I am researching law, physics, and philosophy

Please post all introductions in this forum. Tell us how you found the philosophy forums, what interests you about philosophy, and a little about you, such as your age, where you live, what you do for a living, etc.
evolution
Posts: 957
Joined: April 19th, 2020, 6:20 am

Re: I am researching law, physics, and philosophy

Post by evolution »

LuckyR wrote: March 14th, 2021, 1:10 pm
evolution wrote: March 14th, 2021, 8:40 am
LuckyR wrote: March 14th, 2021, 3:01 am
evolution wrote: March 13th, 2021, 5:01 am

But what determined those subatomic particles at the, so called, "big bang"?

In other words, why do you talk like the "big bang" was the beginning, of everything?

Also, how do 'you' define the term 'free will'?
No one knows what determined those subatomic particles, though it bears mentioning that they don't require any determining beyond random chance, BTW.
You did not answer the actual question I asked you.

By the way, matter exists forever. Therefore, obviously so to do subatomic particles.
LuckyR wrote: March 14th, 2021, 3:01 am No one, least of all me (or you) knows if the BB was the begining, it may just be a known event a long time ago that happens to have a name.
Please refrain from 'trying to' speak for 'me'.

I know the big bang could not be the beginning, and to even think or believe that it was, just because 'it was written', is extremely foolhardy, by the way.

Also, and again, you did not answer the actual first two questions I asked you.
LuckyR wrote: March 14th, 2021, 3:01 am Let me back up the truck to describe what Free Will is to me. If a system is 100% Determined it's behavior could be 100% predictable if it's antecedent state was well known. Say, simple systems like the behavior of billiard balls on a table (or planets in orbit). But let's take a complex system like human decision making (through neurological processes).
But human decision making is not a complex system at all. In fact, once you know how the Mind and the brain work, then the human decision making process is really a very simple and easy system.
LuckyR wrote: March 14th, 2021, 3:01 am Their behavior is partially predictable, but not 100% predictable. What can't be predicted (with knowledge of the antecedent state) is what I call Free Will. What can be predicted is Determined, even Pre-determined. Of course as our abilities improve over time, the portion of what can be predicted goes up, if it ever reaches 100% there will be no Free Will ie human decision making will be shown to be completely Determined. It is my prediction, that day will never come.
Well that is another definition, for me, of the long list of definitions for the term 'free will'.
LuckyR wrote: March 14th, 2021, 3:01 am As you can tell, my previous posting was sarcastic, pointing out the futility and randomness if you follow the Deterministic concept all the way back 13.8 billion years.
But I could not tell your previous posting was sarcastic.

In a philosophy forum I read words, literally.

If one does not say what they mean, or does not mean what they say, in philosophical discussions, then why say 'it'?

Also, if one wants to follow the deterministic concept, then they would also have to understand, and/or explain, what determined the, so called, big bang, and then what determined everything else also prior to that bang.

By the way, if your previous posting was sarcastic, then this helps in explaining why you did not answer the actual first two questions I asked you.
Well, feel free to re-ask your question, as I am happy to answer any question that is comprehensible.
But I just clarified that I now understand better why you did not answer the questions. This is sufficient for me now.
LuckyR wrote: March 14th, 2021, 1:10 pm You seem to be confusing "know" and "theorize" or "suspect". Hence why I included you in the "no one knows" comment.
No I am not confusing 'know' and 'theorize' nor 'suspect'. In fact I use the word 'know' very specifically. See, I do not do 'theorizing', 'guessing', nor 'suspecting'. I do either, 'I know ...', or, 'I think ...' or 'In my view ...'.

