There are only 2 types of justifications or causes: efficient cause (what causes the effect), and final cause (the end goal or intention). If you excl...
Hello. I'd say not necessarily. Justifying means "having a good reason", and we can have a good reason without having free will. E.g. killing someone ...
Hello. Free will means that our intentions are partially free from the laws of physics (I say partially because we may not have free will when we are ...
Hello. We distinguish between 2 types of good and evil: external (sometimes also called physical) and moral. External good and evil are ones that come...
Hello. This is an interesting post, but there seems to be a lot of different topics here. What is your main point? If it is about whether things can e...
Hello. Premises: P1: Some acts are good, e.g. honesty and saving lives, and some are evil, e.g. lying and killing. P2: Some good acts are better than ...
In your view, what is the lowest form of being that is conscious? Is a rock conscious? If not, then the point remains: science says that rocks are old...
Hello. Does reality require an observer? If by observer we mean a human being, and we believe in science that the universe is much older than the huma...
So 'probable' is 'plausible' but with numbers involved. Note that, as described previously, it seems that Michael's description of induction is not co...
Hello. That is indeed one of the descriptions I found, as described in the OP. But 2 things to notice. (1) This description of induction is not compat...
So it seems the distinction is merely in the chronological order of experience. Abduction is an explanation based on past experience, whereas inductio...
This distinction is in the function but not in the act. It seems to me that both are IBE, which is used both to build the hypothesis and to test it ag...
I accept that claim. Thanks. But now, how is induction different from abduction? Upon observing a black swan, the only reasoning needed at that point ...
If some swans are black, the explication that necessarily follows is that the hypothesis "all swans are white" is false. So we falsify the hypothesis ...
I get how each step of the example is categorized in the type of reasoning as you have defined them, but I still don't understand the distinction betw...
Hello. Could you give a specific example of your general description? I fail to see why the verification of the hypothesis by experiments should not s...
Hello. I agree with your view on abduction. Could you give a specific example of induction? I suspect any instance would fall under either abduction i...
The key is the word "rational". If a person chooses the path of reason 100% of the time, then you are correct that any change in decision, even freely...
I'm with you on that one. "Knowledge" is "justified true belief". I don't think someone truly knows what they are talking about if they cannot justify...
I agree that if revisiting a past event as a spectator, we would expect the exact same outcome for that event every time; but note that this expectati...
Interesting theory. But I wonder if it merely pushes the problem one more step, instead of explaining it. A condition to accept a property as being ph...
What I am getting out of your claim is that the will has the possibility of choosing; but also does not because it will always choose the same decisio...
Hello. Are you saying that things are determined prior to the biological state, and then not necessarily determined after that? But then if not for an...
It's a matter of definitions. If randomness was defined as "not determined" or "Cause A does not always give Effect B", then there would only be 2 cat...
Indeed, entropy increases. But as previously mentioned, things can change into different things if both supervene on a same basic thing. E.g. squares ...
Of course, factors like the circumstance, our appetite, and our reason, all influence the will towards a decision; but they cannot compel the will to ...
"Free Will: The will has the ability to choose between multiple effects." Reason allows to determine which outcome is best, but free will allows to ch...
As previously stated, energy in a simple closed system with nothing else cannot increase. But a change to the system can serve to explain the change i...
Regarding the Slot Machine Theory in general. Not gonna lie, I still don't see your view on it being unfalsifiable; but it's not that important becaus...
I agree that if humans were always willing to obey their voice of reason, then they would act in a determined way, called Intellectual Determinism, an...
In general, can you define your acronyms before using them? I take it SMT means Slot Machine Theory. But all 3 types are expected to pay off soon; so ...
I'm not fully understanding your point. That said, given the first definition of free will you wrote, do you still think that it is compatible with de...
Hello. Sounds good to me. I forget the reasons brought forth by Forest; but aren't free will and determinism contradictory by definition? Determinism:...
I think the theory is false. It seems to commit the Gambler's fallacy. You can also disprove it statistically by playing it a large amount of time, or...
They are not incompatible. Picture the good and bad angels on each side of a person's shoulders like here. There are two influences, and the will can ...
Hello. I think you are referring to "Intellectual Determinism", which holds that the human will necessarily acts on the mind's judgment that something...
I don't understand your objection. Mathematical claims demand sufficient explanations like any other claims. Explanations don't always need to be proo...
Sure, provability is an example of justification; but not the only one. And one field of mathematics that is relevant to causality is statistics, whic...
Pure mathematics is in the domain of identity, not causality. E.g. 2+2=4 means that 2+2 is identical to 4, not that 2+2 causes 4. PoSR is in the domai...
Probability. Reasonableness is equivalent to probability in mathematics without being quantitative. Note however, that the PoSR applies first and fore...
First, bear with me when using symbolic logic, because I am not familiar with these. Now the term "proof" is too strict. A reason that yields reasonab...
Greater in terms of "causal power" or "ability". This is still quite generic, so I'll give examples. Indeed if talking about energy events, then the e...
Not in the context of the PoSR; which is what matters for this post. To confirm, in the statement about the PoSR "For every event E, if E occurs, then...
But if a claim does not need to but can be demonstrated, then it means it could be demonstrated without begging the question, which the statement in t...
From the same link: "In informal speech, self-evident often merely means obvious, but the epistemological definition is more strict." And also "A logi...
Comments