Life .. Random or Determined?

[lowtech redneck]

EDIT: An interesting concept would be if we all really did run off equations, but they were actually created by a God (as you suggested). Bit of a twist...in that case I would still say that we do not have free will.

We wouldn't have free will, but life would still contain a lot of randomness if quantum mechanics apply to anything. I agree that free will is (unfortunately) a faith-based concept, though.

 

[AOA]

I don't really think we have 'free will' - that's probably based on the assumption that being human means we're fallible, in which case you coin a term for the reverences of being able to take responsibility, and consider action orientism, in which case being 'free'.

... However, again that's really (only) what we assume in our minds, and in reality, we're not particularly free willed. What we do are based more on our conscious thoughts, such as memories and do so to each other as goes with the social interaction with one another. This brings about the idea of recognition, and respect.

Otherwise, why can't we be able to take on our lives 'really' by ourselves, instead of (often) relying on social groups, or rather experience general 'unwanted' feelings for one another that are out of our will? I would think it is all determined, and also why knowledge and understanding has a pedestal with what we do. Being fallible also just means you're not perfect, which is how we 'attribute' as for God.

 

[Saslou]

Define the terms.

They are vague, and by their usual meanings, not mutually exclusive.

I'd assume you mean predictable vs unpredictable, but people's definitions vary a lot on these terms.

No. By keeping the definition open. You get to choose the answer according to the way you want to interpret it.
If i define the terms then it is somewhat determined.
If i keep it open, then it becomes random.


Seeming i live in a very concrete world, i love moments like this.

 

[ring the bell]

I see life as random. We are all just specks in this huge huge universe. I have a hard time thinking that there is some entity out there who thought up every single one of us and precisly everything we were going to do every moment of every day. I think humans like to think we are more significant than we really are.. but on a fundamental level we are animals just like every other animal on this planet. All these animals came about because of random little permutations in DNA.

 

[Mycroft]

Give me a single compelling reason to believe that a person with any given person's precise biological being and precise experiences in life should make any decisions contrary to the ones that said hypothetical person makes.

As extra homework, give me a single reason to believe that, should "other decisions" be hypothetically possible to members of our species, why it should matter to any hypothetical member of any hypothetical species living within our universe of uni-lateral time.

 

[Saslou]

I think life is determined.

Just look at all the great minds of the past. Charles Darwin, Einstein, Freud, Nietzsche and the list goes on.
Had these people not come to their conclusions (granted others in time would of) in the grand scheme of things, where would we be now.
I don't think of all that as coincidence. It came at a time when it was needed.

I am also into all this new age stuff so for example palmistry. Tell me something is right and i will try and find fault (not awkward, just looking at all possibilities). All those lines on your hand tell to an extent your life story. How can your hand tell so much?
I got an ex team leader from work to photocopy her hand. She never spoke of her life outside work other than her hobbies. She was gob smacked that i got everything right even mentioning the rift between her and her father.

It's also funny that i like to believe i have control over my life yet believe my life is already mapped out for me.

I wonder how many people are looking at the lines on their hands now.

 

[erm]

Lots of definitions flying around. People are answering entirely seperate questions. Like, some people here deny "determinism", when they merely seem to be denying a supernatural, essentially human, being is controlling everything.

What does that have to do with determinism? The being's actions could be "random", AKA "undetermined".

Again, it seems determinism and randomness depend on the point of view, and aren't present within the object itself.

I think humans like to think we are more significant than we really are..

Do you literally mean we are smaller/have less of an impact on the universe?

It's just, significance seems made up by humans. For some arbitrary reason, humans assume the larger thing is more significant than the smaller thing.

Like, adding something large to a scenario of small things, somehow makes the small things less significant? Their impact hasn't lessened, just scaled down when the human focuses on the larger (more dangerous) thing, instinctively.

Significance seems entirely subjective to me.