To me, 'assuming' or 'theorizing' is just a complete and utter waste of time, especially when thee actual Truth of 'things' is just right here before 'us', for all to see. And, to me, 'believing' is the worst as doing 'beliefs' actually stops and prevents one from seeing what thee actual Truth of 'things' is.
LuckyR wrote: March 14th, 2021, 1:10 pm As you alluded to, my view of Free Will is functional, rather than theoretical, so it is a bit different (but easier to quantify) than others in Philosophy.
Yes I agree. But still your view of 'free will' is more complex then I think is necessary. But using your view will certainly come in handy for better explaining my view of 'free will'.
User avatar
Steve3007
Posts: 9161
Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Eratosthenes of Cyrene
Location: UK

Re: I am researching law, physics, and philosophy

Post by Steve3007 »

Dennis Blewett wrote:...And from my interpretation of how matter is interdependent with the dimensions of space and the dimension of time, I do not see how *I* have free will.
I think a good place to start would be to consider what you mean by the proposition "matter is interdependent with the dimensions of space and the dimension of time". Is there some observation or set of observations that you can cite to support the notion that that is a good description of what matter does? Taken in isolation, it's very difficult to see whether it means anything tangible at all. Could I use that statement to predict what some matter is going to do in a given set of circumstances?

You've mentioned Special Relativity a couple of times. So I guess your view is that the theory of Special Relativity told you that "matter is interdependent with the dimensions of space and the dimension of time". In what context did it tell you that? Could you describe, in a nutshell, what SR says and the evidence base which caused it to say it? That might give a clue as to why you think SR has got something to do with free will.
User avatar
Steve3007
Posts: 9161
Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Eratosthenes of Cyrene
Location: UK

Re: I am researching law, physics, and philosophy

Post by Steve3007 »

I guess, om the face of it, "matter is interdependent with the dimensions of space and the dimension of time" means:

"Matter has been known to move about from one place to another. Sometimes it's over here and at other times it's over there."

Is that what you mean by it?
User avatar
LuckyR
Moderator
Posts: 5017
Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am

Re: I am researching law, physics, and philosophy

Post by LuckyR »

evolution wrote: March 14th, 2021, 7:00 pm
LuckyR wrote: March 14th, 2021, 1:10 pm You seem to be confusing "know" and "theorize" or "suspect". Hence why I included you in the "no one knows" comment.
No I am not confusing 'know' and 'theorize' nor 'suspect'. In fact I use the word 'know' very specifically. See, I do not do 'theorizing', 'guessing', nor 'suspecting'. I do either, 'I know ...', or, 'I think ...' or 'In my view ...'.

To me, 'assuming' or 'theorizing' is just a complete and utter waste of time, especially when thee actual Truth of 'things' is just right here before 'us', for all to see. And, to me, 'believing' is the worst as doing 'beliefs' actually stops and prevents one from seeing what thee actual Truth of 'things' is.
Ok, so if a (naive) member of this Forum takes your "knowing" the "Truth" as gospel, for your above argument, what are they to do when the very next post also claims to "know" such (unknowable) "Truth", but has the exact opposite conclusion than your "knowledge"?
"As usual... it depends."
evolution
Posts: 957
Joined: April 19th, 2020, 6:20 am

Re: I am researching law, physics, and philosophy

Post by evolution »

LuckyR wrote: March 15th, 2021, 3:38 pm
evolution wrote: March 14th, 2021, 7:00 pm
LuckyR wrote: March 14th, 2021, 1:10 pm You seem to be confusing "know" and "theorize" or "suspect". Hence why I included you in the "no one knows" comment.
No I am not confusing 'know' and 'theorize' nor 'suspect'. In fact I use the word 'know' very specifically. See, I do not do 'theorizing', 'guessing', nor 'suspecting'. I do either, 'I know ...', or, 'I think ...' or 'In my view ...'.

To me, 'assuming' or 'theorizing' is just a complete and utter waste of time, especially when thee actual Truth of 'things' is just right here before 'us', for all to see. And, to me, 'believing' is the worst as doing 'beliefs' actually stops and prevents one from seeing what thee actual Truth of 'things' is.
Ok, so if a (naive) member of this Forum takes your "knowing" the "Truth" as gospel, for your above argument, what are they to do when the very next post also claims to "know" such (unknowable) "Truth", but has the exact opposite conclusion than your "knowledge"?
But I would suggest to 'never' take any thing as "gospel".

I also suggest challenging and/or asking clarifying questions to another in regards to if what they say or write is the exact opposite conclusion of your "knowledge".

