Speaking of unemployment

[Non Sum]

MT: NS, it is easy to conclude that you are indeed a 'hard determinist.'

NS: It’s good to draw your own conclusions, and not simply takes someone’s word for it. If you’d asked, I could have shown you my Determinist’s Card. It’s also somewhere on my driver’s license.

MT: How long have you accepted this philosophy after seeking how many other schools of thought..?

NS: I’ve no idea how many articles over the years I have read on the topic, but hard determinism has long been my natural preference. I recall taking the minority position back in community college in a basic Phil II class discussion, and 15 years later in a Crim Justice course where only the Prof (soft D) and I stood against the skeptical hoard of instinctual free-willers. Most people hate the idea that they are not in complete control of their will, yet they often find ‘others’ they know as being easily predictable.

“Compatibilism, in-, and semi,” are mostly concerned with moral issues.

You sound as though you too have given this topic some thought and study, rather than simply taken the knee-jerk ‘instinctual’ acceptance of the free-will programming we are all given, no?

"Who makes these changes? I shoot an arrow right. It lands left. I ride after a deer and find myself chased by a hog. I plot to get what I want and end up in prison. I dig pits to trap others and fall in. I should be suspicious of what I want." (Rumi)

[mtmynd]

NS: I’ve no idea how many articles over the years I have read on the topic, but hard determinism has long been my natural preference.

I couldn't help but chuckle upon reading this line! 'My natural preference' is a round about way of using the word 'choice.'

As you needn't be reminded of, one's personal preferences vary greatly amongst us all, and even include our own changes that occur within as moments pass and influences ebb and flow as do all other activities related to existence as we know it.

When we choose, i.e have a natural preference towards some thing or another, is merely our current choice of that which we prefer at the moment. Who knows what will occur even tomorrow that could possibly change our current preference to but yet one other preference..? We have no concrete answer to such a question that will guide us but only to expect the constant of change that indeed does happen daily in our lives.

But when we (collectively) latch onto some subject, some inspiration or another that brings but yet another level of awareness to ourselves, then we gravitate to that certain thing because it brings us a comfort... an assurance that we feel we are on the proverbial 'right track' which in turn brings us an ease to our lives.

[As much as we try to write our truths down for prosperity, each and every word is no more permanent than footsteps on a cloud.]

NS: You sound as though you too have given this topic some thought and study, rather than simply taken the knee-jerk ‘instinctual’ acceptance of the free-will programming we are all given, no?

In order for me to sufficiently answer this for my Self would require a bit more time than I have currently have to thoroughly expunge my thoughts on this subject. As you probably assume by now I have lots of thoughts on lots of things and stuff and I attempt to explain them to not only others but to myself as clearly as I am able.

[one of those jerks]

Who is jerking who's knees that is what I would like to know.

Heisenberg and Schrodinger had a magic act
they never knew if the rabbit in the hat was dead or alive
Time and chance and tumbling dice
Paradoxes abound


One of things that interests me about Albert Einstein is he wanted no truck with "spooky action at a distance" an entangled universe where god shoots craps. He did not want to meet his maker the mad molecule. Even if he was its father.

Is this a Jewish concept of God? “I am a determinist. I do not believe in free will. Jews believe in free will. They believe that man shapes his own life. I reject that doctrine. In that respect I am not a Jew.”
Is this Spinoza’s God? “I am fascinated by Spinoza’s pantheism, but I admire even more his contribution to modern thought because he is the first philosopher to deal with the soul and body as one, and not two separate things.”

[mtmynd]

JT: Who is jerking who's knees that is what I would like to know.

If I tell you, will you promise to keep it a secret..?

I bet Einstein wasn't thinking about any philosophical theory during his final hours. What say ye?

[stilltrucking]

he was thinking about a sled he had when he was a little kid. His final words were "Rosebud"

[mtmynd]

I believe you're right.

