Warning: This is not a joke - serious question

Timf1234
Posts: 186
Joined: 2007-07-30
User is offlineOffline
Warning: This is not a joke - serious question

No offence to anyone. - This is a serious question. You will see.

Please answer the following question and give your reasoning behind your answer. You have 50% chance to give the right answer anyway. Therefore, correct answer doesn't mean much until you give very solid correct reasoning behind your answer.

If you are 100% sure about your answer and reasoning then please do not post your answer.  Just write your answer and the reasoning down on a piece of paper.  I do not want everyone to get hints from your reasoning.

 

==================================================

Richard was born in Boston, Massachusetts in a Catholic family. He was a church going person until his early 20s. He then read Bertrand Russell’s writings and became an atheist. He believed man is responsible for his action. He believed in freedom and free will. Then, on one hand he became very vocal against theist’s faith but on the other hand he still believed in Free Will. That was 20 years ago. Now he has finished his college education, got married and have children. Now he is in 40s and has read many, many books on religion, science, philosophy and history. Which of the following is more probable?

 

a)      Richard is still an atheist

b)      Richard is still an atheist but no longer believes in free will


ParanoidAgnostic
ParanoidAgnostic's picture
Posts: 402
Joined: 2007-05-20
User is offlineOffline
Timf1234 wrote:Which of

Timf1234 wrote:

Which of the following is more probable?

 

a)      Richard is still an atheist

b)      Richard is still an atheist but no longer believes in free will

a is atleast as probable as b and there's a strong case for a being more likely.

If b is true then a must be true, If you are an atheist wo does not believe in free will you are an atheist.

I will assume that your question is not so trivial and refine it to

a)      Richard is still an atheist and still believes in free will

b)      Richard is still an atheist but no longer believes in free will

there are other possibilities so P(a)+P(b) is not neccesarily 1 but I suppose that's not important. I would say he is slightly more likely to still believe in free will because people tend to keep their beliefs and the lack of free will is a tricky idea to get your head around as it directly contradicts our personal experience.

Oh, a lesson in not changing history from Mr. I'm-My-Own-Grandpa!


MrRage
Posts: 896
Joined: 2006-12-22
User is offlineOffline
My answer, which is "b", was

My answer, which is "b", was determined by a coin flip.


vexed
vexed's picture
Posts: 104
Joined: 2007-06-03
User is offlineOffline
MrRage wrote: My answer,

MrRage wrote:
My answer, which is "b", was determined by a coin flip.
LOL


Merakon
Merakon's picture
Posts: 25
Joined: 2007-06-14
User is offlineOffline
free will

If he has read many books on science and philosophy, I would have to say b. is more probably


MattShizzle
Posts: 7966
Joined: 2006-03-31
User is offlineOffline
Basic logic shows a is more

Basic logic shows a is more likely - if be is true, it's impossible for A to be false - it's easily possible to be an atheist and still believe in free will. Shame on anyone who answered b!

Matt Shizzle has been banned from the Rational Response Squad website. This event shall provide an atmosphere more conducive to social growth. - Majority of the mod team


BGH
BGH's picture
Posts: 2772
Joined: 2006-09-28
User is offlineOffline
Timf1234 wrote: Please

Timf1234 wrote:


Please answer the following question and give your reasoning behind your answer. You have 50% chance to give the right answer anyway. Therefore, correct answer doesn't mean much until you give very solid correct reasoning behind your answer.



Okay... I would like to ask a question. Why should anyone answer if you are going to tell us the 'right' conclusion?

You give a half-story about someone,  then tell us to reason an answer. You then inform us you will tell us what the 'correct' answer is and I am sure you will comment on how  'brain wash' and stupid we are. What little information you gave is not enough to properly reason anything about Richard's conclusion.

You seem intent on this argument of 'no free will' when what you are failing to put into perspective is MOST people live their life as if they have free will. You can argue on the quantum level there really is not such thing as free will but humans live their life in the MACRO world and you are arguing about the micro world. I am sure you will respond with a condescending comment about only 50% or less of humans are smart enough to get the right answer (according to YOUR logic), but I fail to see how the little scenario you presented gives enough information to deduct anything regarding Richard's stance on free will.


Vessel
Vessel's picture
Posts: 646
Joined: 2006-03-31
User is offlineOffline
Timf1234 wrote:No offence

 

This isn't a joke? Really?