Furthermore, if one has the exact opposite conclusion that you have, then are you absolutely sure that you can back up and support your conclusion with actual proof?
User avatar
LuckyR
Moderator
Posts: 5017
Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am

Re: I am researching law, physics, and philosophy

Post by LuckyR »

evolution wrote: March 15th, 2021, 4:08 pm
LuckyR wrote: March 15th, 2021, 3:38 pm
evolution wrote: March 14th, 2021, 7:00 pm
LuckyR wrote: March 14th, 2021, 1:10 pm You seem to be confusing "know" and "theorize" or "suspect". Hence why I included you in the "no one knows" comment.
No I am not confusing 'know' and 'theorize' nor 'suspect'. In fact I use the word 'know' very specifically. See, I do not do 'theorizing', 'guessing', nor 'suspecting'. I do either, 'I know ...', or, 'I think ...' or 'In my view ...'.

To me, 'assuming' or 'theorizing' is just a complete and utter waste of time, especially when thee actual Truth of 'things' is just right here before 'us', for all to see. And, to me, 'believing' is the worst as doing 'beliefs' actually stops and prevents one from seeing what thee actual Truth of 'things' is.
Ok, so if a (naive) member of this Forum takes your "knowing" the "Truth" as gospel, for your above argument, what are they to do when the very next post also claims to "know" such (unknowable) "Truth", but has the exact opposite conclusion than your "knowledge"?
But I would suggest to 'never' take any thing as "gospel".

I also suggest challenging and/or asking clarifying questions to another in regards to if what they say or write is the exact opposite conclusion of your "knowledge".

Furthermore, if one has the exact opposite conclusion that you have, then are you absolutely sure that you can back up and support your conclusion with actual proof?
Exactly my point.
"As usual... it depends."
evolution
Posts: 957
Joined: April 19th, 2020, 6:20 am

Re: I am researching law, physics, and philosophy

Post by evolution »

LuckyR wrote: March 16th, 2021, 3:00 am
evolution wrote: March 15th, 2021, 4:08 pm
LuckyR wrote: March 15th, 2021, 3:38 pm
evolution wrote: March 14th, 2021, 7:00 pm

No I am not confusing 'know' and 'theorize' nor 'suspect'. In fact I use the word 'know' very specifically. See, I do not do 'theorizing', 'guessing', nor 'suspecting'. I do either, 'I know ...', or, 'I think ...' or 'In my view ...'.

To me, 'assuming' or 'theorizing' is just a complete and utter waste of time, especially when thee actual Truth of 'things' is just right here before 'us', for all to see. And, to me, 'believing' is the worst as doing 'beliefs' actually stops and prevents one from seeing what thee actual Truth of 'things' is.
Ok, so if a (naive) member of this Forum takes your "knowing" the "Truth" as gospel, for your above argument, what are they to do when the very next post also claims to "know" such (unknowable) "Truth", but has the exact opposite conclusion than your "knowledge"?
But I would suggest to 'never' take any thing as "gospel".

I also suggest challenging and/or asking clarifying questions to another in regards to if what they say or write is the exact opposite conclusion of your "knowledge".

Furthermore, if one has the exact opposite conclusion that you have, then are you absolutely sure that you can back up and support your conclusion with actual proof?
Exactly my point.
Yet I had to say it and make it.

Also, I can back up and support with actual proof what I have said, but can you?

How could you actually prove that "another" does not and can not 'know' a Truth, which you claim is 'unknowable'?
User avatar
LuckyR
Moderator
Posts: 5017
Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am

Re: I am researching law, physics, and philosophy

Post by LuckyR »

evolution wrote: March 16th, 2021, 4:13 am
LuckyR wrote: March 16th, 2021, 3:00 am
evolution wrote: March 15th, 2021, 4:08 pm
LuckyR wrote: March 15th, 2021, 3:38 pm

Ok, so if a (naive) member of this Forum takes your "knowing" the "Truth" as gospel, for your above argument, what are they to do when the very next post also claims to "know" such (unknowable) "Truth", but has the exact opposite conclusion than your "knowledge"?
But I would suggest to 'never' take any thing as "gospel".

