- Joined
- 16 Jan 07
- Moves
- 95105
05 Feb 14
Originally posted by FreakyKBHThe doctrine that the conduct of human beings expresses personal choice and is not simply determined by physical or divine forces.
[b]What is your understanding of 'free will'?
The doctrine that the conduct of human beings expresses personal choice and is not simply determined by physical or divine forces.
Did you have something else in mind?
Did you go along with the experiment? I get the feeling that you didn't - which is why you seem to have missed the point.
Wheth ...[text shortened]... sed some unnamed point, I can't see where you've pointed out any such complete misunderstanding.[/b]
Did you have something else in mind?
and how do we arrive at that 'personal choice'?
05 Feb 14
Originally posted by FreakyKBHI am going to need a lot more detail.
The doctrine that the conduct of human beings expresses personal choice and is not simply determined by physical or divine forces.
Did you have something else in mind?
What is 'personal'? If your choice is determined by brain cancer (a part of your person) is it still personal? If you are not conscious of how the choice was made, is it still personal? Sam Harris is treating consciousness as the 'person' and all other brain function as external to that.
When you say 'not determined by' do you mean that human thought necessarily involves random inputs for free will to exist? So if for example the choice of city in Sam Harris's question was determined by life experience, then that would not be free will, but if it was determined by a truly random quantum dynamic effect in the brain, then that would be free will?
Whether I did or didn't is beside the point (I did), but how can you say the point he was trying to make was missed?
It is clear from your posts that you missed the point. Either your brain works differently from the rest of us, or you didn't pay attention when he did the thought experiment.
Try again, and this time think about how you made your choice of city. Did your consciousness make the choice? Using what process? How many cities did you consider?
You say four times that I missed it, but fail to say where or how.
The point is about how the brain works and how the consciousness is or is not involved in decision making. It is about observing your own brain and how it makes decisions then comparing that with your concept of free will.
And yet it clearly was.
Not in my case. I await your response as to how it worked in your case.
There were no doubt thousand, perhaps millions of activities which occurred in the time between the question being posed and the answer being given, but the limitations of each person's choice were their own: education, experience, vocabulary, memory, etc.
And were they at that moment conscious of the limitations? To what extent did those limitations affect the results?
Never having heard a theist touch on the topics from a theological standpoint, per se, I don't have a point of reference for comparison.
I never said anything about 'theological standpoint'. It just seems to me that theism puts a lot of stock in free will but doesn't put forward a coherent concept of what it is - and most theists are quite confused about the subject as a result.
Other than your four-time insistence that I missed some unnamed point, I can't see where you've pointed out any such complete misunderstanding.
I think I have now, so answer my questions above and ask for further clarification where necessary.
05 Feb 14
Originally posted by FreakyKBHI'm guessing this thread would be a lot more useful to me if I had any idea who Sam Harris is.
Sam Harris is described by Skeptic Magazine's youtube account as...
the author of the New Work Times bestsellers, The Moral Landscape, The End of Faith and Letter to a Christian Nation.
Personally, I've never heard of New Work Times, but I might just be a colossal smartass.
Hard to say, really.
This is the link to the video:
https ...[text shortened]... thought patterns.
How freaking high does a body have to be in order to believe such nonsense?
05 Feb 14
1 edit
Originally posted by SuzianneTo understand the thread, you will have to watch the youtube video linked in the first post as the thread is a discussion of the contents of that video. Other than that you do not need to know anything more about Sam Harris although I highly recommend watching some of his other youtubes.
I'm guessing this thread would be a lot more useful to me if I had any idea who Sam Harris is.
I just got through watching half of the video. It seems that Sam Harris is not likely to be an idiot since he is the author of a best selling book. I think he gives the clue to his idiotic talk in the very beginning. He warns us that he has taken more cold medicine than was advised and might do something strange. The fact that he is under the influence of drugs is the most likely reason for his illogical ramblings and strange ideas he expresses about free will, in my opinion.
Another possibilty is that he is just using the cold medicine excuse to cover-up his alcoholism or other drug abuse.
07 Feb 14
Originally posted by RJHindsL. Ron Hubbard was a best selling sci fi author too. You know, the idiot who started Scientology? The reason his books became best sellers was the parent organization, Scientology inc., simply bought up all the books, thus making it LOOK like a best seller when in fact almost nobody actually bought his books to read. They are piled up by the tens of thousands in some warehouse somewhere, just as a publicity stunt to further the aims of scientology.
I just got through watching half of the video. It seems that Sam Harris is not likely to be an idiot since he is the author of a best selling book. I think he gives the clue to his idiotic talk in the very beginning. He warns us that he has taken more cold medicine than was advised and might do something strange. The fact that he is under the influence of ...[text shortened]... s that he is just using the cold medicine excuse to cover-up his alcoholism or other drug abuse.
When L Ron Hubbard was recognized as a best selling author it gave more credence to scientology.
08 Feb 14
Originally posted by sonhouseHow do you know about all those books not being sold and instead piled up in a warehouse?
L. Ron Hubbard was a best selling sci fi author too. You know, the idiot who started Scientology? The reason his books became best sellers was the parent organization, Scientology inc., simply bought up all the books, thus making it LOOK like a best seller when in fact almost nobody actually bought his books to read. They are piled up by the tens of thousan ...[text shortened]... When L Ron Hubbard was recognized as a best selling author it gave more credence to scientology.
08 Feb 14
The post that was quoted here has been removedOf course I had no such expectation, hence my request for clarification of your sources.
I have read some criticisms by Chris Hedges and Glenn Greenwald (whom
I regard as generally reliable sources) of Sam Harris's anti-Muslim bigotry.
Some other contributors to the 'Huffington Post' (where Sam Harris writes)
also have criticised him. The Wikipedia article mentions some of Sam
Harris's many critics. If you have an open mind, it should not be hard
for you to find more criticisms of Sam Harris's anti-Muslim bigotry.
Considering that there is a lot of material by Sam Harris himself, does it not make more sense to simply go to the source rather than base your opinions on his critics? If you have an open mind it would not be hard for you to listen to him yourself and judge for yourself. In fact I find your insistence on critics and arguments for and against the veracity of various critics rather than simply directly quoting or referring me to some of his offending material quite suspect.