Slimebeast said:
Dr.Grass said:
Slimebeast said:
Dr.Grass said:
TheEvilBanana said:
Our brains, and the entire universe is deterministic... So there is no free will.
But our brains do give us the illusion of free will so it's good enough for me.
Scientists can actually tell what you're going to think in ten seconds by monitoring your brain... The thoughts going through your head right now, the actions your doing while reading this... You already decided you were going to be doing them about 10 seconds ago... |
Can you PLEASE tell me which famous/powerful/godly person made this statement so I can FINALLY know why SO many people actually believe this?
The closest (to my knowledge) cultural acceptance of this is the Hindu/Buddhist belief system. But even there it's only a consequence of the vast time-scales and the minute position a living entity occupies in the universe that allows him to take this as a closest approximation to reality. Even they ultimately disagree.
So,
-Christianity,Islam and others: Miracles. God intervenes etc.
-Hindu, Buddhist: Universe close to deterministic, but minute indeterminism occurs
- Science:Double slit experiment, Heisenberg, De Broglie (smart man) etc. etc.
WHO are you talking about!!?
|
He means that apart from (possibly) the randomness on the lowest particle level all activity in the material world including a human brain is deterministic.
|
I see what you mean, but its wrong. These fundamental interactions have (supposedly) shaped our entire universe. How can the world be deterministic if it would've been completely different without this randomness?
|
It could be randomness within limits.
Like the Butterfly effect. Some people think that if a butterfly flaps his wings in America it could cause a tornado on the other side of the world. But most likely a tornado would require millions of butterfly flaps to occur in a very short time span in a limited area, and that's unlikely to happen.
|
''It could be randomness within limits.''
I don't know what to make of this 'statement' honestly.
''But most likely a tornado would require millions of butterfly flaps to occur in a very short time span in a limited area, and that's unlikely to happen.''
I think you've misunderstood the purpose behind the 'butterfly effect' tale that gets told so often. The point is that a small effect can propagate and eventually be the cause of something of a much grander scale. You can show with a pc and some nifty coding that a butterfly can in fact cause a tornado on the other side of the world - point being the tornado wouldn't have occurred at all if the butterfly didn't flap its wings.
Now the point of the story shouldn't be interpreted too literally, because the odds of a butterfly causing a tornado are approacing zero.
