holding the tiller? :joke:
neuronal analysis :
Analyzing morphological changes of a nerve cell (i.e., neuron) is one of the key methods for understanding the behavior of neurons in response to various stimuli
https://www.nature.com/articles/srep17062
Note : I assume they measure physical inputs (stimuli) and outputs (behavioral response). Stimulus & response is Behaviorism --- suitable for understanding animal instincts. But Poets and non-scientists are typically more interested in the meaningful inputs (information) and purposeful outputs (intentions) of human minds. The "doing what it has to do" is just mechanics or instincts.
Ah, in the whole you’re just afraid of being unfree,
But, hey, look, behold! There is still so much beauty!
A sublime law, indeed, else what beauty could there be?
The coin’s other side speaks—a toss up, weighted equally. — PoeticUniverse
Who's afraid of being dominated by Determinism? Not me! Stacks of stones may imprison my bones, but Determinism will never un-free me.
If both sides of the coin are equal, each flip will be neutral. Hence, "no direction home", as noted by Bob Dylan. In order to make progress or to choose beauty, we need to influence the coin-flip in some way. Otherwise, it will just be a meaningless random pattern. Should we be more afraid of "being unfree" or of being meaningless?
WHICH PATTERN IS ORDERED AND MEANINGFUL???
https://telescoper.files.wordpress.com/ ... =225&h=201
https://telescoper.files.wordpress.com/ ... =225&h=196
https://telescoper.wordpress.com/2015/0 ... ok-random/
Hmmm! Meant by whom to do what? :chin:
I wasn't familiar with the tech term "neuronal analysis". Can they interpret the neural patterns to reveal the subjective meanings being processed? Can they read subjective intentions from those tea leaves? If not, how would they know that neuronal changes can motivate the body to turn toward a specific goal, rather just moving indiscriminately hither thither and yon -- like an outboard motor with no one holding the tiller? :joke:
neuronal analysis :
Analyzing morphological changes of a nerve cell (i.e., neuron) is one of the key methods for understanding the behavior of neurons in response to various stimuli
https://www.nature.com/articles/srep17062
Note : I assume they measure physical inputs (stimuli) and outputs (behavioral response). Stimulus & response is Behaviorism --- suitable for understanding animal instincts. But Poets and non-scientists are typically more interested in the meaningful inputs (information) and purposeful outputs (intentions) of human minds. The "doing what it has to do" is just mechanics or instincts.
Ah, in the whole you’re just afraid of being unfree,
But, hey, look, behold! There is still so much beauty!
A sublime law, indeed, else what beauty could there be?
The coin’s other side speaks—a toss up, weighted equally. — PoeticUniverse
Who's afraid of being dominated by Determinism? Not me! Stacks of stones may imprison my bones, but Determinism will never un-free me.
If both sides of the coin are equal, each flip will be neutral. Hence, "no direction home", as noted by Bob Dylan. In order to make progress or to choose beauty, we need to influence the coin-flip in some way. Otherwise, it will just be a meaningless random pattern. Should we be more afraid of "being unfree" or of being meaningless?
WHICH PATTERN IS ORDERED AND MEANINGFUL???
https://telescoper.files.wordpress.com/ ... =225&h=201
https://telescoper.files.wordpress.com/ ... =225&h=196
https://telescoper.wordpress.com/2015/0 ... ok-random/
Re: TPF : Free Will vs Determinism
Not by "whom", but to do what they have to do as how they are. How would the will not follow the will? What other source would do the willing instead? — PoeticUniverse
How could the A> human Will (the decider) not follow B> whose Will? The Accidental Impetus of Determinism? Or the downward directional causation of Energy/Enformy? Who or what was the Aboriginal Arbiter, or the Initial Impulsive Intender? Whatever that First Cause was, we infer that it had the Potential for Life & Mind & Willful behavior in its creatures. Could a cosmic explosion do all that with no deciding & directing Will of its own? Again, who is this Will you speak of? :chin:
The Salient Source :
Who or What programmed
a schematic system
to emerge & evolve
from a sub-atomic speck
of potential probability
or embryonic egg
. . . . . . . . . .into a
constantly complexifying cosmos
that even fleet-footed fluorescence
can't cross in epochal eons?