Give me a single compelling reason to believe that a person with any given person's precise biological being and precise experiences in life should make any decisions contrary to the ones that said hypothetical person makes.

As extra homework, give me a single reason to believe that, should "other decisions" be hypothetically possible to members of our species, why it should matter to any hypothetical member of any hypothetical species living within our universe of uni-lateral time.

What exactly are you trying to say?

There is a future, granted. That future will happen, granted. How does that effect your definitions of determined/undetermined, random/unrandom?

Possibilities are an expression of ignorance. No-one, who's actually thought about it, will suggest that possibilities are anything other than a list of all scenarios we have not ruled out, when trying to decipher what will actually occur. They are simply a matter of knowledge. More precisely, predictability.

It's a similar case with "shoulds", which share a lot with "coulds".

EDIT: I'd add to Mycroft's post "give me a single definition of "free will", that is actually coherent". Freedom is very vague, as a physical property.

 

[ring the bell]

Do you literally mean we are smaller/have less of an impact on the universe?

It's just, significance seems made up by humans. For some arbitrary reason, humans assume the larger thing is more significant than the smaller thing.

Like, adding something large to a scenario of small things, somehow makes the small things less significant? Their impact hasn't lessened, just scaled down when the human focuses on the larger (more dangerous) thing, instinctively.

Significance seems entirely subjective to me.

We all have an impact on the universe. Entropy is always increasing, right? I believe, on a basic level, we are a combination of subatomic particles, little different from a rock or a tree, except in how it's all combined. Yes, ours is a little more complex in structure, but on the very basic level, we are the same. I have no explanation for how human beings came into existence. That's where the "random" vs "determined" comes in, right? Because I can't see evidence that I can choose to follow, I cannot see it as determined.

I see existence as very volitile and able to quickly change. I see it as some random event that happened because Earth randomly formed.

When I think of "determined", I have to think of who the determiner was... But who created the determiner? I cannot understand the concept of a higher being. There is nothing that is concrete there in that idea for me.

 

[erm]

I believe, on a basic level, we are a combination of subatomic particles, little different from a rock or a tree, except in how it's all combined. Yes, ours is a little more complex in structure, but on the very basic level, we are the same..

So, trees, rocks and humans all exist, having an effect on one another. The very basic "level".

The complex part is where the fundamental differences arise. I can reduce anything to "essentially the same" in the manner you do.

If souls existed, they would be treated as any other particle by science.

I have no explanation for how human beings came into existence. That's where the "random" vs "determined" comes in, right? Because I can't see evidence that I can choose to follow, I cannot see it as determined.

Bolded is where you loose me.

There is huge evidence that the universe is determined. Really simple stuff like, gravity will exist the same tomorrow. All creating a predictable system. (QM and my other previous point aside)

Even if there was no evidence, doesn't that put your position as it being arbitrary (not explainable, but possibly predictable), not necessarily random (unpredictable)?

I see existence as very volitile and able to quickly change. I see it as some random event that happened because Earth randomly formed.

Again, I can't see what you are saying.

It seems to me like you are using randomness and existence interchangeably here. Can you give a scenario where something exists and you don't see it as random?

When I think of "determined", I have to think of who the determiner was... But who created the determiner? I cannot understand the concept of a higher being. There is nothing that is concrete there in that idea for me.

If you have to think of a determiner, it could be anything from a particle, to a human, to a god. The determiner created itself maybe? (ends the causation chain, many place this property on the universe.) There's others, like it being beyond our understanding or an infinite chain of causation, or an eternal being etc.

Higher being, by the definition I think you are using, is a being who is the cause of the things lower than it. Some, who believe the universe to be our creator, would call it a higher being. Generally, I don't think anyone is supposed to see too much concrete in the idea, it has a lot of uses as a term.

 

[Fuulie]

Life is randomly determined to be determinedly random.



-bows-

 

[BlackCat]

Random.

