| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Urn
Azure Flames
Joined: 16 Dec 2004
Post Count: 2590
Location: Mido Shallows
7756 Potch
0 Soldiers
970973 Nation Points
|
 Posted: Thu Jul 14, 2005 9:07 pm Post subject: |
  |
|
| Quote: |
Smilies used out of context (Urn)
|
Really? Please show me where my use of any simile is incorrect and I'll do my best to correct them, but this is what a simile is:
simile (noun):
a figure of speech that expresses a resemblance between things of different kinds (usually formed with `like' or `as')
Better Definition with example:
A figure of speech in which two essentially unlike things are compared, often in a phrase introduced by like or as, as in "How like the winter hath my absence been" or "So are you to my thoughts as food to life" (Shakespeare).
Consider this and make sure I'm not using those similes on purpose. 8-)
| Quote: |
The winking smilie isn't used when you're serious, Urn, and you know it.
|
I've been found out!! lol. No, I'm being genuine most of the time when I use the winking smiley. ;-)
| Quote: |
Lots and lots of latin-speak (SARS Ad-Minh)
|
Yes, it was quite overwhelming.
| Quote: |
| Your argument is basically semantics. With your own diction, there would obviously be no such thing as "free choice," because every human being will be conditioned by their parents and society as they grow up. That's basically what I have been saying. What I am saying is absurd is your notion of "free choice." Such a thing has never existed. |
Well, yes my argument is based on semantics. I'm trying to assess whether there is "free choice". The definition of "free" and "choice" are clear. I don't see the confusion. I'm arguing that the general idea of "free choice" is miscontrued. Of course, I'm going to use terminology that will reflect favorably upon my views.
I'm confused, you say my notion of "free choice", but I had no idea that there were other types of "free choice". I'm saying that no "choice" is "free". I'm not distinguishing at all. I'm saying all "choices" are made absent of "freedom". Just plain and simple. It seems as if you agree, but then you say my notion of "free choice" is absurd, but how can one call something that doesn't exist absurd if such a thing as "free choice" never existed?
_________________
~ Humbly walk the path of death
KOOLUK SUPPORTS TINTO MINERS |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Shrew
The All-Star Rock n' Breakdance Electronic Band from Shenzhen
Joined: 18 May 2004
Post Count: 2328
Location: Chefurbo Kaimuttal
237023 Potch
110 Soldiers
100 Nation Points
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 14, 2005 9:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Dude, he did write smilie and not simile, it's in your own quote there.
Anyway, your "free choice" is impossible. To make any truly "free choice" you'd need infinite time and space and absolutely no restrictions from anything. Which means nothing would exist. Yay for non-existence. I think we can agree on that.
Every choice you make may be based on prior conditioning you've had, but that doesn't mean you have no choice. Every choice has a consequence: you must give up time and energy to do anything, even sleep or stand still. The mind has to ability to calculate what will produce the greatest benefit for the least amount of effort, but it does not always follow those results.
Plus, government did not exist before humans. It is a human product. Therefore governemnt is not making choices for us by conditioning it because we have conditioned it to make choices for us. There's this eternal loop here, so no freedom is really being stolen.
_________________
Fear our Vagueness. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sualtam Lugh
Grey of Macha
Joined: 20 May 2004
Post Count: 1201
Location: Reina Mia
56109 Potch
100 Soldiers
0 Nation Points
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 14, 2005 10:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
"And no, you have the illusion that there is freedom in purchasing narcotics."
That's the stupidest thing I've ever heard. I buy them, or I don't. No one is controlling me to buy them, or not by them, but myself. There isn't an illusion. There's no Puppetmaster commanding us. That is the only way we'd lose "freedom" completely. And don't you bring up the government. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Shrew
The All-Star Rock n' Breakdance Electronic Band from Shenzhen
Joined: 18 May 2004
Post Count: 2328
Location: Chefurbo Kaimuttal
237023 Potch
110 Soldiers
100 Nation Points
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 14, 2005 10:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Pyro, I think what Urn is saying is that you are predisposed to do things because of conditioning. You buy pot because the combination of all the things you have experienced have changed you and brought you to that point. You don't have absolute freedom to choose pot, you're just following everything you've learned.
That's EVERYTHING though, not just the government, which is where Urn seems to be getting hung up. It's not so much that government controls your actions, but society as a whole. You're just a result of your environment.