I also suggest challenging and/or asking clarifying questions to another in regards to if what they say or write is the exact opposite conclusion of your "knowledge".

Furthermore, if one has the exact opposite conclusion that you have, then are you absolutely sure that you can back up and support your conclusion with actual proof?
Exactly my point.
Yet I had to say it and make it.

Also, I can back up and support with actual proof what I have said, but can you?

How could you actually prove that "another" does not and can not 'know' a Truth, which you claim is 'unknowable'?
Of course I can't prove (using the common definition of that word, not your's) that your theory on say the nature things before the Big Bang, is definitively better or worse than any of the other numerous, numerous theories on that subject. Though I can say that the fact that folks who study this area fulltime don't agree with each other (let alone with random online posters) means that there is no evidence of consensus, despite claims to the contrary.
"As usual... it depends."
evolution
Posts: 957
Joined: April 19th, 2020, 6:20 am

Re: I am researching law, physics, and philosophy

Post by evolution »

LuckyR wrote: March 18th, 2021, 2:38 pm
evolution wrote: March 16th, 2021, 4:13 am
LuckyR wrote: March 16th, 2021, 3:00 am
evolution wrote: March 15th, 2021, 4:08 pm

But I would suggest to 'never' take any thing as "gospel".

I also suggest challenging and/or asking clarifying questions to another in regards to if what they say or write is the exact opposite conclusion of your "knowledge".

Furthermore, if one has the exact opposite conclusion that you have, then are you absolutely sure that you can back up and support your conclusion with actual proof?
Exactly my point.
Yet I had to say it and make it.

Also, I can back up and support with actual proof what I have said, but can you?

How could you actually prove that "another" does not and can not 'know' a Truth, which you claim is 'unknowable'?
Of course I can't prove (using the common definition of that word, not your's) that your theory on say the nature things before the Big Bang, is definitively better or worse than any of the other numerous, numerous theories on that subject.
Listen to this and tell me if you can comprehend and understand this; I do not do 'theory'.

What I say has already been backed up and supported with 'prove'.
LuckyR wrote: March 18th, 2021, 2:38 pm Though I can say that the fact that folks who study this area fulltime don't agree with each other (let alone with random online posters) means that there is no evidence of consensus, despite claims to the contrary.
Just because some people have not yet seen the evidence, this does not mean the evidence is not already here.

If I say I can back up and support what I say with evidence and/or proof, then you can either prove me wrong, just accept that I can, just wait to see if I can, or just refuse to believe that I could. The choice is yours.
User avatar
LuckyR
Moderator
Posts: 5017
Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am

Re: I am researching law, physics, and philosophy

Post by LuckyR »

evolution wrote: March 20th, 2021, 7:29 pm
LuckyR wrote: March 18th, 2021, 2:38 pm
evolution wrote: March 16th, 2021, 4:13 am
LuckyR wrote: March 16th, 2021, 3:00 am

Exactly my point.
Yet I had to say it and make it.

Also, I can back up and support with actual proof what I have said, but can you?

How could you actually prove that "another" does not and can not 'know' a Truth, which you claim is 'unknowable'?
Of course I can't prove (using the common definition of that word, not your's) that your theory on say the nature things before the Big Bang, is definitively better or worse than any of the other numerous, numerous theories on that subject.
Listen to this and tell me if you can comprehend and understand this; I do not do 'theory'.

What I say has already been backed up and supported with 'prove'.
LuckyR wrote: March 18th, 2021, 2:38 pm Though I can say that the fact that folks who study this area fulltime don't agree with each other (let alone with random online posters) means that there is no evidence of consensus, despite claims to the contrary.
Just because some people have not yet seen the evidence, this does not mean the evidence is not already here.

If I say I can back up and support what I say with evidence and/or proof, then you can either prove me wrong, just accept that I can, just wait to see if I can, or just refuse to believe that I could. The choice is yours.
Ha ha. It isn't up to me, dude. As I mentioned, what the consensus belief as to what happened before the Big Bang is, isn't decided as an online debate topic by amateurs, it is a valid area of professional study, performed by... professionals. Not you, nor me.