I have no earthly idea how life could be a determined thing. It doesn't make sense to me realistically.

 

[ring the bell]

We all have an impact on the universe. Entropy is always increasing, right? I believe, on a basic level, we are a combination of subatomic particles, little different from a rock or a tree, except in how it's all combined. Yes, ours is a little more complex in structure, but on the very basic level, we are the same. I have no explanation for how human beings came into existence. That's where the "random" vs "determined" comes in, right? Because I can't see evidence that I can choose to follow, I cannot see it as determined.

I see existence as very volitile and able to quickly change. I see it as some random event that happened because Earth randomly formed.

When I think of "determined", I have to think of who the determiner was... But who created the determiner? I cannot understand the concept of a higher being. There is nothing that is concrete there in that idea for me.

So, trees, rocks and humans all exist, having an effect on one another. The very basic "level".

The complex part is where the fundamental differences arise. I can reduce anything to "essentially the same" in the manner you do.

If souls existed, they would be treated as any other particle by science.



Bolded is where you loose me.

There is huge evidence that the universe is determined. Really simple stuff like, gravity will exist the same tomorrow. All creating a predictable system. (QM and my other previous point aside)

Even if there was no evidence, doesn't that put your position as it being arbitrary (not explainable, but possibly predictable), not necessarily random (unpredictable)?



Again, I can't see what you are saying.

It seems to me like you are using randomness and existence interchangeably here. Can you give a scenario where something exists and you don't see it as random?



If you have to think of a determiner, it could be anything from a particle, to a human, to a god. The determiner created itself maybe? (ends the causation chain, many place this property on the universe.) There's others, like it being beyond our understanding or an infinite chain of causation, or an eternal being etc.

Higher being, by the definition I think you are using, is a being who is the cause of the things lower than it. Some, who believe the universe to be our creator, would call it a higher being. Generally, I don't think anyone is supposed to see too much concrete in the idea, it has a lot of uses as a term.

I'm not really sure of what you want, erm. I put my beliefs out there pretty plainly. I do not believe in predetermined. I believe in random. Just because things have followed a trend doesn't mean they will always follow that trend. I don't see the evidence to point to predetermined. Life as we know it started with us as a single celled organism. Random permutations in DNA over a very very long time led to us as we are and whatever the human race is in 100,000 years. I believe that the whole process is not predetermined. I don't believe in a master plan. I just think we are. Even our soul, our thought processes, are really just a biochemical process on a basic level, led to be what it is due to our physical state, which is created by our DNA.

I believe that if something is determined, there has to be someone or something that makes that determination. I have not seen evidence to that determiner, as I said, so I cannot just believe. I need the evidence...

 

[stellar renegade]

I think that all kinds of possibilities for us to experience exist, maybe in multiple dimensions or universes. But our experience of them depends on the direction we go. I'm not entirely sure what separates the you in this universe from the you in an alternate universe or whether the you you're experiencing is more real than another or whatever, but this is just the viewpoint that makes the most sense to me due to two perceptions I have: that possibilities which never end up happening (in our experience) still sometimes seem to have a strong pull on us, and that I don't believe anything not real could ever have that kind of force.

I take it as just a more realistic, concrete point of view, and relegate its idiosyncracies to the possibilities opened up by quantum physics and string theory. I realize that there is much more to the universe than what I or anyone else can directly percieve, even if I believe I can only base my actions on those direct perceptions themselves.

 

[redacted]

If posted in the wrong place, then apologies)

What are your thoughts?

Each moment is a function of the previous moment. It's not predetermined, but it's deterministic. Any alternative explanation fits less well.

 

[redacted]

Who created the equations?

People. The word "who" is already assuming too much.

 

[Lux]

I fall into the random camp.

The word "who" is already assuming too much.

So would you go with a "what" or possibly a "nothing"?

 

[lunalum]

Life is randomly determined to be determinedly random.