Did you ever stop to consider that if there is actually no freewill then there is no use in you trying to persuade people there is no freewill? Its not like they are going to change their minds.

You have a 5% chance of giving the right answer. (There are only two possible answers, yes or no, but I have adjusted the percentages to account for, well, let's just say 5% is being generous.)    

“Philosophers have argued for centuries about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin, but materialists have always known it depends on whether they are jitterbugging or dancing cheek to cheek" -- Tom Robbins


Vessel
Vessel's picture
Posts: 646
Joined: 2006-03-31
User is offlineOffline
Vessel wrote: This isn't a

Vessel wrote:

This isn't a joke? Really?

Did you ever stop to consider that if there is actually no freewill then there is no use in you trying to persuade people there is no freewill? Its not like they are going to change their minds.

You have a 5% chance of giving the right answer. (There are only two possible answers, yes or no, but I have adjusted the percentages to account for, well, let's just say 5% is being generous.)    

I'll give you the answer. The answer is no, you didn't. If there is no freewill you have no choice but to be here telling people you think there is no freewill. Of course, the people you are telling this to who believe in freewill would have no choice but to believe in freewill. And even if they are not thinking it through or not smart enough as you claim, well, they really wouldn't have a choice in that would they? As a matter of fact, we would really have no choice but to live as if there is freewill whether there is freewill or not if the circumstances dictate that we will live as if there is freewill. If the circumstances dictate that we will live as if there is not freewill, then we will, or won't, I don't know I'm getting confused now.

So to sum up, what difference could it possibly make?

“Philosophers have argued for centuries about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin, but materialists have always known it depends on whether they are jitterbugging or dancing cheek to cheek" -- Tom Robbins


Hambydammit
High Level DonorModeratorRRS Core Member
Hambydammit's picture
Posts: 8657
Joined: 2006-10-22
User is offlineOffline
What is it with the leading

What is it with the leading questions?

And once again, what does it matter?

I still have yet to see a demonstration of how belief in free will affects atheism in any way. I don't see why they're necessarily connected.

I also don't see how belief or disbelief in a poorly defined concept can be used as a yardstick to determine anything about a person's reasoning faculties.

I also don't know why Tim is avoiding the post directed at him by Nero. Tim, if you haven't read it yet, I just bumped it to the top. It's RRS Jihadist

Please respond in a timely manner. Thanks.

 

Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin

http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism


Timf1234
Posts: 186
Joined: 2007-07-30
User is offlineOffline
MattShizzle wrote:Basic

MattShizzle wrote:
Basic logic shows a is more likely - if be is true, it's impossible for A to be false - it's easily possible to be an atheist and still believe in free will. Shame on anyone who answered b!

 MattShizzle

Congratulation.

Your answer and more importantly your explanation behind your answer is correct.

Yes. Probability of a is bigger or at least equal to that of b.

Therefore, one must pick a) This problem has nothing to do with theist, atheist or free will.

This question has to do with being able to process English language, logic and not getting side tracked with irrelevant information.

In universities they teach you how to solve math and physics problems where they give you only the things you need-nothing more, nothing less. In real world truth and lies come mixed together. You watch CNN, read WSJ or a book, you will find lies, distraction, and the truth. The ability to extract the relevant and useful information and through away the rest and then process them holistically is what I advocate. In this question word “but” worked just like logical AND.

Which of the following is more probable?

1) A

2) A and B

Obviously correct answer is 1)

 

Some atheists (not all) are not only brain washed but just plain dumb. This category of atheists can’t even process information from what they read as a result they labeled me “theist”. When that failed they have started to label me “Jihadist”. So stupid.

 


JCE
Bronze Member
JCE's picture
Posts: 1219
Joined: 2007-03-20
User is offlineOffline
Timf1234 wrote: Some

Timf1234 wrote:

Some atheists (not all) are not only brain washed but just plain dumb. This category of atheists can’t even process information from what they read as a result they labeled me “theist”. When that failed they have started to label me “Jihadist”. So stupid.

One - If you make and edit to your own post, please make a note of the edit by typing {Edit for...}.  For example, you edited this post by putting the final paragraph in bold, therefore, you would type {Edit for clarity} at the end.  This helps other members understand what change was made from the original post.

