So you think that every thing you do is already set when you're born?
If we was programmed then who done it? God? as you said we can't learn ourselves.
Londoners: PM 'not ruling out' Tube strike ban
- Thread starter J-FRO
- Start date
So you think that every thing you do is already set when you're born?
If we was programmed then who done it? God? as you said we can't learn ourselves.
You haven't though, you have failed to point out the underlying inherent differences of the process of "thinking". Which is just execution of a pre determined program. Through combination of synapses path ways and chemical releases which decide what you calculate. The hardware is different and of course complexity differs, the underlying process is the same. It only becomes different if you add human concepts like free will, souls etc, which are totally unproven and so far, and go against are understanding of physics.
So you can have your own opinion, but you haven't shown any underlying difference.
Nature there is no need for a god. And yes i'm in the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physical_determinism camp, and the older the get the more i move into that camp. As i certainly wasn't In that camp a few years ago.
Its not predetermined as such., something isn't deciding this will happen. Its just that every molecule, energy level etc conforms to the laws of physics and thus there is no room for anything else.
You know said molecule will move and when it collides with something else, x reaction will take place.
Organism are no different imo we are still based on the structure of the universe and thus still cant just decide to override physics as we choose.
Last edited:
I disagree..I, like Xordium just think you cannot see the subtle difference in what you are attributing as being the same. You think we are all pre-determined by a defined and strict code within our DNA...whereas I suggest that our DNA only acts as an indicator and that the way humans and indeed all life reacts and interacts with the world is inherently different because of that subtle difference in the analogy.
And the principle of Nomological determination is actually not in-keeping with modern understanding of physics and biology...the very link you supplied actually states as much.
Indeed.
Edited it, before you posted. Like most things theres a million different things and trying to pigeon hole yourself in a few seconds to help understanding isn't easy.
What subtle differences would these be.
Im not interested i n digital vs analogue I've stated the underlying program. It doesn't matter what system you run things on. You have a program and you input a number x you get z out. This is no different between machines and humans, you get in put you do some analysis and you output something.
I do think a problem here is the way people think DNA works. DNA is merely a vehicle to build stuff - it is highly mutable - everything it makes is highly mutable - it only provides ingredients not the actual recipe.
Anyway a shameless plug for a few of my friends: http://bluebrainfilm.com/bb/
Anyway a shameless plug for a few of my friends: http://bluebrainfilm.com/bb/
But that is like saying there is nothing different between Glaucus and groen they both live in Europe both post here etc. If I said that to your face however ...
Then we are in disagreement.
But that is like saying there is nothing different between Glaucus and groen they both live in Europe both post here etc. If I said that to your face however ...
Well no its not, as I'm not talking about high level, noticed how i myself have included a number of large differences at the high level. Im talking about the underlying process. So no thats another crap analogy.
You take the process down to its simplest form and they are the same. Its just information traveling a preset route and out putting a result. Put identical information in and no other changes and you get same result out. again until you start adding in free will, souls or similar , then there is no different, we are complex biological machines. Once you start adding free will, souls etc then you would be right, but when you show that, I'll hand you the nobel prize myself.
Last edited:
thats been obvious for ages.
Good analogy. DNA isn't a strict set of instructions like a program code. I would say however that the most fundamental of differences is not in our DNA, but in our consciousness itself. Our ability to self determine as individuals despite our experience or influences. A machine doesn't have that ability, it is entirely subject to its inherent instruction pathway, it has no ability to emotionally perceive the world. We can go against our education and better judgement..a machine cannot.
Dna is the building block program, its not the only program. The way your brain is wired and hormonal responses is the actual program.
So not its not a good analogy at all.
Can you go against it? So you can prove determinism is wrong and can prove free will, souls or something similar. You better get in line for that prize.
Right, of course analogue systems always are best described with reductionist logic because the differences and connections never have any impact on any end result whatsoever do they ... strangely enough that very reason being why the brain is so effective at what it does.
I'll leave it there you're quite obviously having one of your hostile and bored days.
Err no DNA codes the creation of stuff how they then form together is a product of timing and environment.
It is kind of relevant when you are making assumption based on a faulty understanding of DNA. And I don't think something that is secondary level biology is 'overcomplicating'. And if it is we have more to worry about in this country than tube drivers striking.
I'm not making a faulty assumption based on dna, you have assumed that. Nothing more.
You clearly don't understand what I've been saying at all. And keep coming up with crap analogy which don't show what you think.
Brake a thought process down to its sim plist form. The smallest part of it. Now try explain the difference between that and a computer program. You wont be able to for the process of whats happening to the info. The hardware is irrelevant. Unless you can show the hardware is doing something different to the information, which again you would need free will, soul or as some biology people think a free will "particle".
Determinism as a philosophy is not the same as self determination of the individual. Causal Determination such as you state is definitive, is actually challenged by modern concepts in quantum mechanics and is an age old philosophical debate on the nature of the Universe...I do not need to prove or disprove determination in all its forms to disagree with the premise that machines and humans are basically operating on a predetermined set of strict instructions...I feel that the innate differences in our relationship with the world and how we perceive and create cognitively are evidence that currently the gulf between man and machine is great enough that your analogy fails...as I said earlier, if such a machine as R. Daneel Olivaw was ever to be created then I would have a different opinion as to the relative similarities in concept between Man and Machine.
The idea is that unlike a machine whose every action is pre-programmed down to the nth degree and that a machine cannot operate on any cognitive level without a complete set of instructions preselected for it, a human can make those quantum leaps even in situations where the information is faulty...a machine would always come to an incomplete conclusion based on faulty data, whereas a human may well come to the complete conclusion as they have the ability to redress and conceptualise ideas they may not have the empirical data to support. This for me, os enough to demonstrate the flaw in your argument.
From what you've said in this thread it would appear you don't understand how DNA works.
I do I've said you can't explain such things using a reductionist process due to their non-linear nature. And you've just gone and posted a totally reductionist thought process there ...