-bows-

-----

Yeah, I kind of see how that can be, but I am more leaning toward life being determined via the principle of universal causation, though perhaps there is still the slight chance of there being randomness via quantum mechanics. I'll have to keep an eye on those odd little particles influences....

 

[lunalum]

People. The word "who" is already assuming too much.

 

[erm]

I'm not really sure of what you want, erm. I put my beliefs out there pretty plainly. I do not believe in predetermined. I believe in random. Just because things have followed a trend doesn't mean they will always follow that trend. I don't see the evidence to point to predetermined. Life as we know it started with us as a single celled organism. Random permutations in DNA over a very very long time led to us as we are and whatever the human race is in 100,000 years. I believe that the whole process is not predetermined. I don't believe in a master plan. I just think we are. Even our soul, our thought processes, are really just a biochemical process on a basic level, led to be what it is due to our physical state, which is created by our DNA.

I believe that if something is determined, there has to be someone or something that makes that determination. I have not seen evidence to that determiner, as I said, so I cannot just believe. I need the evidence...

I'll keep this short, since you don't seem to want to debate.

Your posts, and most others in this thread, have no sensible meaning. They can be used to describe any Universe that can be conceived of, because of their vagueness and lack of definitions.

Example of vagueness:-
"biochemical process", "physical state" and "basic level" are just fancy terms for 'stuff that exists'. It doesn't matter whether a universe has atoms, energy etc or whether it is determined and/or random. It will still contain those three concepts in it's description.

Example of definitions:-
The use of random to describe DNA permutations. It is vague what you mean by that. I know they are taught in school that they are random, as in unpredictable. In the same sense a coin flip is random. Both are proven to be determined, in the sense they are actually predictable to the observer, prior to them actually happening.

On a small side note, you've suddenly used the term "predetermined", instead of "determined", which makes things even less clear.

EDIT: Okay, shortish

 

[ring the bell]

I'll keep this short, since you don't seem to want to debate.

Your posts, and most others in this thread, have no sensible meaning. They can be used to describe any universe that can be conceived of, because of their vagueness and lack of definitions.

Example of vagueness:-
"biochemical process", "physical state" and "basic level" are just fancy terms for 'stuff that exists'. It doesn't matter whether a universe has atoms, energy etc or whether it is determined and/or random. It will still contain those three concepts in it's description.

Example of definitions:-
The use of random to describe DNA permutations. It is vague what you mean by that. I know they are taught in school to random, as in unpredictable. In the same sense a coin flip is random. Both are thought and proven to be determined, in the sense they are actually predictable to the observer, prior to them actually happening.

On a small side note, you've suddenly used the term "predetermined", instead of "determined", which makes things even less clear.

EDIT: Okay, shortish

Those aren't just fancy terms.. they are ways to define things, as used in the scientific community... I can explain what they mean, if you like, but I assume that people are capable of looking something up if it's not easily understood.

I'm not going to spend my time writing out fifteen paragraphs to try to explain all the things that a biochemical process can be. I used the term to begin with because it's all encompassing and I would rather not go into explanation of neurons, dendrites, serotonin, etc or to explain the way that DNA and RNA behaves. It took me 4 years to get my biochemistry degree. I'd rather not spend 4 more trying to write a random post on a forum to explain little things that, if someone is interested, they can easily look up. I'm just putting my opinion out there.

You are right.. I don't want to debate it. I'm just stating how I see the issue. You are welcome to disagree, but when you start using words like "fancy" or "vague", it rubs me a little wrong. You are implying something, without saying it outright. I'd rather you just say "I disagree and this is why" rather than attacking how I constructed what I wanted to say. That's a little nit picky to go after the way its' said rather than what is actually said. I might be more willing to debate, if that were the way it was approached.

Oh, and it's rude to come in and say "your posts and most others have no sensible meaning". You haven't even really clearly said "this is what I think" in this thread. You've just pointed out everyone else's inconsistencies, in your opinion.