___Guess Groking Gnomon
How could the A> human Will (the decider) not follow B> whose Will? The Accidental Impetus of Determinism? Or the downward directional causation of Energy/Enformy? Who or what was the Aboriginal Arbiter, or the Initial Impulsive Intender? Whatever that First Cause was, we infer that it had the Potential for Life & Mind & Willful behavior in its creatures. Could a cosmic explosion do all that with no deciding & directing Will of its own? Again, who is this Will you speak of? :chin:
The Salient Source :
Who or What programmed
a schematic system
to emerge & evolve
from a sub-atomic speck
of potential probability
or embryonic egg
. . . . . . . . . .into a
constantly complexifying cosmos
that even fleet-footed fluorescence
can't cross in epochal eons?
___Guess Groking Gnomon
Re: TPF : Free Will vs Determinism
Yes, but not made from a Higher Will, for not even a composite can be First, much less the complexity of a Planner. There's no Big Guy named Will. — PoeticUniverse
You sound confident that our "unbounded" universe is a cosmic accident. But logically, there must be a nameless Initial Event or First Cause with the extra-mundane Potential to cause a world to appear, as-if-by-magic from who-knows-where. And if there was no Plan or "Planner", how could the complexity of our self-observing world emerge from a random confluence of atoms? Randomness is patternless.
For example, a human egg is just a jelly-like lump of protoplasm. Left alone, it does nothing, and is soon recycled into pre-proto-stuff. Yet, when a wiggle-tail protozoan accidentally-on-purpose bumps into it, a "miracle" occurs : it comes to life. The sperm conveys nothing new to the egg, except Information. And that integrated genetic data becomes the blueprint (the plan or program) for a new living being. A holistic self-directed & self-motivated & self-aware organism born from the convergence of abstract Information with the compulsion to follow its inborn pattern of goals & guides.
So, what would you call the hypothetical "seed" that impregnated the hypothetical nanoscopic nucleus of Potential, to initiate a program of complexification that is still exploring new possibilities after 14 billion solar cycles? The cosmic impetus for such a flourishing program of evolution might warrant a name expressing the origin of a teleological future form. or an inevitable succession of events leading to some future finale. So, what more descriptive appellation could you find than the four letter English word : "Will"?
Will : 1. expressing the future tense.
2. expressing inevitable events.
The manifest complexity of many parts of the universe, especially living organisms and their byproducts, was formerly thought to be an expression of divine creativity, but is now widely believed to result from a general capacity of matter, implicit in known physical laws, to "self-organize" under certain conditions.
https://cqi.inf.usi.ch/qic/94_Bennett.pdf
Note -- the matter, energy & laws are taken for granted, requiring no explanation, by pragmatic scientists. But impractical philosophers tend to push the envelope beyond conventional assumptions. Under what "conditions" do inert matter, and un-directed energy, learn to self-organize?
PS___Once a computer program is underway, it requires no further external input, but due to its internal logic & governing criteria (operating system), it proceeds to "self-organize" itself, under specified conditions, by combining old information in novel ways. In a sense, the program is like a living organism, using available energy & material (data) to construct the mathematical structure we call Software. And the final output will be (future tense) the answer to a question proposed by the Programmer. Some questions can only be answered by doing the math.
You sound confident that our "unbounded" universe is a cosmic accident. But logically, there must be a nameless Initial Event or First Cause with the extra-mundane Potential to cause a world to appear, as-if-by-magic from who-knows-where. And if there was no Plan or "Planner", how could the complexity of our self-observing world emerge from a random confluence of atoms? Randomness is patternless.
For example, a human egg is just a jelly-like lump of protoplasm. Left alone, it does nothing, and is soon recycled into pre-proto-stuff. Yet, when a wiggle-tail protozoan accidentally-on-purpose bumps into it, a "miracle" occurs : it comes to life. The sperm conveys nothing new to the egg, except Information. And that integrated genetic data becomes the blueprint (the plan or program) for a new living being. A holistic self-directed & self-motivated & self-aware organism born from the convergence of abstract Information with the compulsion to follow its inborn pattern of goals & guides.