Similarly, the management of the Covid crisis, as should suprise no one, is not decided based on the Covid thread arguments on this Forum, it is managed by... you guessed it, professionals.

Naturally, we all have our opinions, ideas and yes, theories. We all post them here. That's what the Forum is for. But that's all it's for.
"As usual... it depends."
User avatar
Sculptor1
Posts: 3691
Joined: May 16th, 2019, 5:35 am

Re: I am researching law, physics, and philosophy

Post by Sculptor1 »

Dennis Blewett wrote: February 7th, 2021, 7:58 pm Hello,
...

A person does not have free will to use an alias. Thus, all aliases are actually dissociative identities that are unconsciously at work. Something like that.

A person does not have free will....


Let me stop you there. There can be no condition or codicil to follow that statement. "Free from" or "free of" what exactly??
Aliases are nothing more than names you chose to call yourself, they need not impinge on "identity" and would certainly not cause any dissociation.
Why are you studying physics?
Dennis Blewett
Posts: 17
Joined: February 7th, 2021, 7:46 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Aristotle
Location: Rockford, IL; U.S.A.
Contact:

Re: I am researching law, physics, and philosophy

Post by Dennis Blewett »

Free from the laws of nature.

In relation to the context of my original post, I have been studying physics to refute legal compatibalist, which in turn would enhance my socioeconomic status in relation to the monopoly on violence.
Dennis Blewett
Posts: 17
Joined: February 7th, 2021, 7:46 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Aristotle
Location: Rockford, IL; U.S.A.
Contact:

Re: I am researching law, physics, and philosophy

Post by Dennis Blewett »

legal compatibalism*
User avatar
Sculptor1
Posts: 3691
Joined: May 16th, 2019, 5:35 am

Re: I am researching law, physics, and philosophy

Post by Sculptor1 »

Dennis Blewett wrote: April 18th, 2021, 7:51 pm Free from the laws of nature.
Do you beleive in miracles?

In relation to the context of my original post, I have been studying physics to refute legal compatibalist, which in turn would enhance my socioeconomic status in relation to the monopoly on violence.
How would it do that?
User avatar
Steve3007
Posts: 9161
Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Eratosthenes of Cyrene
Location: UK

Re: I am researching law, physics, and philosophy

Post by Steve3007 »

Dennis Blewett wrote:I have been studying physics to refute legal compatibalist, which in turn would enhance my socioeconomic status in relation to the monopoly on violence.
That may explain why you've apparently misunderstood or misapplied the physics. It's probably not a good idea to study one subject with the sole intent of confirming something that you want to be true in another subject.


When you said: "Matter is interdependent with the dimensions of space and the dimension of time" did you mean: "Matter has been known to move about from one place to another. Sometimes it's over here and at other times it's over there." or something similar to that?
Post Reply

Return to “Introductions”

Philosophy Books of the Month

The Biblical Clock: The Untold Secrets Linking the Universe and Humanity with God's Plan

The Biblical Clock
by Daniel Friedmann
March 2021

Wilderness Cry: A Scientific and Philosophical Approach to Understanding God and the Universe

Wilderness Cry
by Dr. Hilary L Hunt M.D.
April 2021

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute: Tools To Spark Your Dream And Ignite Your Follow-Through

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute
by Jeff Meyer
May 2021

Surviving the Business of Healthcare: Knowledge is Power

Surviving the Business of Healthcare
by Barbara Galutia Regis M.S. PA-C
June 2021

Winning the War on Cancer: The Epic Journey Towards a Natural Cure

Winning the War on Cancer
by Sylvie Beljanski
July 2021

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream
by Dr Frank L Douglas
August 2021

The Preppers Medical Handbook

The Preppers Medical Handbook
by Dr. William W Forgey M.D.
October 2021

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress: A Practical Guide

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress
by Dr. Gustavo Kinrys, MD
November 2021

Dream For Peace: An Ambassador Memoir

Dream For Peace
by Dr. Ghoulem Berrah
December 2021