Report, edit, etc...Posted by Parthx86 on 2005-07-07 at 02:14:00
Your theory is absolutely correct. Why do you care about the beginning of everything? It was started as it was supposed to, and its still going is it not? Why worry about how we were created when we can spend time discovering how we will end.
The funny thing is, that it occurs to everything, not just humans, not just living things.
The funny thing is, that it occurs to everything, not just humans, not just living things.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by rusell1993 on 2005-07-07 at 03:36:59
nothing happens without a reason, but randomness exists. if it didnt, then all we are is puppets to some higher being (sry if it sounds religious)
Report, edit, etc...Posted by CheeZe on 2005-07-07 at 10:44:17
Can you prove randomness exists? This is a harder to answer than you think, so take your time.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by EzDay281 on 2005-07-07 at 14:13:21
QUOTE
nothing happens without a reason, but randomness exists. if it didnt, then all we are is puppets to some higher being (sry if it sounds religious)
Well, that... or we could be on a pre-determined path as Cheeze's theory suggests...
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Loser_Musician on 2005-07-07 at 14:24:39
QUOTE(ihatett @ Jul 6 2005, 09:26 PM)
If you are asserting that all actions have a direct cause, then the fact that nothing could have ever started contradicts and invalidates your theory.
ADDITION:
It would show that your theory is not true, I don't see what your problem with it is.
[right][snapback]255293[/snapback][/right]
ADDITION:
It would show that your theory is not true, I don't see what your problem with it is.
[right][snapback]255293[/snapback][/right]
It seems more like the programmer that said that, directed it towards whatever created us all. That we can or can not come from nothing. That's a DIFFERENT thread.
THIS thread is just noticing how if and then work. Like, IF you didn't drink water for 2 days, THEN you are thirsty. This is the baby basics of logic. It's undeniable. I'm more than positive the programmer had the right sense of mind not to say that it's wrong.
EDIT - Forgot the word not in the sentence.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Staredit.Net Essence on 2005-07-07 at 22:39:43
You can't say, "That doesn't prove anything... we just don't understand it." Using that dubious logic, nothing can ever be disproven.
The fact is: if under your theory nothing could have possibly begun, it isn't true. No misunderstanding about it. Once you can explain the possibillity that your theory covers this, please do so.
The fact is: if under your theory nothing could have possibly begun, it isn't true. No misunderstanding about it. Once you can explain the possibillity that your theory covers this, please do so.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by MapUnprotector on 2005-07-07 at 22:59:57
I don't really think the theory would work out unless you could come up with a way to determine how each and every individual would react. You would need knowledge of not just their current state and every atom that makes them up, but also previous events that have happened that might affect their individuality.
Unless you can find a way to get all the conditions that would tell you the outcome of what an individual who can think will give then it would be hard to determine what they would do.
Unless you can find a way to get all the conditions that would tell you the outcome of what an individual who can think will give then it would be hard to determine what they would do.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by CheeZe on 2005-07-07 at 23:55:27
QUOTE(ihatett @ Jul 7 2005, 09:39 PM)
You can't say, "That doesn't prove anything... we just don't understand it." Using that dubious logic, nothing can ever be disproven.
The fact is: if under your theory nothing could have possibly begun, it isn't true. No misunderstanding about it. Once you can explain the possibillity that your theory covers this, please do so.
[right][snapback]256386[/snapback][/right]
The fact is: if under your theory nothing could have possibly begun, it isn't true. No misunderstanding about it. Once you can explain the possibillity that your theory covers this, please do so.
[right][snapback]256386[/snapback][/right]
You still cling to your beliefs. I ask you now, how does it invalidate my arguement from this moment?
Report, edit, etc...Posted by MapUnprotector on 2005-07-08 at 00:05:37
CheeZe about the "current conditions" does that disregard past experiences that could affect future outcomes?
