3 ms·
The anti-vaccine movement developed as soon as vaccines forest existed, and it developed independently on at least 3 continents. Even if you could snap your fin
by ch4s3 5y ago
The anti-vaccine movement developed as soon as vaccines forest existed, and it developed independently on at least 3 continents. Even if you could snap your fingers and make social media disappear, people would still at various times and places refuse vaccination.
Also your assertion that free will doesn’t exist is highly suspect. Either you’re coming from a place of collectivist ideology and work backwards or your reading about Libet’s button press studies. I’ll assume the latter, since is more interesting. Trying to pick apart awareness of intention to move, RP (readiness potential) as measured by eeg or fmri, and the movement in less than 300 ms using a clock the participant has to read is highly fraught. The setup could easily be wrong. Other researchers trying different approaches to measuring the awareness of the decision point have gotten the opposite results. There’s also absolutely no consensus among researchers on this topic. If you truly believe as you say that science is the key to progress, you must admit that the science of free will is very much unsettled. And we must also consider that cognitive neuroscience research has had a lot of embarrassing missteps, e.g. replication issues.
You may choose to believe people have no free will, but I feel agency in my actions so it’s real enough to me. One must also concede that there have existed totalitarian systems in living memory that predetermine all human actions that should happen in the system, and yet some people still rebel. There must be something there.
- fleurjs 5y agoScience doesn't prove God exists and science doesn't prove free will exists. Everything is cause and effect. Superdeterminism is the best theory.
- ch4s3 5y agoI would also argue that like the existence of god free will is probably unfalsifiable.
- fleurjs 5y ago
- ch4s3 5y agoAwfully presumptuous of you… Some ideas just exist outside of our ability to test hypotheses about them. If there’s an idea that could never be disproven by observation, then it exists outside of the domain of science, definitionally. Have faith or don’t, I don’t care.
- fleurjs 5y agoYou're rambling nonsense and for the past few comments. Why do you think I wrote science doesn't prove God or free will? Do you believe I didn't already classify you with persons that believe unprovable things that doesn't mix with science. In academia the worst persons to work with have been believers of God or free will. It's honestly too bad that we don't have real choice otherwise I would've requested to not be born into the world with persons that believe in such nonsense.
- erulabs 5y ago> You will scream at me (that is, if you condescend to do so) that no one is touching my free will, that all they are concerned with is that my will should of itself, of its own free will, coincide with my own normal interests, with the laws of nature and arithmetic. Good heavens, gentlemen, what sort of free will is left when we come to tabulation and arithmetic, when it will all be a case of twice two make four? Twice two makes four without my will. As if free will meant that! Well said - I fear you’re talking to a deaf audience, but still, well said.
- ch4s3 5y agoThank you. I’ve been deep in Solzhenitsyn, and that Dostoevsky quote really hit me. I had to go look up the whole passage. I especially like: > for the whole work of man really seems to consist in nothing but proving to himself every minute that he is a man and not a piano-key! What a beautiful and concise way of putting that idea.