_________________
Fear our Vagueness. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sualtam Lugh
Grey of Macha
Joined: 20 May 2004
Post Count: 1201
Location: Reina Mia
56109 Potch
100 Soldiers
0 Nation Points
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 14, 2005 10:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| That actually makes a lot of sense, Shrew. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Urn
Azure Flames
Joined: 16 Dec 2004
Post Count: 2590
Location: Mido Shallows
7756 Potch
0 Soldiers
970973 Nation Points
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 14, 2005 11:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
Dude, he did write smilie and not simile, it's in your own quote there.
|
I apologize. I thought he meant simile. I humbly apologize to Leb.
| Quote: |
Anyway, your "free choice" is impossible. To make any truly "free choice" you'd need infinite time and space and absolutely no restrictions from anything. Which means nothing would exist. Yay for non-existence. I think we can agree on that.
|
Again, you are saying "my" "free choice". I'll say again, that I believe there is no "free choice" in any context. There is no such thing as "my" "free choice". And your statements affirm my statements. And how does "free choice" coincide with existence? lol. We do things we don't want to do everyday. So, that is a comment taken way out of context...yay for out of context statements. ;-)
| Quote: |
Every choice you make may be based on prior conditioning you've had, but that doesn't mean you have no choice.
|
This is simply an oxymoron. How can every "choice" we make be based on prior conditioning and yet constitute a "choice"? Sorry, it just isn't possible. A conditioned "choice" is not a true "choice". It is the result of training to attain a desired result.
| Quote: |
Plus, government did not exist before humans. It is a human product. Therefore governemnt is not making choices for us by conditioning it because we have conditioned it to make choices for us. There's this eternal loop here, so no freedom is really being stolen.
|
True, government did not exist before humans, but moral laws are the very foundation in which government is established to rule by. Moral laws or natural laws are supposedly those laws that exist independent of human nature. They are laws that exist independent of human will, as well.
Natural laws supposedly existed before man it is the laws handed down through God that all deem as natural and good without a doubt. Humans are products of these moral or natural laws. Humans willingly give the ability of rule to the government which they establish. These governments implement these laws reminescent of natural laws.
Government uses these laws which are designed to lead humane society. These laws are instruments, better yet, they are tools for desribing what humane society should do. These laws are what inhibit and constrain "choice". This is the meaning of government. They dictate to society what is right and wrong. The government took over humanities ability to "choose" through constant condtitioning and I have not been convinced otherwise.
You say people conditioned the government, but the fact is that government was chosen to lead the people or to serve, but through laws we have become the servents and have willingly given them the ability to decide what to do with our individual rights. The notion that we needed leaders based on the situations present within a society caused for an reaction based on natural consequences.
These consequences were to exist without rule or perish, leading to the eventual creation of government. Thus, there was no "choice". It was a cause and effect. The decision to live or die presents only one "choice" as death is not a true "choice" at all. Again, this is the illusion of "choice".
But, lets say that humans conditioned government and accept the idea of a loop. But this government created from conditioned humans who have conditioned "choices" that makes our laws, cannot help but use laws that condition our "choices" as it's intended nature based on the people who appoint it. Such is the endless loop. This again leads to the point that every supposed "choice" is conditioned and thus not a true "choice".
| Quote: |
Pyro, I think what Urn is saying is that you are predisposed to do things because of conditioning. You buy pot because the combination of all the things you have experienced have changed you and brought you to that point. You don't have absolute freedom to choose pot, you're just following everything you've learned.
|
That was the exact point I was hoping people would come to see by themselves without me expressly stating it.
| Quote: |
That's EVERYTHING though, not just the government, which is where Urn seems to be getting hung up. It's not so much that government controls your actions, but society as a whole. You're just a result of your environment.
|
It's not me being hung up, it's just the state of things. And you are expressing my point once again that there is no thing as "free choice" in any and every thing. That is my whole point of this entire discussion. I went about it in a round about way as I actually like hearing others debate, argue and get rather beside themselves, but the essence of my argument was never centered solely on government. I was just keeping things within context of this particular thread. But, I was trying to point out that we are controlled in every way by everything we experience and interact with. Shrew did a better job of it which is odd because he's the Vaguelord, but oh well.
_________________
~ Humbly walk the path of death
KOOLUK SUPPORTS TINTO MINERS |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Vextor
Joined: 09 Mar 2004
Post Count: 12081
Location: Hell
11324811 Potch
23689 Soldiers
160 Nation Points
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 14, 2005 11:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It is your "free choice" because your whole argument is that mankind has no "free choice," when there is no such thing as "free choice." You're basically creating a concept that can't exist and are refuting it youself, which is absurd when you look at it from the outside. What you are refuting as "choice" is in actuality choice. A person may be coerced or even physically forced, but it is in the end a choice. That's the English language you're arguing with.
