3 ms·

Sure, but what makes poets want to write? How does the answer being "the initial condition of the universe" instead of some acausal mechanism change anything of

Sure, but what makes poets want to write? How does the answer being "the initial condition of the universe" instead of some acausal mechanism change anything of importance?

sgt101 10y ago
Because if it is the initial condition of the universe then there is one history and everything is predestined. This has a number of implications like : - everything could be predicted - criminals are not responsible for their behavior - human life is not sacred - our thoughts are not real It's this last one that catches me; predestination means "I think therefore I'm not really me" we then need to abandon the whole of rationalism and retreat to the caves!
- hackinthebochs 10y ago
  I don't see these points as following from determinism. >everything could be predicted Not at all. Think about what you need to predict someone's behavior. You need to emulate the entire universe (at least within the cone of causal influence) and then run it long enough for the thing you're trying to predict to occur. Essentially you're creating a duplicate universe and just seeing what happens. You're not predicting, you're observing. In this tangent universe, the person is thinking and deciding just the same. So ultimately the decision is still the necessary precursor to the event. >our thoughts are not real Our thoughts are real, they're just highly complex interactions of physical atoms. Our thoughts aren't non-physical, or acausal, or anything supernatural. But I don't see these properties being necessary for our thoughts to be real and hold value to us. As I said before, our thoughts necessarily precede our decisions which necessarily precede our actions. What else do you want from your thoughts?
- abiox 10y ago
  > criminals are not responsible for their behavior you remain "reponsible", however the basis for bloodthirsty retributive self-gratification is diminished. it begins to be clear that the only rational course is rehabilitation and positive reinforcement. > human life is not sacred no more or less than before. i'm not sure what this even means, exactly. > our thoughts are not real ...eh? > I think therefore I'm not really me ...eh? imho, "i think" is unproved. that which observes thought and that which emits thought are not by necessity the "same thing".

Sure, but what makes poets want to write? How does the answer being "the initial condition of the universe" instead of some acausal mechanism change anything of importance?

sgt101 10y ago

Because if it is the initial condition of the universe then there is one history and everything is predestined. This has a number of implications like : - everything could be predicted - criminals are not responsible for their behavior - human life is not sacred - our thoughts are not real It's this last one that catches me; predestination means "I think therefore I'm not really me" we then need to abandon the whole of rationalism and retreat to the caves!

hackinthebochs 10y ago
I don't see these points as following from determinism. >everything could be predicted Not at all. Think about what you need to predict someone's behavior. You need to emulate the entire universe (at least within the cone of causal influence) and then run it long enough for the thing you're trying to predict to occur. Essentially you're creating a duplicate universe and just seeing what happens. You're not predicting, you're observing. In this tangent universe, the person is thinking and deciding just the same. So ultimately the decision is still the necessary precursor to the event. >our thoughts are not real Our thoughts are real, they're just highly complex interactions of physical atoms. Our thoughts aren't non-physical, or acausal, or anything supernatural. But I don't see these properties being necessary for our thoughts to be real and hold value to us. As I said before, our thoughts necessarily precede our decisions which necessarily precede our actions. What else do you want from your thoughts?
abiox 10y ago
> criminals are not responsible for their behavior you remain "reponsible", however the basis for bloodthirsty retributive self-gratification is diminished. it begins to be clear that the only rational course is rehabilitation and positive reinforcement. > human life is not sacred no more or less than before. i'm not sure what this even means, exactly. > our thoughts are not real ...eh? > I think therefore I'm not really me ...eh? imho, "i think" is unproved. that which observes thought and that which emits thought are not by necessity the "same thing".