Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account

mikeman

Member Since 10 May 2004
Offline Last Active Jun 28 2016 03:54 AM

Posts I've Made

In Topic: USC Canceled Video Game Panel For Too Many Men

02 June 2016 - 02:15 AM

 

It doesn't say there is something beyond our physical brains and everything physical they interact with.

Nothing about free will suggests that it requires something outside of our brains.

Even physical processes are only superficially deterministic - quantum particles don't all line up neatly by themselves, you know.

 

If the brain is "nothing more" than particles going in trajectories obeying the laws of physics, I don't see where this "free will" thing fits in.

As for the "uncertainty" of quantum processes, first, from what I've read at least, most scientists posit that they don't really affect our brain processes, happening in sub-atomic scales and all, and second, even if some "randomness" exists, again I don't see how that makes it "free will". Quoting Harris here:

 

 

  And to the extent that the law of cause and effect is subject to indeterminism—quantum or otherwise—we can take no credit for what happens.


In Topic: USC Canceled Video Game Panel For Too Many Men

02 June 2016 - 01:25 AM

 

atheists which on one hand will probably say "free will" is an illusion anyway and all it exists is our physical brains(something I agree with)

Wait, what? Which atheists say that?

 

A...lot of them?

https://newhumanist.org.uk/articles/4888/do-we-have-free-will-the-atheist-case-for-determinism

https://danielmiessler.com/blog/dennett-wrong-freewill/

Just some examples, but let's not derail the thread again because of a tangential observation I made. Even the article you linked supports determinism, it just says that the concept of "free will" and responsibility for our choices can exist even inside that framework. It doesn't say there is something beyond our physical brains and everything physical they interact with.


In Topic: USC Canceled Video Game Panel For Too Many Men

01 June 2016 - 03:01 PM

 

Just to be clear, when I was talking about atheists that bring up the "choice" argument, I was talking more about several "prominent" youtubers that I'm aware of, not people on this thread :)

 

Why don't we leave out the religious flaming just once? I mean, for once, just for once, this was more about gender inequality than religion.

 

But yeah, of course it matters more that the guys saying something you don't agree with are atheists than what they are saying. Because them not believing in the same religion than you automatically invalidates everything they are saying.

 

 

... okay, rant over, I'll calm down now...

 

Okay, do calm down, cause I'm an atheist too, and had no intention of starting a "flamewar" about religion :) I was merely remarking how it's kind of contradictory that atheists which on one hand will probably say "free will" is an illusion anyway and all it exists is our physical brains(something I agree with), will OTOH just resort to some nebulous "choice" concept when discussing the careers people enter into, and the focus they put into them, disregarding the possibility that our way of thinking, and thus our choices *are* formed by our interactions with our environment, at least in some capacity, and the ideas/stereotypes that are presented to us.


In Topic: USC Canceled Video Game Panel For Too Many Men

31 May 2016 - 07:36 AM

Just to be clear, when I was talking about atheists that bring up the "choice" argument, I was talking more about several "prominent" youtubers that I'm aware of, not people on this thread :)


In Topic: USC Canceled Video Game Panel For Too Many Men

26 May 2016 - 07:15 AM

I have to say one thing about the whole "it's just women's choices" issue when it comes to representation in STEM/wage gap: I've seen it being claimed by atheists who, in other discussions, will tell you that there isn't even such thing as "free will" or "choice" at all, and everything we think and choose is based on complex chemical reactions in the brain. I mean, given such views, it seems pretty logical that you'd assume our choices are heavily influenced by our environment, without that fact making us "brainwashed". It's just the way things work. If there's only the physical brain, and its interactions with the environment, including other physical brains, there isn't even such a thing as a "deep", "core" self that makes the choices without being influenced by anything other than itself. These people seem to contradict themselves a bit. And if you're going to claim "biology"(aka hormones) is the basis for the difference in choices...that's a pretty bold claim. It might account for *some* difference, but does it account for everything, or even the majority?

 

 

Though I have to ask: Given that most college students seem now to be women, but ones that follow humanities, are we stating as a goal that we want *less* women to choose humanities as a subject? I mean, it does seem a bit..."bizarre" to have such a goal, doesn't it? Or am I missing something on how the numbers here work?


PARTNERS