What you're instead saying is that a person is predesiposed towards certain tendencies due to various factors such as their upbringing, religion, culture, laws, etc. These are factors that influence each person, but it is also exactly what makes a person an individual. Thus, "free choice" never existed; only choice that people make based on their disposition. There is no such thing as a person who is capable of making "free choice" or "true choice" according to your own diction. The meaning of the word "choice" doesn't assume freedom from conditioning; a choice is a choice regardless of disposition. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sualtam Lugh
Grey of Macha
Joined: 20 May 2004
Post Count: 1201
Location: Reina Mia
56109 Potch
100 Soldiers
0 Nation Points
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 15, 2005 12:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
| See....Urn...you have a valid point, you're just not very good at expressing what you want to say....using diction to elaborate your point...well...if confuses, if you can't do it right. Next time, be a little more blunt with your words. Maybe then, we won't get as confused as some of us seem to be. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tony Stark
War Machine
Joined: 19 Feb 2005
Post Count: 3030
Location: Darja
536068 Potch
250 Soldiers
1600 Nation Points
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 15, 2005 12:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Sars Ad-Minh wrote: |
| What you're instead saying is that a person is predesiposed towards certain tendencies due to various factors such as their upbringing, religion, culture, laws, etc. These are factors that influence each person, but it is also exactly what makes a person an individual. Thus, "free choice" never existed; only choice that people make based on their disposition. There is no such thing as a person who is capable of making "free choice" or "true choice" according to your own diction. The meaning of the word "choice" doesn't assume freedom from conditioning; a choice is a choice regardless of disposition. |
Depends on your definition of choice. If one choses, they can believe in fate, wherein a choice can only be made by a deity, if at all. There are other different variations of the word choice, it is an uncertain concept (like love, happiness, etc.) being as it is English, as you tried to point out, certain descrepancies exist between how different people define different things. "What is a name? Would a rose by any other name not smell as sweet?" Concepts remain but the words we use to describe them change.
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Vextor
Joined: 09 Mar 2004
Post Count: 12081
Location: Hell
11324811 Potch
23689 Soldiers
160 Nation Points
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 15, 2005 12:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
Choice specifically means, "the act of choosing." So here is the definition of "choosing" from dictionary.com.
| Quote: |
v. chose, (chz) cho·sen, (chzn) choos·ing, choos·es
v. tr.
1. To select from a number of possible alternatives; decide on and pick out.
2. To prefer above others: chooses the supermarket over the neighborhood grocery store.
3. To determine or decide: chose to fly rather than drive.
v. intr.
To make a choice; make a selection: was used to doing as she chose. |
Looks pretty clear to me. Anyone can make up a new meaning for a word, but no one else would share that. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tony Stark
War Machine
Joined: 19 Feb 2005
Post Count: 3030
Location: Darja
536068 Potch
250 Soldiers
1600 Nation Points
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 15, 2005 12:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
Since when has the dictionary always been right? According to them "ain't" is a word. According to them, nice is meaning good natured when the real word should mean foolish. Ecstacy actually should mean maddness. The dictionary can be wrong in certain people's minds. While I actually agree with what you said prior I do not think we should look to the dictionary on what words mean as an absolute god-like source, but I suppose that's because I'm Bohemian. I quoted Shakespeare before, he certainly did not believe in leaving things to convention, inventing words and using different meanings for them. And most people call him a genius.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Vextor
Joined: 09 Mar 2004
Post Count: 12081
Location: Hell
11324811 Potch
23689 Soldiers
160 Nation Points
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 15, 2005 12:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
| In this discussion, the meaning of "choice" is what has been stated by the dictionary. I appreciate your insight, but it is unfortunately not relavant to this discussion. We are not talking about poetry. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tony Stark
War Machine
Joined: 19 Feb 2005
Post Count: 3030
Location: Darja
536068 Potch
250 Soldiers
1600 Nation Points
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 15, 2005 1:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
I concede that, but acting like the dictionary is "always right" gets me a bit infuriated, but I suppose you did not do that. I apologize for making a tangent. No harm, no foul.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Urn
Azure Flames
Joined: 16 Dec 2004
Post Count: 2590
Location: Mido Shallows
7756 Potch
0 Soldiers
970973 Nation Points
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 15, 2005 1:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
See....Urn...you have a valid point, you're just not very good at expressing what you want to say....using diction to elaborate your point...well...if confuses, if you can't do it right. Next time, be a little more blunt with your words. Maybe then, we won't get as confused as some of us seem to be.