So, what would you call the hypothetical "seed" that impregnated the hypothetical nanoscopic nucleus of Potential, to initiate a program of complexification that is still exploring new possibilities after 14 billion solar cycles? The cosmic impetus for such a flourishing program of evolution might warrant a name expressing the origin of a teleological future form. or an inevitable succession of events leading to some future finale. So, what more descriptive appellation could you find than the four letter English word : "Will"?
Will : 1. expressing the future tense.
2. expressing inevitable events.
The manifest complexity of many parts of the universe, especially living organisms and their byproducts, was formerly thought to be an expression of divine creativity, but is now widely believed to result from a general capacity of matter, implicit in known physical laws, to "self-organize" under certain conditions.
https://cqi.inf.usi.ch/qic/94_Bennett.pdf
Note -- the matter, energy & laws are taken for granted, requiring no explanation, by pragmatic scientists. But impractical philosophers tend to push the envelope beyond conventional assumptions. Under what "conditions" do inert matter, and un-directed energy, learn to self-organize?
PS___Once a computer program is underway, it requires no further external input, but due to its internal logic & governing criteria (operating system), it proceeds to "self-organize" itself, under specified conditions, by combining old information in novel ways. In a sense, the program is like a living organism, using available energy & material (data) to construct the mathematical structure we call Software. And the final output will be (future tense) the answer to a question proposed by the Programmer. Some questions can only be answered by doing the math.
Re: TPF : Free Will vs Determinism
Yes, but not made from a Higher Will, for not even a composite can be First, much less the complexity of a Planner. There's no Big Guy named Will. — PoeticUniverse
You sound confident that our "unbounded" universe is a cosmic accident. But logically, there must be a nameless Initial Event or First Cause with the extra-mundane Potential to cause a world to appear, as-if-by-magic from who-knows-where. And if there was no Plan or "Planner", how could the complexity of our self-observing world emerge from a random confluence of atoms? Randomness is patternless.
For example, a human egg is just a jelly-like lump of protoplasm. Left alone, it does nothing, and is soon recycled into pre-proto-stuff. Yet, when a wiggle-tail protozoan accidentally-on-purpose bumps into it, a "miracle" occurs : it comes to life. The sperm conveys nothing new to the egg, except Information. And that integrated genetic data becomes the blueprint (the plan or program) for a new living being. A holistic self-directed & self-motivated & self-aware organism born from the convergence of abstract Information with the compulsion to follow its inborn pattern of goals & guides.
So, what would you call the hypothetical "seed" that impregnated the hypothetical nanoscopic nucleus of Potential, to initiate a program of complexification that is still exploring new possibilities after 14 billion solar cycles? The cosmic impetus for such a flourishing program of evolution might warrant a name expressing the origin of a teleological future form. or an inevitable succession of events leading to some future finale. So, what more descriptive appellation could you find than the four letter English word : "Will"?
Will : 1. expressing the future tense.
2. expressing inevitable events.
The manifest complexity of many parts of the universe, especially living organisms and their byproducts, was formerly thought to be an expression of divine creativity, but is now widely believed to result from a general capacity of matter, implicit in known physical laws, to "self-organize" under certain conditions.
https://cqi.inf.usi.ch/qic/94_Bennett.pdf
Note -- the matter, energy & laws are taken for granted, requiring no explanation, by pragmatic scientists. But impractical philosophers tend to push the envelope beyond conventional assumptions. Under what "conditions" do inert matter, and un-directed energy, learn to self-organize?
PS___Once a computer program is underway, it requires no further external input, but due to its internal logic & governing criteria (operating system), it proceeds to "self-organize" itself, under specified conditions, by combining old information in novel ways. In a sense, the program is like a living organism, using available energy & material (data) to construct the mathematical structure we call "Software". And the final output will be (future tense) the answer to a question proposed by the Programmer. Some questions can only be answered by doing the math.
You sound confident that our "unbounded" universe is a cosmic accident. But logically, there must be a nameless Initial Event or First Cause with the extra-mundane Potential to cause a world to appear, as-if-by-magic from who-knows-where. And if there was no Plan or "Planner", how could the complexity of our self-observing world emerge from a random confluence of atoms? Randomness is patternless.
