Does free will exist?

Share your experiences with the opposite sex. Suggest ways to improve your success. Analyze the behavior of females in real life and online. Rant and rave about females. Show the importance of looks pertaining to attracting females and other social situations. Discuss aesthetics and the science of attractiveness. Exchange health, nutrition and looksmaxing tips.

It's been hypothesized that consciousness came about as an efficient way of processing the world. Your brain doesn't need to consult other parts of the brain before doing something; it all comes together as one.



No, it doesn't. We don't choose what to be convinced by. We don't choose what seems rational. Whatever we do was just our most powerful impulse. We have no say in what that is.

Whatever is, is. We're just along for the ride.

Whenever anyone talks about free will not existing, slap them in the face. Watch them get angry, and then point out that it was destined to happen.

Strangely the conversation and armchair philosophy seems to end there.
Tell me with whom you associate and I will tell you who you are. If I know with what you busy yourself, I know what you amount to

MyBalls YourChin wrote:Whenever anyone talks about free will not existing, slap them in the face. Watch them get angry, and then point out that it was destined to happen.

Strangely the conversation and armchair philosophy seems to end there.



possibly the worst shit post in the thread so far



DavidDickinsonIsGod wrote:
lanklet wrote:
I like to view consciousness as the moderator of the mind

It gives us the benefits of (partial) self-awareness while blocking off unconsciousness processes that we're probably better off not knowing

It's really pointless to even discuss the fact that we 'run on chemicals', because everything we do and think is based on chemicals, including consciousness. Chemical reactions may be the basis of everything, but that doesn't neccessarily invalidate our own conscious thoughts


What benefits? There are zero benefits unless our consciousness plays a part in manipulating the way we react. There are literally no benefits. It would make far more sense that we'd evolve separate unconscious brain compartments IF separation was needed, than an entire complex system like what we have.

Also there is zero proof that consciousness is chemical based, if there were any recent discoveries I missed them. That's why there are scientists coming up with theories about consciousness being stored in quantum computers inside the brain (Penrose) and all sorts of wacky ideas, because we dodon't yet have an answer.




You need to read up more. This is basic shit.


http://www.ted.com/talks/dan_dennett_on ... sciousness

LMSghost wrote:
MyBalls YourChin wrote:Whenever anyone talks about free will not existing, slap them in the face. Watch them get angry, and then point out that it was destined to happen.

Strangely the conversation and armchair philosophy seems to end there.



possibly the worst shit post in the thread so far


The attachment of morality to actions and behaviours is proof enough that regardless of the existence of free will, society is based around it. The above was a genuine example given by a KCL Professor of Philosophy. Don't get mad if you can't understand the deeper ramifications of the issues discussed ITT.

Now fuck off back to the LSS you PUA cunt.

MyBalls YourChin wrote:
LMSghost wrote:

possibly the worst shit post in the thread so far


The attachment of morality to actions and behaviours is proof enough that regardless of the existence of free will, society is based around it. The above was a genuine example given by a KCL Professor of Philosophy. Don't get mad if you can't understand the deeper ramifications of the issues discussed ITT.

Now fuck off back to the LSS you PUA cunt.



lol at the butthurt :lol:

Shit post made no sense as well. Now conceding that free will doesn't exist. Nice backtracking.

Just LOL.

And LOL at being a member of a PUA forum :lol:



LMSghost wrote:
DavidDickinsonIsGod wrote:
What benefits? There are zero benefits unless our consciousness plays a part in manipulating the way we react. There are literally no benefits. It would make far more sense that we'd evolve separate unconscious brain compartments IF separation was needed, than an entire complex system like what we have.

Also there is zero proof that consciousness is chemical based, if there were any recent discoveries I missed them. That's why there are scientists coming up with theories about consciousness being stored in quantum computers inside the brain (Penrose) and all sorts of wacky ideas, because we dodon't yet have an answer.




You need to read up more. This is basic shit.


http://www.ted.com/talks/dan_dennett_on ... sciousness


What is basic shit? There is nothing yet but pure theory on what processes cause consciousness, that's fact. What is that guy's main points?

