dimreepr

Another point well missed... 🙄 TBH I don't care, it's got nothing to do with the topic at hand. 😪 The one time you engage with the question, and you answer with a meaningless tautology, gee thanks... 🥱 I worked as a house father in a Steiner home (they rammed it home, but his attitude to schooling is specious) for the differently abled, his attitude to their care, resonated strongly with me, but his philosophy has so many contradictions. I'd be horrified if academia did take him seriously. I nearly agree with these two.

That's like saying Einstein was wrong to imagine what it's like to be a photon... 🙄 Are you a madman? Says you... No he doesn't, he just argued that he said it wrong... Think about it... Your libido says yes, but your boss is in the building; you'd better find a way to wac that mole down, or you lose the game... 😝

From your link: How does this favour your OP? How is it possible to debunk something you don't understand? It's the old Dr Doolittle fantasy, just because a lion can speak English doesn't mean you could understand what it says

The premise of the OP is, we do understand free will well enough to be able to quantify it. How can the thought experiment be moot? Unless you can provide evidence of the futility in seeking to understand it; so, again your post is off topic. No it isn't, you're conflating a notion of God, with the notion of free will. Free will is self evident, as described by Descartes and my decision to answer your post, what's in question from that perspective is the degree of freedom; like playing wac-a-mole with varying levels of difficulty.

It's like we're playing wac-a-mole from both end's of the game...

They do indeed, but I must say that none of them, nore a combination of, resonated exactly with my thinking. My thinking is more akin to Rudolf Steiner's as it pertains to the differently abled. Edit, none of the other shit he espoused BTW. 😣 Sorry, it was an interesting and well presented post, worthy of it's own topic; what I mean by free will, I'd say we have a limited amount of it that varies from person to person.

Indeed, but science can at least get us a step closer to asking the right question's...

It's not about either, it's about what can, usefully, be done with that knowledge. Indeed you could (in another thread), I'm aware of the problem's of understanding such things, but what's it got to do with the question asked? Sorry I missed this post +1, it never ceases to amaze me, just how arrogant this/every generation becomes when they get the latest phone, that doesn't even need you to spell to work properly, and laugh at the savage that can't say "google" right. I can think of a few thought experiments/television idea's that would wipe the smile... 😝 Well you could choose to become homeless, it's much easier and better for your soul than to drown in a sea of money.

What's weird is that you think we already understand how free our will is; for instance, when we have a sherry or two our definition is both positive and negative... How would you define a blind man's freedom?

In the context of this thread, I think it's very much the same; They're both an unquantifiable something that comes from within and makes us feel better.

You seem very confused, as to what benefits us. It's perfectly possible to kill with kindness; for instance, it would seem to be very kind to feed a hungry child, but if a ten year old is twice your weight, maybe you need to be cruel to be kind. Heaven isn't a future thing, it's what benefits us, now... Besides, "it doesn't matter who created killed who, look at those vast tract's of land". 😉 The placebo effect is just as imaginary, but believe it or not, can be just as real...

Indeed, hence my answer... Bacon sarnie gate actually f@(&£% happened...

Eat a bacon sarnie on Tik Tok is probably worth a try...

Anything you do from an aeroplane will be similarly stained, there's no way round that; a newborn can't be a philosopher... I get that, but the analogy still work's, because the blind man knows that he's blind, so he just describes what he sees, it's not his fault that you're blind to that world; my point has always been, the lucky ones are those that can see their blindness. I don't think I did. What's this got to do with the topic? Whatever it means...🙄 Not every question/quote is a gem; I bet when Oscar Wilde went through customs the first time, he just said no to the question, and on the way out he said "fuck, I just thought of a bloody brilliant answer" 😣

Why we are publishing disturbing content from AR-15 mass shootings (msn.com)

Indeed, that's why I said "metaphorically", but that's not my point, we need to have been taught well enough to understand the flaws of the teacher's,, which usually takes a bit of living/time, all of which could be done from an armchair. Again you miss the point, the blind man's description would be from a different perspective, not wrong at all...

It depends on what you mean by "anything and everything", I think it's perfectly possible to understand the human condition while sitting in an armchair (metaphorically speaking) I could read some book's or just watch the TV; one doesn't need to travel to understand that different culture's just produce different versions of me. What did I miss?

You should read my "what is justice?" thread, that I linked to in my previous post, it's explained there in. Off topic here though. Right, and in every century we contrive to forget what's been learned, which is rather well explained by Nietzcher in his "parable of the mad man", and by Shelley in his poem Ozymandias What makes you think we can't? No it doesn't, as suggested by Jim "we're all dumb cunts", what I'm actually suggesting is, we need to acknowledge the statistic's and build a model that helps us all defend our culpability; when we all finally understand what "there but for the grace of God, goes I" actually fucking means... 🙄

Nope, I'm saying if "we" (which includes neuroscientist's) come to understand free will and therefore provide a metric, by which we "could" measure individual culpability, then the world would be a slightly better place. Besides, why are you so skeptical that philosopher's can learn? We have indeed, at length. But this is a different question, the clues in the title... Indeed it is, but guess where all the prisoners comes from? We all have free will, but some are freer than other's, for instance... 🧐 Jim sum's it up quite neatly.

I agree that some people have some free will, my point is rooted in the saying "it takes a village to raise a child", as in one's biases influences the "free choice" along with all sorts of other factors, such as diet. Not everyone are capable of recognising this and developing a personal moral compass free of friends, family etc... If we understand where free will, which is the point of this topic, actually exists in the human condition, then that knowledge when accepted by society, would automatically lead to a more refined understanding of justice and how to more appropriately deal with the perpetrator. Prisons as we know them today would be gone, replaced by secure holiday (for want of a better word) camp's.

Which word has tripped you up? You did, and then you failed to understand the word justice; it's not my job to understand for you... Maybe true, yet here you are wasting mine; I'm not holding a gun to your head, feel free to go forth with multiplication on your mind. 😣 Yes, philosophy determined a way to think without bias; can't think of the word... I would ask for clarification, but what's the point, if you don't understand a simple question (topic title)...

Well, aren't you just full of sugar. I think the topic title is relatively biguous, please provide a more concise way to ask... Besides, in my experience ambiguity generally gets higher numbers, and can lead to a more enjoyable and informative discussion, just a thought. You're always welcome to ask me to clarify, because you've missed my point entirely. If philosophy can determine just how much free will we actually have (I think it may not be as much as I think (50%ish), and I'm bloody sure it's not as much as you think (90%+)) and can persuade our populous, IOW politicians, of that knowledge; then prison's could become obsolete, because most people would have a better understanding of what justice actually means... That's a rubbish heckle... 🧐

Bump, into the rabbit hole...

This whole topic is a rabbit hole, some just like the more fanciful tributaries @AIkonoklazt for instance.

How closely does the 'Flash' series' portrayal of the multiverse align with the complex and theoretical concepts of parallel universes proposed in scientific theories? Not very...