[stilltrucking]

So many quotes by Einstein. I wonder how many he actually did say.
It reminds of those little signs you see on the east cost that say "George Washington slept here" Old George sure slept around.

For me hard determinism has to do with our genome. Our hereditary diseases. I am sure one day we will be able to tinker with that.

[mtmynd]

For me hard determinism is another subject created by mind to entertain mind.

[Non Sum]

MT: I couldn't help but chuckle upon reading this line! 'My natural preference' is a round about way of using the word 'choice.'

NS: Glad you’re chuckling, MT; good for the heart, and I’m glad to be of medical assistance.

I see you still got your free-will hypothesis impaled on the word and act of making ‘choices.’ No determinist since time was determined to begin has denied that all beings make choices. In fact determinists believe that we are both determined to make choices, and to make them ‘as if’ we were making them freely. Of course, whatever choice we eventually make is just as pre-determined, as was the time and act of choosing to make a choice.

MT: When we choose, i.e have a natural preference towards some thing or another, is merely our current choice of that which we prefer at the moment.

NS: Sure, and where do these “preferences” come from? Did you choose to prefer to paint, and then choose to paint? I don’t recall choosing to prefer not to prefer to paint. Did I do that? I can’t seem to remember.

MT: We have no concrete answer to such a question that will guide us but only to expect the constant of change that indeed does happen daily in our lives.

NS: Actually, for all the small changes, I find for my own life and those I know well enough, that patterns seem to hold fairly steady. Someone once said to take a walk in the snow, turn around, and you’ll see your style of walking; turn around in life, and you’ll also see your style of living. We all have our easily discernable patterns/preferences.

MT: we gravitate to that certain thing because it brings us a comfort...

NS: What brings comfort to one, could bring discomfort to another. When did each choose: ‘this will be something that will bring comfort to me,’ ‘this will be something to discomfort me’?

You make me think of those Christian homophobes who fault gays for giving in to the temptation of choosing to become gay. Like they had any actual choice. Like I had any temptation to not be a hetero.

Good quote, ST. Spinoza too was a determinist – that is, he ‘choose’ to be a determinist – first ‘choose’ to prefer determinism -- before that, ‘choose’ to establish a preference between freewill and determinism – etc, etc. (big chain of choices there)

MT: I bet Einstein wasn't thinking about any philosophical theory during his final hours. What say ye?

NS: I bet he was. He always showed a philosophical bent, rather than religious. In moments of crises, mundane matters take second place to metaphysical ones. Isn’t that why they say ‘there are no atheists in foxholes’?

There's a reason for that: I told the Corp upon entering that I would have “atheist” put on my dog tags. They said, ‘no go,’ that I had to choose a religion (lest I be excluded from gaining a fox hole, presumably) . So, I ‘choose’ a religion of no religion, and had “Zen Buddhist” around my neck for 4 years.

[one of those jerks]

My mind is easily entertained. It enjoys nothing so much as a good pissing contest.

Have fun on your run compadre

I don't know what he was thinking but ...

His last spoken words were in German and the nurse in attendance did not speak German. So his last words are lost. Some references say his last words were "I think..." then he died. But I wonder if that is just someone's sense of humor.

This is what he was writing just before he died. His last words.

When Einstein died on April 18, 1955 he left a piece of writing ending in an unfinished sentence. These were his last words:

Note: When Einstein died on April 18, 1955 he left a piece of writing ending in an unfinished sentence. These were his last words:
In essence, the conflict that exists today is no more than an old-style struggle for power, once again presented to mankind in semireligious trappings. The difference is that, this time, the development of atomic power has imbued the struggle with a ghostly character; for both parties know and admit that, should the quarrel deteriorate into actual war, mankind is doomed. Despite this knowledge, statesmen in responsible positions on both sides continue to employ the well-known technique of seeking to intimidate and demoralize the opponent by marshaling superior military strength. They do so even though such a policy entails the risk of war and doom. Not one statesman in a position of responsibility has dared to pursue the only course that holds out any promise of peace, the course of supranational security, since for a statesman to follow such a course would be tantamount to political suicide. Political passions, once they have been fanned into flame, exact their victims ... Citater fra...

