BombermanBoard

chris_h · #76 Posted: Mon Mar 30, 2009 1:16 am

Quote:

You must be absolutely insane if you believe that. How we turn out has little to do with genetics. I am nothing like my parents, nor my grandparents, and if I delved further back I'm sure I'd run into more differences. I am slightly more like my brother, but he doesn't seem to share quite the same beliefs that I do. Also, no one and nothing absolutely forces you to make a decision, whether on what to do or what to believe. Choices are provided, and you must choose. And you have the free will to choose. People are not as clear cut and dry as you suppose them to be.

I did not say only genetics. I said genetics plus environment. Say you create a robot with artificial intelligence and then let him go to discover things and make decisions based on his initial programing. This is equivalent to a newborn. Yet every decision made is ultimately a product of the initial conditions and programming. As a baby, you had no will in your environment or in your genetics. And then the combination of your genetics and the environment shape you into the person you become. The decisions you make today are based on your current thoughts and environment, which are based on your early thoughts and environment, which based on your earlier thoughts and environment... all the way back to your first thought and environment: of which you had not control.

Quote:

It is most certainly correct,

Show me a quote by any famous physicist claiming to have figured everything out with 100% certainty. The strongest claims I ever see are something along the lines of "this is the best model we have at the time."

Quote:

But based on your views you are likely not guilty of wishing for a woman to love you for who you are and not for the simple fact that you are a male human being.

Agreed. If she loves me for being a male human being, then she does love who I am. I am a specific male human being.

Quote:

Yet you still ignore me when I bring up points that you apparantly can't attempt to counter, let alone admit that they make sense. And you were rather rude when you said that I am distracted by the unimportant, while the point I made about the man and the tree was rather important if you stopped to think about it, and other points that you skipped over were also important. I don't think you really know what -is- important.

Forgive any rudeness, it was not the intention, and you claim to care about intentions.

As for the tree, the complication was unimportant because it was never intended to be a literal issue. We are not arguing about what to do when we encounter a tree. It was a metaphor. It was not about going around the tree, but rather about rejecting the futile options. Adding additional valid options makes the futile options no less futile. My attempt was to keep it simple by creating a situation with only one reasonable continuation. Maybe he did not have an axe or saw? Who cares, that was not the point. Again, the point was that it is foolish to choose one of the futile options when a practical one exists. Perhaps rather than objecting to my metaphor you intended to expand my metaphor in some other direction, but if so I misinterpreted you.

Your objections make sense, they simply are usually of minimal relevance to the point which I am trying to make. I do not even remember why we are talking about know it all physicists anymore. All I remember is that has something indirectly related to love.I do not think we are getting anywhere. Perhaps we should agree to disagree.