Like say I hurt myself riding a bike, yet at this moment in this current condition I am feeling particularly brave and now I am debating whether to ride a bike or not because the bike is there. I think the past experience of hurting myself while riding my bike would affect my thinking process when deciding whether I should ride again, but that's not included in the current condition, is it? Crappy example eh?
Like say I hurt myself riding a bike, yet at this moment in this current condition I am feeling particularly brave and now I am debating whether to ride a bike or not because the bike is there. I think the past experience of hurting myself while riding my bike would affect my thinking process when deciding whether I should ride again, but that's not included in the current condition, is it? Crappy example eh?
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Staredit.Net Essence on 2005-07-08 at 00:13:53
You are religiously supporting this thing!
You are saying that for something to happen, it must have a direct cause. If we take what you are saying to be true, nothing could have ever begun. How do you not understand this? I don't care if it appears to be true from here on out (you don't have any proof of this; you are simply saying it), the fact that it isn't always true proves that it's wrong. All it takes is one case where a theory is proved false for it to be invalidated.
If something as giant as the existance starting happened without a cause, what makes you so sure that every day things that the human consciousness does can't be the same way?
You are saying that for something to happen, it must have a direct cause. If we take what you are saying to be true, nothing could have ever begun. How do you not understand this? I don't care if it appears to be true from here on out (you don't have any proof of this; you are simply saying it), the fact that it isn't always true proves that it's wrong. All it takes is one case where a theory is proved false for it to be invalidated.
If something as giant as the existance starting happened without a cause, what makes you so sure that every day things that the human consciousness does can't be the same way?
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Parthx86 on 2005-07-08 at 00:14:22
QUOTE(rusell1993 @ Jul 7 2005, 12:36 AM)
nothing happens without a reason, but randomness exists. if it didnt, then all we are is puppets to some higher being (sry if it sounds religious)
[right][snapback]255636[/snapback][/right]
[right][snapback]255636[/snapback][/right]
How can we be slaves to a higher being? I'd say we're slaves to the conditions of the specific moment you speak of. When you're thirsty your organs tell your brain to drink, not some higher being. We dont have voices in our head telling us what do to. Well, maybe you do
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Staredit.Net Essence on 2005-07-08 at 00:15:09
To add to that, since something did start existance without a cause, what do you call that?
Report, edit, etc...Posted by MapUnprotector on 2005-07-08 at 00:16:55
QUOTE(ihatett @ Jul 8 2005, 12:13 AM)
You are religiously supporting this thing!
You are saying that for something to happen, it must have a direct cause. If we take what you are saying to be true, nothing could have ever begun. How do you not understand this? I don't care if it appears to be true from here on out (you don't have any proof of this; you are simply saying it), the fact that it isn't always true proves that it's wrong. All it takes is one case where a theory is proved false for it to be invalidated.
If something as giant as the existance starting happened without a cause, what makes you so sure that every day things that the human consciousness does can't be the same way?
[right][snapback]256516[/snapback][/right]
You are saying that for something to happen, it must have a direct cause. If we take what you are saying to be true, nothing could have ever begun. How do you not understand this? I don't care if it appears to be true from here on out (you don't have any proof of this; you are simply saying it), the fact that it isn't always true proves that it's wrong. All it takes is one case where a theory is proved false for it to be invalidated.
If something as giant as the existance starting happened without a cause, what makes you so sure that every day things that the human consciousness does can't be the same way?
[right][snapback]256516[/snapback][/right]
That's what I'm questioning, for CheeZe's theory to be true you have to be able to find a cause for everything, and be able to take every condition to predict the outcome.
I guess you can't really prove this true or false until you can say you either can or can't create some kind of "equation" to determine how something will behave based on previous experiences, like something as complicated as human thought.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Parthx86 on 2005-07-08 at 00:30:45
Well, when working with triggers, if you see all the conditions, you'll know what the trigger is incase you forget. Isn't that how psychics work? They'll ask you some questions like "Are you searching for true love" and you'll say yes, then they say "Oooh well I can sense it in your future"....isn't that obvious?