[one of those jerks]

I have often wondered why there are no atheists in fox holes. Now I know thanks for that information.

Did you get your Fox hole?

Speaking of that, I miss surfer mike. I hope he is still lurking on Studio Eight once in a while.

I can't remember some litkicker from palastine, but
I do know when I was in combat in Vietnam, I saw
God more than once. He was usually disguised as
a hellicopter pilot, and he flew low, and dropped
ammo. and water. He'd then return and take away
my wounded and dead friends. I'm sure that was
God, even though he used the named Donald.

Surfer Mike on studio eight a few years ago.

[mtmynd]

NS: I see you still got your free-will hypothesis impaled on the word and act of making ‘choices.’ No determinist since time was determined to begin has denied that all beings make choices. In fact determinists believe that we are both determined to make choices, and to make them ‘as if’ we were making them freely. Of course, whatever choice we eventually make is just as pre-determined, as was the time and act of choosing to make a choice.

You seem to be so determined in your hard determinism that you cannot grasp the idea that over 6 billion hu'mans don't share your own philosophical game with the same insistence you obviously expound. Are all of us who don't agree with hard determinism doomed to repeat our foolishness in another life?

[Non Sum]

ST: Did you get your Fox hole?

NS: Yes, several (but only during war games). Fortunately, Zennies Are allowed into foxholes. I can honestly say that I’ve never been in one when I didn’t fall asleep. The movies don’t show it, but foxholes are commonly puddle-holes.

MT: You seem to be so determined in your hard determinism that you cannot grasp the idea that over 6 billion hu'mans don't share your own philosophical game with the same insistence you obviously expound.

NS: Didn’t I mention earlier that HD was a decidedly minority pov? I believe I did; so fear not, the ‘grasp’ is well in hand.

Is your point that wisdom is an article possessed by majorities? It’s far far easier to prove the contrary case, imo. The general run of humanity rarely questions much of anything, and of the few whom occasionally do, few do it well.

MT: Are all of us who don't agree with hard determinism doomed to repeat our foolishness in another life?

NS: For humanity “foolishness” is the rule in any life. The freewiller is eager to be praised/blamed for his foolishness. To do otherwise would be too threatening to his ego, i.e. better to be thought a ‘fool’ than a ‘foolish puppet.’ (A not unreasonable position)

The determinist, no less an egotist, yet determinably a far better thinker, sees his choices between being either a ‘foolish puppet,’ or a ‘wise puppet’; ergo, he must be a determinist.

”Whom Allah pleases He cause to err, and who He pleases He puts on the right way.” (Surah 6, 39)
“All planning is Allah’s.” (13, 42)
“There is no living creature but He holds it by its forelock.” (11, 56)

[mtmynd]

NS: Is your point that wisdom is an article possessed by majorities?

Never had the opportunity to meet the majority, so I'll pass on that question.

NS: It’s far far easier to prove the contrary case, imo. The general run of humanity rarely questions much of anything, and of the few whom occasionally do, few do it well.

The general run of hu'manity, eh? Unlike myself, you are quite familiar with that vast majority 'out there' I take it. Regarding whether they are questioners or thinkers you choose neither, and keep your own 'questionings and thinking' to a select few that you feel understand you... or at least measure up to your standard of a select few who do it well. Am I understanding this right?

NS: The freewiller is eager to be praised/blamed for his foolishness. To do otherwise would be too threatening to his ego, i.e. better to be thought a ‘fool’ than a ‘foolish puppet.’ (A not unreasonable position)

You got us freewillers figured out, don't you? Any threats to our ego can bring on a defensive posture and may include using words that determinists may find unsuitable.

