"freewill"

[Skip]

events happen to things. without things, there can be no events.

also, things needn't necessarily be physical.

If the things are not physical, how can you tell what - if anything - happens to them?
If events can't happen without things, and the things are not physical, how can you tell whether an event happened?

[alpha]

events happen to things. without things, there can be no events.

also, things needn't necessarily be physical.

If the things are not physical, how can you tell what - if anything - happens to them?
If events can't happen without things, and the things are not physical, how can you tell whether an event happened?

me knowing about something happening is immaterial (pun intended). this is sort of like the "tree falling while no one witnessing it" example.

[Skip]

No, it's not.
When a real tree falls, even if nobody witnessed it, there is timber lying around, sometimes on people's cars, and they can't fail to notice. Real things, and the real events that befall them, have real effects.

This is like you saying "An invisible tree fell in the unseen forest. I witnesses it immaterially and you can't prove I didn't."
Well, so what? Nobody else is affected.

[alpha]

No, it's not.
When a real tree falls, even if nobody witnessed it, there is timber lying around, sometimes on people's cars, and they can't fail to notice. Real things, and the real events that befall them, have real effects.

This is like you saying "An invisible tree fell in the unseen forest. I witnesses it immaterially and you can't prove I didn't."
Well, so what? Nobody else is affected.

my friend, every event must have an effect, but it's not necessary that we know about those effects in order for them to be true. our ignorance (lack of means etc.) is not a valid basis for dismissing logical possibilities/facts/truths.

things (events) happen all around us all the time without us realizing it. does that mean they never happened? do you see/notice all that goes on in your body/mind/environment? are you suggesting that things (events) that were discovered recently weren't actually taking place thousands of years ago, because no one (for argument's sake) knew about them at the time?

[The Inglorious One]

i'm inclined to believe in determinism because logic dictates it.

no one can deny the existence of order in the universe, which necessitates the existence of causation. only strict cause and effect can produce order. the existence of -any- randomness is not only impossible, but would only lead to indeterminism.

"freewill" is either subject to this law, or it isn't. if it is, then it's not genuine freewill. if it isn't then it's subject to randomness (for the sake of argument), and therefor, isn't true freewill either.

i don't really see a third possibility. do you?

Yes: determinism and randomness mediated by mind.

[Hobbes' Choice]

Yes: determinism and randomness mediated by mind.

And what determines randomness, and how does the mind mediate without being determined?

[Skip]

[my friend, every event must have an effect, but it's not necessary that we know about those effects in order for them to be true. our ignorance (lack of means etc.) is not a valid basis for dismissing logical possibilities/facts/truths.

things (events) happen all around us all the time without us realizing it. does that mean they never happened?

I means you don't know, so can bloody well stop talking about them!

[hazlett]

[my friend, every event must have an effect, but it's not necessary that we know about those effects in order for them to be true. our ignorance (lack of means etc.) is not a valid basis for dismissing logical possibilities/facts/truths.

things (events) happen all around us all the time without us realizing it. does that mean they never happened?

I means you don't know, so can bloody well stop talking about them!

I guess it is where freewill and moral responsibility comes in on both arguments. E.G if falling of trees is due to nature reason then the tree itself is casually responsible but not morally responsible since tree is not moral recipient. There will be moral responsibility if the agent is morally human and acted upon his/her will.

[The Inglorious One]

Yes: determinism and randomness mediated by mind.

And what determines randomness, and how does the mind mediate without being determined?

You answered your own question.

[Hobbes' Choice]

Yes: determinism and randomness mediated by mind.

And what determines randomness, and how does the mind mediate without being determined?

You answered your own question.

What determines randomness?
And HOW does the mind manage to mediate this WITHOUT being determined?
How can a thing be random when it has been chosen?

[alpha]

[my friend, every event must have an effect, but it's not necessary that we know about those effects in order for them to be true. our ignorance (lack of means etc.) is not a valid basis for dismissing logical possibilities/facts/truths.

things (events) happen all around us all the time without us realizing it. does that mean they never happened?

I means you don't know, so can bloody well stop talking about them![/quote]
i know the will is a thing (even if you wanna consider it an event, an event is still a thing), and as such is either determined by sufficient reason, or indetermined by randomness. if you have a comprehension disorder like some others on the site, that's not my problem.

[The Inglorious One]

What determines randomness?
And HOW does the mind manage to mediate this WITHOUT being determined?
How can a thing be random when it has been chosen?

"Freewill" implies limitation and coordination. Randomness (freedom) and necessity do not exist independently nor is their coexistence temporal. The former implies limitation, mutability, extension and diversity; the latter implies Law, immutability, and Oneness. The tension between them is mediated by Mind: not, perhaps, by mind as we in our lowly estate understand mind--at its level of existence, Mind doesn't "think" or "choose" between alternatives, but is "aware" (via non-locality) and coordinates and eventuates reality in a way that perfectly resolves the tension between freedom and necessity.

Werner Heisenberg came upon his famous uncertainty principle by changing his question, changing his worldview. He says, "Instead of asking: How can one in the known mathematical scheme express a given experimental situation? the other question was put: Is it true, perhaps, that only such experimental situations can arise in nature as can be expressed in the mathematical formalism?” The space-time universe, which in our considerations is naturally paramount, might be little more than a shadow of existential realities that experiment cannot reveal or be expressed in mathematical formalism.

[Hobbes' Choice]

What determines randomness?
And HOW does the mind manage to mediate this WITHOUT being determined?
How can a thing be random when it has been chosen?

"Freewill" implies limitation and coordination. Randomness (freedom) and necessity do not exist independently nor is their coexistence temporal. The former implies limitation, mutability, extension and diversity; the latter implies Law, immutability, and Oneness. The tension between them is mediated by Mind: not, perhaps, by mind as we in our lowly estate understand mind--at its level of existence, Mind doesn't "think" or "choose" between alternatives, but coordinates and eventuates reality in a way that perfectly resolves the tension between freedom and necessity.

Werner Heisenberg came upon his famous uncertainty principle by changing his question, changing his worldview. He says, "Instead of asking: How can one in the known mathematical scheme express a given experimental situation? the other question was put: Is it true, perhaps, that only such experimental situations can arise in nature as can be expressed in the mathematical formalism?” The space-time universe, which in our considerations is naturally paramount, might be little more than a shadow of existential realities that experiment cannot reveal or be expressed in mathematical formalism.

Why are you avoiding the question?
Nothing is atemporal, except concepts that do no work and have no extension. You were asked to assess the possibility of a third alternative (above) to which you claimed; "Yes: determinism and randomness mediated by mind."
Now you are denying the terms upon which your statement relies. Then you make unsupported claims about the 'mind' as if it exists, in an atemporal reality, yet you are claiming it can cause the will to act? Well duh? How? How does an atemporal thing 'select' and cause to act in the temporal world? It's nothing by flim-flam. How can you be taken in by this stuff, and where are you pasting it from?
Heisenberg is not apposite in any sense. There is no point regurgitating things you clearly have no grip of, and applied to a thing for which it is not relevant.

[The Inglorious One]

Nothing is atemporal, except concepts that do no work and have no extension.

Does reality have a beginning? Do either randomness or necessity have a beginning?

[alpha]

Nothing is atemporal, except concepts that do no work and have no extension.

Does reality have a beginning? Do either randomness or necessity have a beginning?

there is no such thing as randomness (actual randomness).