What are some non-bluepilled arguments agaisnt determinism?

It's one of the great unsolved problems of metaphysics.

If you have any metaphysical, mystical, theosophical, etc. inclinations whatsoever, you should keep your mind open about free will.

Emergentist compatibilists put sticks in their cock holes.

wtf is this blue pill red pill shit. I only go on /lit so I have no idea what your talking about.

it comes from the movie matrix

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benjamin_Libet#Implications_of_Libet.27s_experiments

extreme redpill

this meme is the best i got

/thread

this is pretty much it

i dont understand why he calls donald a hypocrite

hol up, so u tellin me dat may may BTFO these anons?

the fact that we always have the capacity to choose? even things that are illogical or against what we believe?
to prove that the way reality manifests itself will be exactly the same each time you set a certain space-time coordinate and press play like a movie, is unprovable with current technology and anyone who professes to know undoubtedly that we understand every law of reality that can possibly exist as behaving in a cause and effect framework is taking as much as a leap of faith as believing in God, humans can only understand reality humanly, and that means we understand time in a linear fashion, but how reality actually works is unknowable to us, other than that I'd say that the fact that we're aware and we're aware that we're aware to an infinite cycle and the freedom of movement and choice our self experience following that characteristic of consciousness is so complex that it's unprovable to actually show how linear time wise it works and what the chain of causes and effects that determine our eventual choices are.

I said non-bluepilled arguments

I think it's from reddit.

you won't find something better than that bro
believe what you will

Le demiurge prefers us to find our own suffering.
There you go.

>to prove that the way reality manifests itself will be exactly the same each time you set a certain space-time coordinate and press play like a movie
You answered it exactly in that last bit of your statement. It is like a movie, because that's a perfect example of proof of determinism. If you record a film of something that happened, that film will play out the exact same way every single time. That is because the event that was recorded only happened one way and no other conceivable possibilities were the ones that did happen. It's impossible to ever go back and alter this event, and therefore it's impossible for it to ever have happened a different way. If determinism weren't true, then the world would be inconsistent chaos and the past would constantly be altering itself. But the fact that consequences and remainders of past events retain their consistency with the present shows that this is not the case. Claiming that determinism is invalid is equivalent to claiming that the past is malleable and inconsequential.

There aren't.
But then again, the whole basis for the determinist argument is a fallacy in itself, since it boils down to "everything has a cause so you have no control over it".
Discussing the topic any further is useless, since both sides present invalid claims as arguments. Much as the "God is real" debate, the answer is dependent solely on faith and personal opinion instead of "facts".

you forgot to read
>unprovable with current technology and anyone who professes to know undoubtedly that we understand every law of reality that can possibly exist as behaving in a cause and effect framework is taking as much as a leap of faith as believing in God

anyway what you said about the past is complete nonsense, things that happened, happened, but they might just as well happened and manifested differently.

Quantum indeterminacy. The only argument. Although, the Hidden Variable Theory tries to deal with it. I guess we simply don't know.

Think of it as Pascal's wager. Let's break this down:

Everything is not predetermined
>Believe everything is predetermined->you don't really try to control your fate->you lose out on life
>Don't believe in determinism->you will try your hardest->live life to the fullest, assert your will on the universe

Everything is predetermined:
>Don't believe in determinism->you try your hardest->but it was all determined already so nothing changes
>Believe in determinism->but it was determined already, nothing changes

Not believing in determinism is the only logical choice, it ensures that you won't lose out no matter what the truth might be.

If the past constantly altered itself, we wouldn't have any way to notice, would we?

>Believe everything is predetermined->you don't really try to control your fate->you lose out on life

This is a non sequitur. Since we don't know what is the predetermined future, there's nothing to «accept». The fact that I accept determinism doesn't mean I'll stop trying in life, that would be absurd. You either «choose» to live life to its fullest or you don't, it doesn't matter if that choice is an illusion.

That's a cute frog OP

lies to keep from killing yourself

>You either «choose» to live life to its fullest or you don't
so you choose or you don't choose?

i wish i could argument like these other anons itt

thanks, you can save it

i feel there is something to be said about Heisenberg's uncertainty principle and determinism.

Heisenberg states that the outcome of an event is changed just through its observation.
So when we see an event occurring we have altered it ever so slightly due to our perception of said event.

How does this apply to determinism.
things have a set path, MAYBE
we can get a pretty good idea on how things behave
its through this knowledge we can alter said behavior, or bend it to our will.
Kinda like how once we know what's going to happen we can alter the course for a different outcome.

also problem of inducttion
just becuase A,B,C,X,Y are determined doesn't neesicarily mean that z is determined. . sot here you could accuse the determinist of being too generalizing.

also if determinism works then why do we have random number generators?

how? (i really want to ...)