You suggest you have much to lose and will go to any extreme to defend yourself, your ego, your philosophical choice(s), et al. I read this between the lines here. This surprises me, my friend, as I would certainly believe otherwise. It's apparent your own ego speaks for yourself as well as most, wouldn't you agree? Why else would you write: "The determinist, no less an egotist, yet determinably a far better thinker, sees his choices between being either a ‘foolish puppet,’ or a ‘wise puppet’; ergo, he must be a determinist."

Are all determinists simply egotists in intellectual disguise, who brashly announce that their belief reins over all others ('far better thinker'), equating themselves with the Absolute... (your last Surah quote)? That's a mighty large ego, amigo. Do you have room for it?

[Non Sum]

MT: Never had the opportunity to meet the majority, so I'll pass on that question.

NS: Too late to “pass,” my friend, since you’ve already stated the position you know to be held by “over 6 billion.”

Mt: The general run of hu'manity, eh? Unlike myself, you are quite familiar with that vast majority 'out there' I take it.

NS: Not “unlike yourself,” but just ‘like’ yourself. (see above (6 bil) quote.)

Yes, we are all fairly familiar with what the majority of humanity does, which reveals indirectly what they are thinking. Six thousand years running of recorded history, gives us all a good window on the “general run.” As mentioned earlier, I’ve been party to class discussions on this matter, and heard the reasoning behind the consistent majority’s opinions. Many forum discussions, private ones, and my readings of other’s experiences with this topic, can safely allow for both of our mutually agreeing generalization.

MT: You got us freewillers figured out, don't you?

NS: Sure. Much like yourself, they are not shy in presenting their position, and what they take as supporting arguments. In philosophical writings, there are several good cases made for ‘freewill,’ just as serious determinist thinkers, of all varieties, also present. But, like you rightly say, step away from the philosophers (on both sides), and you will find a vast sea of poor thinkers who are firmly fixed (unthinkingly) on ‘freewill.’

MT: Any threats to our ego can bring on a defensive posture and may include using words that determinists may find unsuitable.

NS: I did not say that. I said that “ALL of humanity is both foolish and egotistical.” Not just freewillers.

MT: It's apparent your own ego speaks for yourself as well as most, wouldn't you agree? Why else would you write: "The determinist, no less an egotist,

NS: Of course, I agree. I had said it to be so intentionally. Was I not clear and obvious on the matter? Yet, you act as though you’ve made some subtle discovery.

MT: Are all determinists simply egotists in intellectual disguise,

NS: They are more often thinkers. They are always humans, ergo egotists. ”All is vanity.” Why ‘often thinkers,’ you ask? Because, the common default position for us all is the instinctual sense of freewill. In order to take a position counter intuitional, which is a rarity, one must give the matter some serious consideration, which is even more of a rarity.

Yes (before you ask), I do know what does, and does not, happen frequently among humanity; being neither new to the planet, nor uninformed. That’s why I did not contest your 6bil + figure.

MT: who brashly announce that their belief reins over all others ('far better thinker')

NS: Not so. Among the rare serious thinkers, both sides are well represented, and no side’s argument is able to overwhelm the other’s. Didn’t we both admit to this fact early on?

MT: equating themselves with the Absolute... (your last Surah quote)? That's a mighty large ego, amigo.

“There is no living creature but He holds it by its forelock.” (11, 56)

NS: Sounds like you misread the last Quranic quote, amigo.

“He” stands for Allah. A “forelock” is the frontal lock of hair upon one’s head. So, the picture is: Allah having a firm grasp of one’s hair and pulling it in whatever direction He wishes, and the individual being literally dragged, sans any actual choice, in that direction.

All that is left for the poor dragged creature is to say, “I always choose my own direction,” ignoring Allah pulling presence; or, to admit that one is always dragged by Allah, whether one takes the right course, or the wrong. “All planning is Allah’s.” Which creature is the ‘egotist’ of these two: the one who claims credit for the choices of another, or the one who claims no credit for any choice, but rather credits the one who actually makes the calls?