Why aren't you a monist determinist, Veeky Forums ?

ZeroReborn
ZeroReborn

Why aren't you a monist determinist, Veeky Forums ?

Attached: parmenides.jpg (29 KB, 250x305)

GoogleCat
GoogleCat

If nothing creates something, how can new forms arise?

StrangeWizard
StrangeWizard

Because uneven Platonic dualism is correct.

Lunatick
Lunatick

I am. On Nature unironically convinced me of eleatic monism. Ex nihilo nihil fit

Deadlyinx
Deadlyinx

rhizomes

TreeEater
TreeEater

i believe you answered your own question in that first part

Illusionz
Illusionz

determinism becomes harder to define as representations become more abstract but becomes more clear through a decrease in concious awareness which puts a limit on human capacity to understand Will as it becomes more convoluted from Causality. If will is determined through Causility I would have to be an idealist since determinism would expect a full understanding of the Will which isnt possible.

massdebater
massdebater

Over-using '-isms' when talking about philosophy shows a lack of capacity for conceptual thinking. It is easier to juggle with big words that connote certain positions than to actually immere yourself into the coordinates of paricular 'ism'.

TreeEater
TreeEater

Because everything can be divided

whereismyname
whereismyname

I surf rhymezone all the time.

Garbage Can Lid
Garbage Can Lid

wouldn't i cease to exist then, making your question empty?

Soft_member
Soft_member

ITT: brainlets who haven’t read Spinoza

idontknow
idontknow

Change cannot happen by one object, thus at least two are required

PackManBrainlure
PackManBrainlure

An object can change without another object

Emberburn
Emberburn

There has to be a subject for an object to change

Attached: 1520551388829.jpg (70 KB, 600x799)

RavySnake
RavySnake

Before something can change, change has to exist already

RumChicken
RumChicken

It only exists as representation of causality, causality does not exist in and of itself without an observer. If there is no observer nothing can take place

New_Cliche
New_Cliche

Obviously it has to but you cant prove it outside your own intellect

viagrandad
viagrandad

Monism as the belief that there is only one substance/object/etc. doesn't hold water as a metaphysics to me because I believe numbers are an abstraction from real quantity and thus only have mental existence. Determinism doesn't work for me because contemporary physics seems to affirm that at least some parts of reality are probabilistic in nature and thus not strictly determined.

massdebater
massdebater

This has always been a highly convincing argument to me.

VisualMaster
VisualMaster

monism targets only concrete objects

StrangeWizard
StrangeWizard

on the latter point, youre conflating the limits of our ability to measure with properties of the thing measured

also you should read and expand your knowledge on the topic of determinism, its more than you seem to grasp at the moment. you can at least learn to differentiate between hard determinism, soft determinism, indeterminism, and compatibilism

Evil_kitten
Evil_kitten

youre conflating the problem of causal determination with the problem of free will

I think he was speaking strictly on the former. This question is obviously important for the problem of free will, but they're still separate.

takes2long
takes2long

Daily reminder that becoming is illusionary

SniperWish
SniperWish

bump

VisualMaster
VisualMaster

Determinism doesn't work for me because contemporary physics seems to affirm that at least some parts of reality are probabilistic in nature and thus not strictly determined.

It does not do this. That is a matter of interpretation

LuckyDusty
LuckyDusty

Because it's an inferior and flawed understanding of traditional non-dualism