Shit bait
Good posts

click on the image and then right-click the enlarged image, the option to save should appear in a window along with other options
can you explain why donald in a "hypocrite", please?

The determinist argument on a nutshell:

Determinist: Actually free will does not exist because your neurons made your decision for you

Non-determinist: But user since the brain is mine am not i the one making the decisions?

Determinists: BUT GENETICS OR SOME SHIT DUURRRRR (collapses on a puddle of own urine)

Better a bluepill than a shitpill

...

determinist BTFO

Yeah, those are pseudo random generators.

>but they might just as well happened and manifested differently.
Actually, no. They happened one way and that's that. The universe is not on your side with this one.

You have the illusion of choosing. You either choose to live life to its fullest or to stop trying. I suppose I phrased that poorly, apologies.

Yes, we would. The past only exists in the consequences and remainders of it, and these things always remain consistent.

but if everything is predetermined, you don't "choose". if there is a choice, determinism is false

nice strawman
nod an adgument

It's not an argument shitsteak
It's just someone more intelligent than you stating determinism is for morons and faggots who shield themselves with pseudo-science and bullshit logic

you don't know, because you, as a little human, don't fully understand any piece of information that forms the whole of reality, and thus limited by your knowledge also don't have any evidence to indicate that what you said is true.

so... analytic philosophers? did i get that one right?
pls dont be rude i just want to learn

human beings can't help but believe in free will

:^)

If you don't believe in knowledge, then what are you doing on this board ? Go back to where you belong.

this is a veiled Kek thread, right?

im just LARPing tbqh

>so... analytic philosophers? did i get that one right?
No

The fact is determinism is based on some really bullshit claims that cannot be proven nor unproven, yet act like they have science on their side and have achieved omniscience or some shit. Not that the other side of the coin is much better. They are just more grounded, that is all.

>If you don't believe in knowledge

since when is genetics pseudo-science

Every science is a pseudo-science when wielded by a pseudo-scientist

thats a really pseud thing to say, but i guess you are right :D

If you're so intelligent, then why do you not have an argument ?

becasue intelligent people dont argue :^)
you can tell someone is clever because they never argue, bet you didnt think about that, huh kid?

You make a decision
You act on your decision
You willed something
Your will became reality
Free will is real

There you go. Here's an argument.

>the """""you"""" make a decision" meme

>The """""Genetics""""" make a decision meme

is physics, brainlet

I didn't say I don't believe in knowledge, I said I don't believe you have the specific knowledge required to answer that specific question in a satisfactory manner, and that as I said, the universe is not fully comprehended by humans and subjectivity is even less understood and thus trying to imply that freewill doesn't exist is nice and all but doesn't go hand in hand with direct human experience and thus worthless.

That's why I talk about the illusion of choosing. My «choice» is predetermined by the way I am, but also by my experiences, like this. Our interaction is a factor. But knowing that everything is predetermined is not the same as knowing what is predetermined. If you don't know what's going to happen, then it doesn't matter. I don't know what's predetermined in my life, so I don't see why I must stop trying to get joy and happiness.

How is indeterminism more grounded?

This is all bullshit. If we were able to observe the universe from an outer position, would the brain of some mammals be the only obstacle for determinism? (Not taking into account quantum indeterminacy, I'm merely attacking the argument from free will).

is this the ultimate redpill? can /pol/ even compete?

Any discussion on the existence of free will is destined to fail if a definition isn't agreed beforehand. Anons are discussing about different concepts.

Tell me, user. What are some bluepilled arguments against it?

Pragmatically, we need to have a concept of free will.
But I don't think it's worthless to discuss whether it exists or doesn't, since the non existence of free will obliterates the concepts of punishment (besides as a deterrant) and guilt. You say that we don't have the specific knowledge, but that borders on challenging people to try to prove a negative. Why would we think brains don't follow the laws of physics?

let me /thread
the only thing that matters is that what determines our choices is infinitely complex like the subjective experience itself and thus even if it is predetermined we will never have the ability to understand exactly the full chain of causes and effects that produce the specific result of our choices and because of that it's a worthless concept and freewill exist as a part of our healthy conception of the self, if not totally outside of causality than at least far enough so it wouldn't matter, freewill exist because that's how we subjectivity experience reality and being a part of reality it must also be real to a certain extent which it is, the whole concept of illusion is false as everything exists inside the limits that determine its existence the only thing that concerns us as humans is trying to grasp the limits and laws that enables a specific existence to be.

un/threaded ;)

first you materialisticly assume that the brain is the only thing that determines if the self exist or not even though the very fact that we have a self, and the reason for why it specifically exists, is unknown to us, secondly you assume humanity knows and understands every laws and forces in the universe even though it doesn't.

