Philosophy Discussion Forums | A Humans-Only Club for Open-Minded Discussion & Debate

[Raymond]

"That's what social media is for, namely to distribute low quality information to low quality intellects. Go for it."

Well, I tried it on other philosophy fora, on physics fora, on a lot of stack exchange fora, and almost all threw me out. On The Philosophy Forum they made up a new rule for becoming a member and one of the moderators even made a short story about me. For the great Christmas holiday competition. Instead of helping to refine theory, model, cosmology, or theology, you mostly meet resistance, be it for the physics or the gods or attitude towards, say, consciousness. Despite of all claims of and love for freedom, the attitude is pretty oppressive.

[LuckyR]

"That's what social media is for, namely to distribute low quality information to low quality intellects. Go for it."

Well, I tried it on other philosophy fora, on physics fora, on a lot of stack exchange fora, and almost all threw me out. On The Philosophy Forum they made up a new rule for becoming a member and one of the moderators even made a short story about me. For the great Christmas holiday competition. Instead of helping to refine theory, model, cosmology, or theology, you mostly meet resistance, be it for the physics or the gods or attitude towards, say, consciousness. Despite of all claims of and love for freedom, the attitude is pretty oppressive.

Oh well, what can you say? They just don't "get" you.

[Raymond]

"That's what social media is for, namely to distribute low quality information to low quality intellects. Go for it."

Well, I tried it on other philosophy fora, on physics fora, on a lot of stack exchange fora, and almost all threw me out. On The Philosophy Forum they made up a new rule for becoming a member and one of the moderators even made a short story about me. For the great Christmas holiday competition. Instead of helping to refine theory, model, cosmology, or theology, you mostly meet resistance, be it for the physics or the gods or attitude towards, say, consciousness. Despite of all claims of and love for freedom, the attitude is pretty oppressive.

Oh well, what can you say? They just don't "get" you.

Well, I think they get me. I had a discussion about preons ( particles making up quarks and leptons) on physics stack exchange. There were no real arguments against it (the mass paradox is no paradox anymore if you consider them massless and even an alternative to mass generation, instead of the Higgs mechanism). Preons are not that difficult to get. There are other "mechanisms" at work. Peer pressure, careers, standard thinking, etc.

[heracleitos]

An action is done out of free will, if there is no theory possible that could systematically and correctly predict it. It is the opposite of "preprogrammed".

[The Beast]

There is one choice among all possible choices. If I am inside a sphere my choices of movement are confined in a plane. However, I could increase the number of my choices with the use of an airplane or an excavator. Some choices are better than others. I could construct an algorithm to prompt the best choice but, choose the worse one. Since I chose the worse choice, I have no will or It was the only choice since it is determined by internal mechanisms. This at the least, proves the existence of a mechanism. I could influence this mechanism with an Ethics book. Similar situations could yield different outcomes. So, there is a mechanism and there is the program installed in the mechanism. One choice is good, many are less good, others are bad. How I choose depends on the program. How I change the program is free will. This makes free will a cognitive function.
Another way: Free will is a cognitive function that allows a human to change the program.

[Nightmare]

First, it is imperative to subdivide the concept; either in absolute Metaphysical terms, or Pragmatically earthly.
Therefore, only by explicating from living beings: we achieve in the second section, assumed as an indispensable empirical reference to the state of linear existence.

Nevertheless, chronologically arises deductive premise absolute relativistic punctuation.

• Free will is computed by determinism, however every cosmic motion is Relative. Ergo, it derives the relativistic negation. The free will does not exist, never existed, nor will ever exist. [Appendix].

• It is a dual stratagem, even if it leads to a single dead end. It is nothing but an insurmountable illusion, stipulated by the evolutionary Epigenetics; so that the society would not be outclassed by the total Chaos.
  It indirectly plays a crucial role, not necessarily of a religious nature: in porking conscious living beings to act responsibly from a moral point of view. [Roots exemplified briefly].

• It is beyond remarkably blindingly unconscious, negligent; cowardly, and obviously rationally incorrect logically-deductively: to suppose it a human faculty; including any form of matter, except for the inconceivable nucleotide genesis residing intrinsically in the quantum vacuum. [Initialization].