Report, edit, etc...Posted by CheeZe on 2005-07-08 at 01:05:42
Let's say that's true. Let's say the beginning is something that this theory cannot deal with. But how does it make it wrong through current conditions? This has been my question through the whole thing. I understood your nonsense from the beginning; however, you have repeatly mistaken that I haven't and continued with your sad ideas instead of opening your mind to my beliefs.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Staredit.Net Essence on 2005-07-08 at 01:32:36
Okay, so if I don't believe you, I'm closed minded, but if you don't believe me, you are open minded. Liberal's logic.
I don't want to believe you theory any more than I want to believe there is an invisible dragon sitting next to me, because there is no reason to support it. But, even worse than that, there is reason against it! If free will existed at one point, what makes you think it still doesn't exist?
Stop being an arrogant liberal prick, and get some sense in your head.
I don't want to believe you theory any more than I want to believe there is an invisible dragon sitting next to me, because there is no reason to support it. But, even worse than that, there is reason against it! If free will existed at one point, what makes you think it still doesn't exist?
Stop being an arrogant liberal prick, and get some sense in your head.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by MillenniumArmy on 2005-07-08 at 01:34:26
Hmmm, I sense some turbulence building up here
*MiLlEnNiUmArMy grabs some popcorn for the show.
*MiLlEnNiUmArMy grabs some popcorn for the show.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Parthx86 on 2005-07-08 at 01:46:10
QUOTE
If free will existed at one point, what makes you think it still doesn't exist?
He's trying to state that free will doesn't exist, it never did, that everything is planned out, unless you're once again going back how the world started
addition: man Im hungry for some popcorn right now, guess Ill go get some
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Staredit.Net Essence on 2005-07-08 at 02:00:45
QUOTE(Parthx86 @ Jul 8 2005, 12:46 AM)
He's trying to state that free will doesn't exist, it never did, that everything is planned out, unless you're once again going back how the world started
addition: man Im hungry for some popcorn right now, guess Ill go get some
[right][snapback]256694[/snapback][/right]
addition: man Im hungry for some popcorn right now, guess Ill go get some
[right][snapback]256694[/snapback][/right]
Yes, I am talking about how the world began. Who cares if I bring that up? Why are you so quick to ignore it? I'd like to see his response to my previous post.
SHIT, I have work tommorow, I really have to go to bed.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Parthx86 on 2005-07-08 at 02:06:33
He didn't say you were wrong, he asked to comprehend his theory ignoring the fact that their must be someway things were created, which is what I'm doing.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by EzDay281 on 2005-07-08 at 14:14:27
QUOTE
I don't want to believe you theory any more than I want to believe there is an invisible dragon sitting next to me, because there is no reason to support it. But, even worse than that, there is reason against it! If free will existed at one point, what makes you think it still doesn't exist?
Yes there is. Logic.
The universe doesn't necesarily have a beginning. What came before the universe?
The beginning of the universe, such that it would fit with CheeZe's theory, would be another theory.
So, how about you come up with a theory as to how free will works? How such a thing that can break the laws of physics and such can exist?
Because otherwise, it would be controlled by them. To not be controlled by a "universal" "law" would be to break it.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by ShadowBrood on 2005-07-08 at 14:18:42
Yeah, life is like a large C program. If, Then. <Inservt variable that alters this here>
Rinse wash and repeat.
Rinse wash and repeat.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by MapUnprotector on 2005-07-08 at 15:51:56
I think the problem is that you need to know how the universe started and everything before the current conditions you are talking about. They can possibly affect what is happening now.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by The_Shattered_moose on 2005-07-08 at 23:09:35
Cheeze, quantom physics allows for true randomization, seeing as we are composed of atoms which have quantom particles within them, therefor randomization is a part of us.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by CheeZe on 2005-07-09 at 00:57:13
I said it before, I don't understand why that's random..
Perhaps you can explain?
Perhaps you can explain?