I like how scientific and brain uses alot of the deterministic fall back on but if they knew anything about science
they would see how scientists are more akin to say this is the "likely" or "most probable" explanation
whereas the arguments have completely forgotten about the problem of induction.

or how ANY testing done on live subjects usually has to be repeated on the magnitude of a few hundred times, and the results are put under a bell curve.
There's outliers in MRI studies. The pop sci journalists don't like to bring it up though. (at least not in the headline anyway).

so even if determinism were true, it would be more of a "probableism" where the future isn't certain, its only probable. So there we have room for free will in a determined universe.

We deal in probabilities because we don't have the knowedge or resources to assess all the factors. Determinism is independent of humankind.

I most definitely not assume we understand every «law and force» of the universe. But you're dangerously veering towards solipsism. Is there any reason whatsoever to not think about the world in a materialistic way? Solipsism is unfalsifiable, therefore we must tend to the reality that presents to us, we have no choice. Provide evidence for a non materialistic worldview or don't bring it up. You can't demand to prove a negative.

Solipsism prevents the claim of any absolute truths; but that borders irrelevance.

so either determinism is too complex to comprehend
or humans are an exception

might as well lump it in with the "does an all knowing, all powerful creator exist?"

I don't need to provide any evidence for non materialistic reality, the very fact that subjectivity exist with the full range of subjective phenomenona(feeling seeing thinking imagining etc) is evidence enough

>pill

You sure you belong here, pal?

...

Citation needed. We understand perfectly how «seeing» works. As for «feeling, thinking and imagining» we are making progress daily and can already explain a lot of phenomena, specially regarding «feeling». The fact that we don't have complete knowledge on a subject doesn't mean that it must be non-materialistic.

The concept of determinism is not too complex to comprehend; but it doesn't provide the knowledge needed to make absolute predictions. We are striving to further that knowledge.

Matrix memes are fresh.

you don't understand
I don't say that things aren't made of other things which is what you call explaining, surely they are,I say that the very fact things exist as themselves and we subjectively experience them as they are and not as what they are made of, is a proof that the human reality is a non materialistic one.

Su madre es una puta.

Yes, but it's no longer the pills of The Matrix. In the movie, Morpheus showed Neo the information and then left him to decide what to do with it. He didn't force him or even suggest he do anything with it other than what Neo wanted. He let him choose whether to even believe it or not.

See, people want to force a metaphorical pill onto you now. If you don't accept it and join them in their (often wrong or biased) "enlightenment" then you are wrong. That completely goes against the overarching message of the entire movie. There were choices that you didn't even have to choose. Inaction was as loud as action.

tl;dr the retards at /pol/ ruin everything

The subjectivity of human perception lies in materialistic reasons, some we understand, some we do not understand yet. The sole concept of human consciousness doesn't provide evidence for non materialism, we simply don't fully understand it yet. Would you call an advanced AI proof for a non materialistic reality?

so you are saying you can't predict stuff in a determined reality?

or if you want to be a stickler for definintionsd, even something independant of humankind and determinism couldn't predict anything in a determined reality?

It's only memes ya know
no one actually takes them seriously and it's obvious that once someone is expressing himself with a meme that he's at least partially joking and being non-serious which is the whole philosophy of Veeky Forums as a community and culture.

El hecho de que mi madre sea una puta o no, no constituye de ninguna manera un insulto, como vos implicás de forma tan concisa.

Yes it could. We, humans, don't possess all the knowledge needed and maybe we never will. We are talking about knowing all the variables to a subatomic degree. Here's when quantum indeterminacy becomes a threat for determinism, but the hidden variables theory tries to deal with that. In that sense we're still trying to figure it out.

sounds like the answer to the question when posed to us humans will seem to forever be

"maybe"

what you say is that consciousness is made out of things but we don't know what they are exactly yet and I'll add that we'll probably never actually know.

what I say is that the very fact things exist in a specific way as we subjectively experience them as they are and not as what they are made of is immaterial, the subjective feeling itself of listening to music doesn't equal what it is made of, or what enables its existence, it exist as a thing our self experience in a certain way outside of the concept that it is material because subjective phenomenona capture the essence of things as they are and not only the fact that they are made of other things.