Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Emma]

About to get on a plane, I don't think I'll ever get used to this.

[hops]

Furthermore, the multiverse doesn't actually guarantee that any possible universe exists - there still might be an underlying order, such as "gravity exists in all universes" or "entropy is always increasing", that cannot be violated. Magic, likewise, doesn't have to exist. (Magic of improbability might, such as "knowing what card you picked", but magic of impossibility (making things fly) probably doesn't.)

Plus it's not "all things possible exist", since then it's the ontological argument all over again. If we assume all things exist, then we can say that a thing exist which will make all things not exist. And to use the Cogito, I Think, Therefore I Am, thus I exist, which is a contradiction to the existence of the thing that would cause me to not exist.

[martinuzz]

About to get on a plane, I don't think I'll ever get used to this.

Don't worry, planes are completely safe. It's the humans flying them that are prone to error.

[Rolan7]

Furthermore, the multiverse doesn't actually guarantee that any possible universe exists - there still might be an underlying order, such as "gravity exists in all universes" or "entropy is always increasing", that cannot be violated. Magic, likewise, doesn't have to exist. (Magic of improbability might, such as "knowing what card you picked", but magic of impossibility (making things fly) probably doesn't.)

Plus it's not "all things possible exist", since then it's the ontological argument all over again. If we assume all things exist, then we can say that a thing exist which will make all things not exist. And to use the Cogito, I Think, Therefore I Am, thus I exist, which is a contradiction to the existence of the thing that would cause me to not exist.

Unless universes can't interact with one another (except to spawn more), in which case they're meaningless.  Except as an explanation for why things are so complicated here - the multiverse is actually a completely simple fractal, and we're down one path.  Everything zeroes out.

[TempAcc]

Plus nothing guarantees that said multiverse is actually infinite, although there are reasonable arguments in favor of that. Hell, we don't even know if OUR universe is finite or infinite, something something open space time curve vs. closed space time curve loop something.

If you want a decent reason to be terrified, think about consciousness and free will. Nobody actually knows the true nature of consciousness, and the current model of known physics isn't entirely friendly to free will. For all we know, determinism could be a thing and we'd have no real control over anything.

[Eric Blank]

So much snow. Why did I even bother to shovel the driveway yesterday. All the effort in the world cannot into snow.

Aaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhh

[ChairmanPoo]

TBH I don't think determinism and free will are antagonical. In fact, I don't think that they're even related problems.

[TempAcc]

If you take a view like Daniel Dennett's, then ye, you can get away with determinism and free will, and his argument is one of my favorites.

[scriver]

I'm a supporter of what I've jokingly dubbed post-determinism. I have the free will to make any available choice, but I can only choose one. Therefore, once chosen, the choice I made was the only one I could have made in the first place.

[TheBiggerFish]

I'm a supporter of what I've jokingly dubbed post-determinism. I have the free will to make any available choice, but I can only choose one. Therefore, once chosen, the choice I made was the only one I could have made in the first place.

That actually makes a surprising amount of sense.

[TempAcc]

Dan Dennett conciliates free will with determinism through avoidance, that is, things may be determined to happen, but a conscious being can avoid it by taking actions that remove the conditions that allow said determined thing to actually happen, or at least modify the way it happens. Thus determinism could a thing, but a malleable thing that can be reshaped or avoided by consciousness.

[TheBiggerFish]

Dan Dennett conciliates free will with determinism through avoidance, that is, things may be determined to happen, but a conscious being can avoid it by taking actions that remove the conditions that allow said determined thing to actually happen, or at least modify the way it happens. Thus determinism could a thing, but a malleable thing that can be reshaped or avoided by consciousness.

But then it's a 'turtles all the way down' sort of thing.

[ChairmanPoo]

I'm a supporter of what I've jokingly dubbed post-determinism. I have the free will to make any available choice, but I can only choose one. Therefore, once chosen, the choice I made was the only one I could have made in the first place.

This is kind of what I think. I think free will is about making a conscious choice. It does not imply that other choices would have been made.

[IcyTea31]

About to get on a plane, I don't think I'll ever get used to this.

Don't worry, planes are completely safe. It's the humans flying them that are prone to error.

Actually, those humans mostly kick back and relax while the autopilot does the magic. And even if something goes wrong, those pilots are much better trained than, say, the average Sunday driver on a terrestrial road. You're much more likely to die in a car accident than a plane crash.

Dan Dennett conciliates free will with determinism through avoidance, that is, things may be determined to happen, but a conscious being can avoid it by taking actions that remove the conditions that allow said determined thing to actually happen, or at least modify the way it happens. Thus determinism could a thing, but a malleable thing that can be reshaped or avoided by consciousness.

I think that falls into the problem of consciousness (still) being undefined. Is that famous hurricane-causing butterfly conscious? If not, then what is? If yes, then what isn't?

[Dozebôm Lolumzalìs]

About to get on a plane, I don't think I'll ever get used to this.

Don't worry, planes are completely safe. It's the humans flying them that are prone to error.

Actually, those humans mostly kick back and relax while the autopilot does the magic. And even if something goes wrong, those pilots are much better trained than, say, the average Sunday driver on a terrestrial road. You're much more likely to die in a car accident than a plane crash.

Is that adjusted for how many people drive/fly?