I have not read anything which has convinced me why a complex system of consciousness is necessary and beneficial to our survival when we run on auto-pilot. There is no reason for a complex system of what WE think of as "awareness" assisting in any way, hence no reason for us to evolve to possess said system.

As I see it, computers actually run very similarly to humans. They use electrical impulses like our brain, with a central processing unit to do the thinking and other components which help the computer to function. A computer is able to separate its functions and process them separately devoid of consciousness. All of its functions can be carried out easily without awareness. 99% of the functions in our body are performed with absolutely no need for any awareness.

A computer can even be programmed to "see" color through cameras and sort objects according to color. Again without any awareness needed.

So when light hits our eyes and our brain processes it and figures out what to do, and produces a completely auto-pilot reaction, why would a conscious awareness benefit us in any way, shape or form?

Because all living things have some level of awareness, to find the answer would probably mean going farrrrr back in time, to when we were still just a bunch of cells on the planet's surface, and following evolution from that point up until the point when creatures first gained a knowing awareness of the world around them.
Image

LMSghost wrote:
MyBalls YourChin wrote:
The attachment of morality to actions and behaviours is proof enough that regardless of the existence of free will, society is based around it. The above was a genuine example given by a KCL Professor of Philosophy. Don't get mad if you can't understand the deeper ramifications of the issues discussed ITT.

Now fuck off back to the LSS you PUA cunt.



lol at the butthurt :lol:

Shit post made no sense as well. Now conceding that free will doesn't exist. Nice backtracking.

Just LOL.

And LOL at being a member of a PUA forum :lol:


No backtracking, pls look up "regardless". I don't have time to teach you English.

Also don't get mad cos some of us remember you talking about the LSS on PUAHate. It's ok homie.

MyBalls YourChin wrote:
LMSghost wrote:

possibly the worst shit post in the thread so far


The attachment of morality to actions and behaviours is proof enough that regardless of the existence of free will, society is based around it. The above was a genuine example given by a KCL Professor of Philosophy. Don't get mad if you can't understand the deeper ramifications of the issues discussed ITT.

Now fuck off back to the LSS you PUA cunt.


Doesn't work. We don't need free will to hold people accountable for their actions. Just apply utilitarianism .

If you're a shit violent person, you're a danger to the greater good. It's irrelevant if you chose your actions or not. You need to be contained. Just like we contain a rabid dogs, but more humanely.

Jigar wrote:
MyBalls YourChin wrote:
The attachment of morality to actions and behaviours is proof enough that regardless of the existence of free will, society is based around it. The above was a genuine example given by a KCL Professor of Philosophy. Don't get mad if you can't understand the deeper ramifications of the issues discussed ITT.

Now fuck off back to the LSS you PUA cunt.


Doesn't work. We don't need free will to hold people accountable for their actions. Just apply utilitarianism .

If you're a shit violent person, you're a danger to the greater good. It's irrelevant if you chose your actions or not. You need to be contained. Just like we contain a rabid dogs, but more humanely.



Theres no point - he doesn't understand the topic. This is poverty-tier levels of discussion.

I sent a Tweet to Richard Dawkins asking for his input. As an evolutionary scientist hopefully he will be able to shed some light on the subject. Probably too busy to respond to an aspie in a hat though.

Jigar wrote:
MyBalls YourChin wrote:
The attachment of morality to actions and behaviours is proof enough that regardless of the existence of free will, society is based around it. The above was a genuine example given by a KCL Professor of Philosophy. Don't get mad if you can't understand the deeper ramifications of the issues discussed ITT.

Now fuck off back to the LSS you PUA cunt.


Doesn't work. We don't need free will to hold people accountable for their actions. Just apply utilitarianism .

If you're a shit violent person, you're a danger to the greater good. It's irrelevant if you chose your actions or not. You need to be contained. Just like we contain a rabid dogs, but more humanely.


Jesus tap-dancing Christ an intelligent response. I could fucking kiss you.

Agreed, you could apply utilitarianism, but society doesn't, not as a whole. A society primarily using utilitarianism would look far different to the one we have now. I'm not denying the efficacy of such a system, but it isn't what we use.