For example, a human egg is just a jelly-like lump of protoplasm. Left alone, it does nothing, and is soon recycled into pre-proto-stuff. Yet, when a wiggle-tail protozoan accidentally-on-purpose bumps into it, a "miracle" occurs : it comes to life. The sperm conveys nothing new to the egg, except Information. And that integrated genetic data becomes the blueprint (the plan or program) for a new living being. A holistic self-directed & self-motivated & self-aware organism born from the convergence of abstract Information with the compulsion to follow its inborn pattern of goals & guides.
So, what would you call the hypothetical "seed" that impregnated the hypothetical nanoscopic nucleus of Potential, to initiate a program of complexification that is still exploring new possibilities after 14 billion solar cycles? The cosmic impetus for such a flourishing program of evolution might warrant a name expressing the origin of a teleological future form. or an inevitable succession of events leading to some future finale. So, what more descriptive appellation could you find than the four letter English word : "Will"?
Will : 1. expressing the future tense.
2. expressing inevitable events.
The manifest complexity of many parts of the universe, especially living organisms and their byproducts, was formerly thought to be an expression of divine creativity, but is now widely believed to result from a general capacity of matter, implicit in known physical laws, to "self-organize" under certain conditions.
https://cqi.inf.usi.ch/qic/94_Bennett.pdf
Note -- the matter, energy & laws are taken for granted, requiring no explanation, by pragmatic scientists. But impractical philosophers tend to push the envelope beyond conventional assumptions. Under what "conditions" do inert matter, and un-directed energy, learn to self-organize?
PS___Once a computer program is underway, it requires no further external input, but due to its internal logic & governing criteria (operating system), it proceeds to "self-organize" itself, under specified conditions, by combining old information in novel ways. In a sense, the program is like a living organism, using available energy & material (data) to construct the mathematical structure we call "Software". And the final output will be (future tense) the answer to a question proposed by the Programmer. Some questions can only be answered by doing the math.
Re: TPF : Free Will vs Determinism
Still incomplete; but no woo-of-the-gaps needed, Gnomon. — 180 Proof
Speaking of "woo" in the breach, your reply reminds me of Apostle Paul's definition of Faith : "Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen". You expressed your faith in several things unseeable, which you "hope" will some day prove true : "vacuum fluctuation" ; "planck scale" ; "non-spatiotemporal (eternal) vacuum", or "virtual events". I can't confirm or deny such "woo-woo", because I have no experience of "oscillations of emptiness" ; "mathematical measurements of the infinitely small" ; " changes that are not in space or time" ; or "unreal events". I assume that the scientists, who propose such literal non-sense, know what they are talking about. but I have to take it on faith, plus a grain of doubt. So, my confidence is limited by moderate skepticism.
Regarding my own conjectures into the unknown and unknowable, they are not intended to be taken on faith as facts. But merely as possibilities for philosophical exploration. And they are no more woo-ish than the conjectures of scientists into the great beyond that lies in the infinity-eternity before the spatio-temporal Big Bang : e.g. Multiverses, Many Worlds, Parallel Realities, etc. Does your faith in such obscure opinions make you "less uncomfortable" with the religious implications of the mathematically proven creation event (discovered by astronomers, not astrologers) that scientists are still trying to disprove after a century of evasive tactics, such as miraculous instantaneous inflation? :joke:
Woo-woo is a slang term used to describe those who believe in phenomena that lacks substantiated evidence to prove the claim of the phenomena.
Note -- the noetic notions mentioned above are "the substance of things hoped for", because they are not evident to the human senses. They are knowable, in the abstract, only to arcane mathematicians. I accept their postulations provisionally, up to the edge of the abyss of ignorance (The Gap) beyond human experience. Past that jumping-off point only theoretical thinkers & philosophers dare to speculate.
