Determinism Is Self Defeating

[bennyboy]

and have said merely the ability to predict the outcome of systems is good evidence.

Because it is. Making a successful prediction is a double bonus.

Except it isn't. When I hear thunder, I can predict rain with 100% success. This definitely does NOT generalize to the idea that all weather behaves predictably.

But you can't take a couple dozen (or a couple million) predictable systems and call it evidence;

yes..you can. They are evidence of the existence of at least a couple dozen (or a couple million) predictable systems.

Yes, but there are infinitely many unpredictable systems.

You're right. If free will, for example, is deterministic, but operates outside of spacetime, you could say that's still determimism. But it now causes the universe to completely fail the predictability test.

No..it would cause "free will" to fail the predictability test (which it hasn;t by the way, predicting our "free will" is a multi billion dollar business...and they're good at it)[/quote]
No. It would mean that free will would exert an influence at time t + 1, and that since you cannot predict that influence, the chain of causality is broken.

And we're pretty good at undertanding people, but if you think we've mastered this in a deterministic way, you need to tell me what stock to buy. ;P

A hidden variable is nevertheless one which exists (to be hidden). If we assumed such a variable we are still left with our ability to make successful predictions (even with regards to "free will") in the here and now (speaking of what can be observed) - but more fundamentally..we are left with a system in which predictions are possible - even though we may be incapable of performing them.

If you had access to that hidden variable, you could. But "hidden" means you can't.

---

So far, I have 500 years of scientific investigation saying, there's no evidence of the immaterialism, or a spiritual world, or magic, and determinism is a pretty good foundation for explaining the universe.

No evidence except the existence of mind, you mean, and the experience of free will.

Scientists are working hard now to show that these are both deterministic "byproducts" of the brain-- which to me is a strange idea, but hey, strange happens. The problem is that while you can do observational science on the brain, you can't do it on the mind-- so the whole process is frought with philosophical issues.

Seriously, though. If scientists CAN show some kind of field or something that can be directly observed or manipulated (e.g. by injecting a pink unicorn into my thoughts from a mechanism external to my own brain), I will be highly impressed and well on my way to being convinced.