RE: The burden of proof relating to conciousness, free choice and rationality
February 26, 2012 at 1:57 pm
(This post was last modified: February 26, 2012 at 2:06 pm by The Grand Nudger.)
You did rule out free will in your hypothetical. Maybe you didn't intend to?
Free will as defined by whom? I could define free will as the illusion of choice that is the effect of the vast number of variables that are too great for our minds to comprehend. We surely seem to be making choices (to us), but are we?
If free will is an illusion (and it may very well be) then you are "making choices"...despite the non-existence of "free will". Down the rabbit hole we go. What you believe you may be doing, or what you feel you may be doing is not always an accurate picture of reality. We can agree on that count can't we?
Perhaps, and I'm just spitballing here, "free will" is an inadequate or deficient description of reality. A gross oversimplification that is not technically speaking correct, but is still practically useful for us as human beings in how we perceive our interactions with the world. Judging from it's source (ourselves) and specifically it's most ardent advocates from within that small source group (the religiously minded) we have every reason to approach the issue with a healthy dose of skepticism.
With human beings, and concepts that we have created, it's not always a matter of what's "right", but what "works well enough".
Free will as defined by whom? I could define free will as the illusion of choice that is the effect of the vast number of variables that are too great for our minds to comprehend. We surely seem to be making choices (to us), but are we?
If free will is an illusion (and it may very well be) then you are "making choices"...despite the non-existence of "free will". Down the rabbit hole we go. What you believe you may be doing, or what you feel you may be doing is not always an accurate picture of reality. We can agree on that count can't we?
Perhaps, and I'm just spitballing here, "free will" is an inadequate or deficient description of reality. A gross oversimplification that is not technically speaking correct, but is still practically useful for us as human beings in how we perceive our interactions with the world. Judging from it's source (ourselves) and specifically it's most ardent advocates from within that small source group (the religiously minded) we have every reason to approach the issue with a healthy dose of skepticism.
With human beings, and concepts that we have created, it's not always a matter of what's "right", but what "works well enough".
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
