Anybody else swallowed the hard-deterministpill...

>There is no proof for free will and there never has been.

My proof that you don't actually think that is in post .

I'm absolutely sure you don't actually believe in hard determinism and that exposing you to any scenario where the cessation of pain required you to appeal to the independent and free moral judgment of another would expose that easily.

social determinism is a thing, physical determinism isn't real because the universe is inherently non-deterministic.

>the fact that you would react in a predictable manner when given a certain stimulus based on pre-determined variables and circumstances is why hard determinism isn't a thing
I don't think you thought this through

Attached: 1555205173580.png (706x690, 31K)

There are different types of determinism and meanings of the world determinism. Quantum physics does not necessarily disprove determinism. It's kind of irrelevant anyway because even if some events at the small scale are fundamentally random, what more room does create for the concept of free will? None at all. All it would mean is that there is the possibility that some of your thoughts and behaviors are determined by randomness.

>>the fact that you would react in a predictable manner when given a certain stimulus based on pre-determined variables and circumstances is why hard determinism isn't a thing
>I don't think you thought this through

Nope, wrong.

The only reason to appeal to your attacker is because you fundamentally believe he can respond to an appeal. If hard determinism is true, he cannot respond to your appeal.

>NUH UH MAYBE MY APPEAL IS THE STIMULUS THAT WILL PRODUCE THE DETERMINISTIC RESPONSE THO!

If thinking of things to say and saying them can overcome the entire chain of circumstances since the Big Bang and change the outcome of your torture session, then the entire concept of determinism is meaningless and we all possess a functional free will that you're simply irrationally and childishly refusing to accept as free.

if the synthesis of results is random, how do you know that the sequence of results from observing quantum-level interactions wasn't pre-ordained or could have happened in a different way than it did? there is nothing to compare it to; time flows irreversibly in one direction and every effect fits perfectly into every preceding cause at higher levels.

it implies your life isn't some pre-ordained timeline which you could just scrub back and forth like a video if you knew all possible information. Might make some people feel better that there isn't some fixed, terrible event in their future, but rather they just appear randomly as time advances. All it offers is a slightly different perspective which some people might prefer over the alternative.

you guys just reminded me why i fell in love with this place

Attached: ¦3.png (33x33, 862)

What if someone broke into your house today and hooked you up to the PAIN MACHINE, which generates exponential levels of suffering, which will only end if you start being a faggot? Looks like you are one now because my hypothetical says so.

single particles sent one-by-one through diffraction apparatus result in detection patterns which can only be explained in terms of wave-like interference of the particle's probability function.

>The only reason to appeal to your attacker is because you fundamentally believe he can respond to an appeal
So why can't they? Because they decided beforehand that they wouldn't stop no matter how much you screamed or begged? Are they a mindless kill-drone? The possibility that it might work is enough to try, especially when in pain and mortal danger with little else to do. At that point it's the result of not knowing that the appeal won't work, not that you believe that it will always work because you have free will.

Attached: 1555277841813.png (948x535, 570K)

Our brains being deterministic does not in any way mean that it cannot respond to external stimuli, such as begging for mercy.

Pure conjecture. That we cannot observe the outcome of an event does not prove that it is truly random, only that out best available explanation reasons as such. Nor would it matter if it were random, as determinism and randomness are not mutually exclusive. You are conflating the literal term of determined with the philosophical concept of determinism, which are two different things.

Even if some events are random, per quantum physics, how does that change OP's point? We still wouldn't have free will.

I don't see how randomness could ever exist, aside from it being what we call something that we can't predict due to a lack of information. If something happens completely at random, without any sort of influence or a part of any chain of events, that would go against the concept of cause and effect. And even if true randomness exists, that still barely changes determinism, because instead of it being Input > Output, it's just Input > Dice Roll > One of multiple outputs. We still can't influence anything.

it means you have a (very, very, very remote) chance of getting a gf by a random quantum fluctuation which causes her to randomly materialise in your room. If this doesn't give some people hope I don't know what will.

Low IQ poster

>thinking of things to say and saying them
That only happens because you were predetermined to do so. And your attacker is predetermined to react in the way he does.

>Our brains being deterministic does not in any way mean that it cannot respond to external stimuli, such as begging for mercy.

The only way begging for mercy could ever possibly arise as a stimulus is in a context where active agents decide how to act by considering alternatives and choosing one. Which is "free will". Arguments to the contrary have INCREDIBLE bootstrapping problems.

>That only happens because you were predetermined to do so. And your attacker is predetermined to react in the way he does.

It's an absurdly overornate elaboration for the all-controlling deterministic processes of the universe to devise a system where random cogs in that system pretend to communicate and deliberate prior to performing their assigned role. This is one of the primary bootstrapping problems. You're asking me to believe that a deterministic process led to the development of a communication system that deceptively appears to rely on and imply decision-making on the part of the communication participants. Why would it do that? What would make that communication an effective stimulus, in the absence of a decision-making agent? Why would the very first agent to attempt to deploy that stimulus do so?

This thread is why philosophy is dead. Determinism and free will are not mutually exclusive, a five minute thought experiment can demonstrate otherwise.

>The only reason to appeal to your attacker is because you fundamentally believe he can respond to an appeal
Lol no it isn't. You're a fucking idiot lmfao people will cry in pain regardless of the consequences. You have such a low IQ I can tell

It's a stupid pill to swallow, debunked whenever you feel undecided about what you want to do

You're confusing decision making with the idea of some individual agency in your brain that means you are somehow not subject to the same physical laws as everything else. A computer can be programmed to make decisions; that doesn't give it free will. It's just taking an input and producing an output. And since every output in this universe is based on an input, every event has already been determined.

>Lol no it isn't. You're a fucking idiot lmfao people will cry in pain regardless of the consequences. You have such a low IQ I can tell

WHY will people cry in pain regardless of the consequences? What is the function of crying out?

>HURR DURR THAT'S JUST NATURAL

The REASONS you think it's natural are impossible to disentwine from a host of assumptions that only make sense if there is some ability to make decisions on the part of conscious organisms, even lower animals.

We don't "pretend" to think about decisions, we actually think about it, but that doesn't mean that it isn't deterministic. It just means that our brain's calculation that determines the output based on the input is complicated and takes some time. There is no bootstrapping problem here, the logic of this world doesn't change at all even if we say it is deterministic. In fact saying that free will is real is what causes the real problems here, such as explaining what mechanism and purpose such free will has.

>Determinism and free will are not mutually exclusive, a five minute thought experiment can demonstrate otherwise.
What thought experiment?

>What is the function of crying out?
To signal to other people around that you need help, which evolved because it was beneficial to the survival of our species.