• The reasons are obvious: A) Reduced adherence to daily dynamics; B) Subversion of basic, successively hierarchical, more abstract reasoning; C) Distressing idiotic guilt; D) Depriving oneself of the benevolence of which relativity relieves the existential burden not chosen. [Primary benefits].

• That said, the highest form of Universal perfection is equilibrium. It is as salient to focus on as it is ethically not to dodge. Moreover, we would go mad if it were no more than a lesson to be pondered with feet firmly on the ground, purely intellectual. Not unconsciously internalized Archétypical.

• I end, not denigrating the readers abilities: providing only one reason, from which this trait becomes imperatively absent. No living being chose his own genotype, the annexed mutations; food and childhood hydration: the context, scientifically called "Environment" in which to grow. Nor the events that took place.

[*]

• The answer in synthetic lemmas.

Free will?
It is the ability to maneuver utopianally one's own ship.
To believe in it is to not obliterate the eventuality. Living by reasoning alone, would make it a carrier value; and with it, if I were ever refuted, Neuroscience; and centuries of reflections: he would remain detracted cause his limit itself.

Is it enough?

We can never know who we really are, since the entity of being is an external empathic projection of others: which, in turn, was not transmitted arbitrarily.

[Michael Lunardini | 2017].

[heracleitos]

The phenomenon of free will actually also occurs in the chaotic and unpredictable multiverse of the natural numbers. This multiverse is replete with logic sentences that are true but not provable from their theory, i.e. Godelian facts.

These unpredictable facts represent free will in the world natural numbers.

We normally do not observe these strange facts, because we always implicitly approach the standard universe of natural numbers, i.e. the so-called "intended interpretation", through its theory. This creates the fundamentally wrong impression that:

- There is just one universe of natural numbers. Wrong. There are an endless number of nonstandard universes replete with nonstandard natural numbers.

- The universe of natural numbers is predictable. Wrong. It is full of arbitrary, random truths. It is actually incredibly chaotic.

If we were ourselves placed inside the universe of natural numbers, and we would be able to look around, we would see something as chaotic as our own physical universe.

The man who discovered this, Thoralf Skolem, actually did not like his own discovery one single bit:

"Legend has it that Thoralf Skolem, up until the end of his life, was scandalized by the association of his name to a result of this type, which he considered an absurdity, nondenumerable sets being, for him, fictions without real existence." – Poizat (2000).

If the Lowenheim-Skolem theorem is provable from a particular theory, then this theory will generate ("be interpreted by") an unpredictable, chaotic multiverse that contains a large number of elements of "free will".

[Nightmare]

The phenomenon of free will actually also occurs in the chaotic and unpredictable multiverse of the natural numbers. This multiverse is replete with logic sentences that are true but not provable from their theory, i.e. Godelian facts.

These unpredictable facts represent free will in the world natural numbers.

We normally do not observe these strange facts, because we always implicitly approach the standard universe of natural numbers, i.e. the so-called "intended interpretation", through its theory. This creates the fundamentally wrong impression that:

- There is just one universe of natural numbers. Wrong. There are an endless number of nonstandard universes replete with nonstandard natural numbers.

- The universe of natural numbers is predictable. Wrong. It is full of arbitrary, random truths. It is actually incredibly chaotic.

If we were ourselves placed inside the universe of natural numbers, and we would be able to look around, we would see something as chaotic as our own physical universe.

The man who discovered this, Thoralf Skolem, actually did not like his own discovery one single bit:

"Legend has it that Thoralf Skolem, up until the end of his life, was scandalized by the association of his name to a result of this type, which he considered an absurdity, nondenumerable sets being, for him, fictions without real existence." – Poizat (2000).

If the Lowenheim-Skolem theorem is provable from a particular theory, then this theory will generate ("be interpreted by") an unpredictable, chaotic multiverse that contains a large number of elements of "free will".

We choose because we can't remember the past exact memories, and formulates prediction about the future we didn't explored. Our free will is called emotivity. Given our self feeling we must be, then able to existing; while living through the Neurotransmitters sets of boundaries, in differents realities each others. Despite being univocally connected.

Doesn't require Astrophysics.
Keep trying the best adventure,
through simplicity of axioms projected.