My point is simply that society as stands is predicated on the existence of free will. Whether it does/does not exist. The existence of morality, ethics, justice etc. show this.

I'm not coming down on either side of the argument, but any discussion of free will without considering this is lacking.

LMSghost wrote:
Jigar wrote:
Doesn't work. We don't need free will to hold people accountable for their actions. Just apply utilitarianism .

If you're a shit violent person, you're a danger to the greater good. It's irrelevant if you chose your actions or not. You need to be contained. Just like we contain a rabid dogs, but more humanely.



Theres no point - he doesn't understand the topic. This is poverty-tier levels of discussion.


You can be a PUA if you want homie. Don't be ashamed.

MyBalls YourChin wrote:
Jigar wrote:
Doesn't work. We don't need free will to hold people accountable for their actions. Just apply utilitarianism .

If you're a shit violent person, you're a danger to the greater good. It's irrelevant if you chose your actions or not. You need to be contained. Just like we contain a rabid dogs, but more humanely.


Jesus tap-dancing Christ an intelligent response. I could fucking kiss you.

Agreed, you could apply utilitarianism, but society doesn't, not as a whole. A society primarily using utilitarianism would look far different to the one we have now. I'm not denying the efficacy of such a system, but it isn't what we use.

My point is simply that society as stands is predicated on the existence of free will. Whether it does/does not exist. The existence of morality, ethics, justice etc. show this.

I'm not coming down on either side of the argument, but any discussion of free will without considering this is lacking.


The fact that our society is based on the idea of free will has zero effect on the truth of whether it exists, which is the only thing that matters.

DavidDickinsonIsGod wrote:
MyBalls YourChin wrote:
Jesus tap-dancing Christ an intelligent response. I could fucking kiss you.

Agreed, you could apply utilitarianism, but society doesn't, not as a whole. A society primarily using utilitarianism would look far different to the one we have now. I'm not denying the efficacy of such a system, but it isn't what we use.

My point is simply that society as stands is predicated on the existence of free will. Whether it does/does not exist. The existence of morality, ethics, justice etc. show this.

I'm not coming down on either side of the argument, but any discussion of free will without considering this is lacking.


The fact that our society is based on the idea of free will has zero effect on the truth of whether it exists, which is the only thing that matters.


I 100% agree, but take my point made earlier about someone being mad about being slapped in the face.

It's not just society that take it as a given, but everyone does, even the people that intellectually believe free will doesn't exist. I hit you, steal from you, you get angry at me. I bang your mum, you get sad and horny. You can't logic your way out of it because a research paper says it was inevitable.

Ultimately, where this ends up is whatever conclusion you arrive at regarding free will, you will continue to live your life as if it exists*. You could even argue that the better question to ask isn't "does free will exist", but "does it matter whether free will exists?"

*unless you are a Sluthate poster looking to explain away your failures

MyBalls YourChin wrote:
DavidDickinsonIsGod wrote:
The fact that our society is based on the idea of free will has zero effect on the truth of whether it exists, which is the only thing that matters.


I 100% agree, but take my point made earlier about someone being mad about being slapped in the face.

It's not just society that take it as a given, but everyone does, even the people that intellectually believe free will doesn't exist. I hit you, steal from you, you get angry at me. I bang your mum, you get sad and horny. You can't logic your way out of it because a research paper says it was inevitable.

Ultimately, where this ends up is whatever conclusion you arrive at regarding free will, you will continue to live your life as if it exists*. You could even argue that the better question to ask isn't "does free will exist", but "does it matter whether free will exists?"

*unless you are a Sluthate poster looking to explain away your failures


If a computer was programmed to slap me in the face or steal my shit I would smash the fucking thing to pieces in anger and cuss its mother.
PostThis post by TysonBallou was deleted by puanewb on Tue Oct 07, 2014 11:28 am.
Reason: Requested via PM
Previous

Topic Tags

Return to Shitty Advice

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider], Google [Bot], mrz, TheChosenOne and 110 guests