|
My diction is just fine. It's not about me doing it right, the problem is finding a way to get what I understand clearly in my mind out to others. That's what's difficult.
| Quote: |
It is your "free choice" because your whole argument is that mankind has no "free choice," when there is no such thing as "free choice." You're basically creating a concept that can't exist and are refuting it youself, which is absurd when you look at it from the outside. What you are refuting as "choice" is in actuality choice. A person may be coerced or even physically forced, but it is in the end a choice. That's the English language you're arguing with.
|
I'll consent to that for arguments sake. But, then again, my whole argument was to refute the notion of "free choice" thus I'd have to prove that such a thing does not exist. I just find it comical that it is called my "free choice" when I'm conveying the notion that there is no such thing as "free choice" in entirety.
What I'm trying to get across is that coercion eliminates choice. I'm arguing the idea that people have of what choice constitutes. I'm not arguing a definition, I'm arguing with the idea that even if you make a decision under coercion that it is still a choice. I'm stating that this is an illusion. A decision made through coercion does not constitute a choice as one is not free to decide without consequence.
You all are using definitions when you say that a choice is a choice no matter the circumstance. I know what choice means and I'm well aware of how it is defined. Again, I'm stating that coercion eliminates choice based on the fact that coercion predisposes an individual to a particular decision that cannot be avoided as a result of prior conditioning.
| Quote: |
These are factors that influence each person, but it is also exactly what makes a person an individual. Thus, "free choice" never existed; only choice that people make based on their disposition. There is no such thing as a person who is capable of making "free choice" or "true choice" according to your own diction. The meaning of the word "choice" doesn't assume freedom from conditioning; a choice is a choice regardless of disposition.
|
But are those choices when you are predisposed to or already conditioned to make those decisions? A choice is a choice regardless of disposition, huh. I don't think that's true when one's disposition makes it impossible for them to choose and predisposes them to one particular decision. When you are only faced with one option that does not allow for a choice. That is what predisposition through conditioning does to an individual.
It leaves them with one option and gives the illusion of the ability to choose to the contrary of that option. We are decieved into believing there is many options when in reality we are predisposed to one. Thus my argument and my question. I don't agree that a choice is a choice regardless of disposition. I ask does the idea of choice truly neglect conditioning?
I argue that if a supposed "choice" results through conditioning then it isn't a choice at all. Thus, I have no interest in definitions, just simple logic and reasoning. Anyone can look up a definition and say this is what choice means, but one has to use that knowledge and see how it occurs in reality. Does one really determine or decide when there is only one option? That is my question.
So, I definitely believe that the dictionary's meaning of choice bears little to no relevance here and I will clear up any misconceptions if I've been misconstrued as to be arguing the definition and not how the word choice is effectively ascertained in reality.
_________________
~ Humbly walk the path of death
KOOLUK SUPPORTS TINTO MINERS |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Shrew
The All-Star Rock n' Breakdance Electronic Band from Shenzhen
Joined: 18 May 2004
Post Count: 2328
Location: Chefurbo Kaimuttal
237023 Potch
110 Soldiers
100 Nation Points
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 15, 2005 2:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
Of course, you must realize that one cannot prove everything is due to conditioning. That's from a purely behavioral- or nurture- viewpoint. You can also argue that our genes have already determined everything about us and conditioning has no effect.
Of course, you still wouldn't have any choice here, but it's an opposite viewpoint.
My problem is that the human mind is quite simply too complex. People constantly breakout of predicted patterns, and that can very well be due to choice. Conditioning doesn't account for everything, and conditioning can be forgotten. So if we aren't exposed to conditioning on a certain subject we may eventually be able to choose without it.
The other problem people are picking at is that the "pure free choice", one without any constrictions, is impossible in the real world. We all will admit this. We just also argue that conditioning does not limit you to only one choice. I think limited choices are still possible in humans, which is what makes us human. I don't think of us as pure automatons, though I admit there is part of that in us.
When people fail to fulfill predictions, you could argue that it is because something in their life changed it slightly but couldn't be identified at first. Thus the prediction was wrong, but no choice was made. I argue that this happens all too often and that the world and the human mind are simply too complicated to reduce into pure statistics. Thus it is not reasonable to try to predict the human mind with certainty, which means you can't rely on conditioning or genetics to explain behavior. And if you do try, which is more important? We don't even know. There appears to be a hidden variable in the formula.
I call it free will.
_________________
Fear our Vagueness. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
