Terrapin Station

Yes. And again--this is something else that I've had to repeat many times (which is incredibly annoying) when we're just talking about electrons and r...

Okay. So once again--for the umpteenth time now, biasing the possibilities is something that you do. You control this.

Sure, so that's not random. There's not even any other possibility at that point.

So first, you understand that at the point you make a decision, you've biased the possibilities so it's 100% in favor of one of them, right?

We covered this already. I'm repeating myself again. I didn't say that it's impossible for speech to be a cause of violent action. I said that we can'...

No, it's not random. For the third time now, at the point you make the decision the biasing is 100% (or 1 in probability terms) towards what you decid...

The probabilities with respect to the options are a factor of your contemplation. It's not deterministic in that you're not forced to make a particula...

This post was from 10 days ago. It's very simple and straightforward. What don't you understand here: https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/commen...

I explained this. What did you do when you read that explanation?

Okay, thanks. So, with free will, it's not something random, is it? I've explained this to you in some detail already in another thread.

I want you to admit that it's not causal first. Is it causal?

.

I want you to admit that it's not causal first. Is it causal?

It's not causal, is it?

You're a determinist. I'm not. Obviously I don't believe that free will is "wishful thinking" I think that determinism is thinking that hasn't moved p...

Why am I having to repeat something I just wrote? Something prior to free will isn't causal to a free will decision.

If it's indeterminate it's not causal.

Not necessarily, and it's "not whether I believe it or not." You'd be saying not only that I have unconscious mental content but that you can know wha...

Free will can't be part of the equation if we're trying to claim that something prior to it caused something. That's contradictory. Free will isn't de...

It's ridiculous to think I was ever suggesting anything special about "things with single causes."

No. I addressed this already above.

Again, I don't want to keep going over the same stuff again and again. Above I wrote "'X makes y more likely' isn't a statement of causality" and "On ...

We'd need to establish it via empirical evidence, etc.--the way we need to do with any empirical claim, which has nothing to do with proof.

No, because no empirical claim is provable period. Proof has nothing to do with empirical knowledge. It's a category error.

You wrote "So, if one could prove that hate speech makes violence more likely" I was commenting on that.

I'm tired of going over the same stuff again and again. Since empirical claims are not provable, it's not something to bother with. I'm not saying any...

Re the first poll question, I don't see how anyone could argue that an individual's status/outcome couldn't be aided by assistance/cooperation from ot...

When the elephant thing first came up, I pointed out that it's still something the receiver has to basically choose (I'm saying "basically" because it...

I wasn't following this latest tangent (I'm going to be pretty busy for awhile), but on my view, you have to intentionally construct meaning, but that...

In other words, I was seeing whether you were asserting determinism, or at least asserting that mind doesn't phenomenally involve free will. Correct. ...

Most of the time, can't you tell if someone is really loving or hating a song, film, painting, or some particular food etc. without them telling you?

"Subjective" refers to it being a mental state. You're not arguing that pain is something other than a mental state, are you?

Psychological force is the same thing as physical force. Mentality is physical. At any rate, aside from the fact that I was asking you about decisions...

Any value assessments are subjective. Someone else's suffering is a way they feel about their situation, their experiences.

Weren't we talking about value assessments of facts such as that, including compared to other things? We're not just naming the facts, right?

Of course. It can't be anything else. Anyway, a few examples of positives that I'd not say are not "because of something negative," these are things t...

So first, do you understand that decisions are not forced?

I just explained that I was asking you a question. You just answer it honestly. But you're not being honest here either. That's a regular issue with y...

Rather, you have no interest in learning anything. You're only interested in arguing and being right.

I don't just blanketly consider the arms industry or greed negative. Inequality I think is unavoidable and not negative. I wouldn't say the world is o...

Either you understand it or you do not. You just answer honestly, and then we go from there.

So first, do you understand that decisions are not forced?

If I'm teaching you, you don't get to make demands. You follow the teacher.

Okay, first, do you understand that decisions are not forced?

Decisions are not forced. They wouldn't be decisions if they were.

Not everything everyone does is great, of course, but I think good things far outweigh bad things.

Yes, apparently Isaac is a determinist, though for some reason he doesn't seem to want to be very straightforward about that.

At any rate, so what's P for the supposed contradiction?

Maybe try learning something for once?

I'm not of any delusions that anyone is really understanding what I'm typing, unfortunately, but this is the best I can get--a bunch of really conceit...