Speaking of "woo" in the breach, your reply reminds me of Apostle Paul's definition of Faith : "Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen". You expressed your faith in several things unseeable, which you "hope" will some day prove true : "vacuum fluctuation" ; "planck scale" ; "non-spatiotemporal (eternal) vacuum", or "virtual events". I can't confirm or deny such "woo-woo", because I have no experience of "oscillations of emptiness" ; "mathematical measurements of the infinitely small" ; " changes that are not in space or time" ; or "unreal events". I assume that the scientists, who propose such literal non-sense, know what they are talking about. but I have to take it on faith, plus a grain of doubt. So, my confidence is limited by moderate skepticism.
Regarding my own conjectures into the unknown and unknowable, they are not intended to be taken on faith as facts. But merely as possibilities for philosophical exploration. And they are no more woo-ish than the conjectures of scientists into the great beyond that lies in the infinity-eternity before the spatio-temporal Big Bang : e.g. Multiverses, Many Worlds, Parallel Realities, etc. Does your faith in such obscure opinions make you "less uncomfortable" with the religious implications of the mathematically proven creation event (discovered by astronomers, not astrologers) that scientists are still trying to disprove after a century of evasive tactics, such as miraculous instantaneous inflation? :joke:
Woo-woo is a slang term used to describe those who believe in phenomena that lacks substantiated evidence to prove the claim of the phenomena.
Note -- the noetic notions mentioned above are "the substance of things hoped for", because they are not evident to the human senses. They are knowable, in the abstract, only to arcane mathematicians. I accept their postulations provisionally, up to the edge of the abyss of ignorance (The Gap) beyond human experience. Past that jumping-off point only theoretical thinkers & philosophers dare to speculate.
Re: TPF : Free Will vs Determinism
↪Gnomon
Respectfully, sir, your lack of scientific literacy does not render my layman's comprehension "faith" or the well-established theoretical results of scientists mere "conjectures" open to your idle (paper) doubts. Scientists' speculative 'interpretations' of scientific theories are the very "possibilities for philosophical exploration" you speak of, Gnomon, which are extrapolated from 'problematic' theoretical results and are not just tu quoque more woo-of-the-gaps. — 180 Proof
Spoken as a True Believer!
However, you seem to dis-respect my "scientific literacy" as a layman. Unless you have formal training in the sciences -- mine was limited to basic classes in each major field -- my comprehension of cutting edge science may be as good as yours -- except for the degree of faith in authorities.
Tu quoque works both ways . . . sir. Woo hoo! :joke:
The meaning of TU QUOQUE is a retort charging an adversary with being or doing what the adversary criticizes in others.
3.Miracle of Creation :
Notable Scientist’s opinions on BB theory
Fred “Big Bang” Hoyle (British astrophysicist): "A common sense interpretation of the facts suggests that a superintellect has monkeyed with physics, as well as with chemistry and biology, and that there are no blind forces worth speaking about in nature. The numbers one calculates from the facts seem to me so overwhelming as to put this conclusion almost beyond question." (changed his tune)
https://www.quora.com/Was-the-Big-Bang-a-miracle-1
Respectfully, sir, your lack of scientific literacy does not render my layman's comprehension "faith" or the well-established theoretical results of scientists mere "conjectures" open to your idle (paper) doubts. Scientists' speculative 'interpretations' of scientific theories are the very "possibilities for philosophical exploration" you speak of, Gnomon, which are extrapolated from 'problematic' theoretical results and are not just tu quoque more woo-of-the-gaps. — 180 Proof
Spoken as a True Believer!
However, you seem to dis-respect my "scientific literacy" as a layman. Unless you have formal training in the sciences -- mine was limited to basic classes in each major field -- my comprehension of cutting edge science may be as good as yours -- except for the degree of faith in authorities.
Tu quoque works both ways . . . sir. Woo hoo! :joke:
The meaning of TU QUOQUE is a retort charging an adversary with being or doing what the adversary criticizes in others.
3.Miracle of Creation :
Notable Scientist’s opinions on BB theory
Fred “Big Bang” Hoyle (British astrophysicist): "A common sense interpretation of the facts suggests that a superintellect has monkeyed with physics, as well as with chemistry and biology, and that there are no blind forces worth speaking about in nature. The numbers one calculates from the facts seem to me so overwhelming as to put this conclusion almost beyond question." (changed his tune)
https://www.quora.com/Was-the-Big-Bang-a-miracle-1
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 29 guests