 Two - There is no need to put insulting comments in bold.  No one here has labeled you a 'jihadist'.  Inconsistencies in your posts raised several questions and a thread has been started to give you an opportunity to share your views and defend your beliefs/non-beliefs.  It would be very nice to hear your story.

 


MrRage
Posts: 896
Joined: 2006-12-22
User is offlineOffline
Timf1234 wrote: MattShizzle

Timf1234 wrote:
MattShizzle Congratulation. Your answer and more importantly your explanation behind your answer is correct.

Actually, ParanoidAgnostic answered this way first. But I guess that doesn't mean you problems with processing language.

Timf1234 wrote:
This question has to do with being able to process English language, logic and not getting side tracked with irrelevant information.

The question was also ambiguous. Why are you calling us brain washed and dumb because someone interpreted the language differently? Able to process English indeed.


Timf1234
Posts: 186
Joined: 2007-07-30
User is offlineOffline
MrRage wrote:Timf1234

 

Timf1234 wrote:

MattShizzle wrote:
Basic logic shows a is more likely - if be is true, it's impossible for A to be false - it's easily possible to be an atheist and still believe in free will. Shame on anyone who answered b!

MrRage wrote:
Timf1234 wrote:
MattShizzle Congratulation. Your answer and more importantly your explanation behind your answer is correct.
Actually, ParanoidAgnostic answered this way first. But I guess that doesn't mean you problems with processing language.
Timf1234 wrote:
This question has to do with being able to process English language, logic and not getting side tracked with irrelevant information.
The question was also ambiguous. Why are you calling us brain washed and dumb because someone interpreted the language differently? Able to process English indeed.

Mr. Rage:

Yes, I saw, ParanoidAgnostic's answer too. But MattShizzle's reasoning was clearer. He did not get double minded. He did not stumble. He was sure. He got the insight. He even said shame on anyone who answers (b). That kind of clear understanding I seek for.

ParanoidAgnostic (PA) attempted to rewrite the question. But he is good too. I have seen his understanding on other posts. PA is very good.

Would you please point out where the question is ambiguous?

Are you now trying to cover it up now? I can't let you do that.

Among all the ambiguity you can point out the most powerful logic that supersedes and trivialize everything else is the use of word "but" in (b)

You still did not get it. Otherwise, you wouldn't have said, question was ambiguous. Where is the ambiguity? Show me.

By the way, all real world problems are not as clear cut as we have been trained in universities. In the real world deceptions, lies and truth comes mixed together. Far more skill is required to sort out politics, emotions, logic, faith than solving differential equation. In other words, translating poor English language to superior mathematical (logical) language requires thought processing(logical meaning) not only word processing (dictionary meaning).

For most people, the bottle neck is not the lack of command on any language but the lack of thought processing skill. Chew on that.

 

Why don't you flip your coin again and form an opinion, MrRage?

Man, man, man, You don't even have a good coin. Your coin flipp told you the answer is b.


MrRage
Posts: 896
Joined: 2006-12-22
User is offlineOffline
Timf1234 wrote: Would you

Timf1234 wrote:
Would you please point out where the question is ambiguous?

Let P = "Richard is an atheist", and R = "Richard believes in free will."

We can boil your two choices down to

A = P
B = P and ~R

("~" means "not".)

When you formally state the choices this way you leave out the ambiguity, because A is logically equivalent to "P and (R and ~R)", which is what you meant. But, since you gave the choices in a non-formal way, and some people could interpret the choices as a either/or dichotomy, they could think that A meant "P and R", which is not what you intended.

Timf1234 wrote:
But MattShizzle's reasoning was clearer. He did not get double minded. He did not stumble. He was sure.

Don't mean to say anything bad about MattShizzle, but you gave at trivial problem. There's nothing wrong with what changing the problem a little to try to make sense of what you're trying to do.

Timf1234 wrote:
Are you now trying to cover it up now? I can't let you do that.

What the fuck are you talking about?! What am I trying to cover up?

Where do you get off? You scold us with a patronizing tone when people don't catch on to your little "trick" question. You don't realize that my first post was a joke?

Timf1234 wrote:
By the way, all real world problems are not as clear cut as we have been trained in universities. In the real world deceptions, lies and truth comes mixed together. Far more skill is required to sort out politics, emotions, logic, faith than solving differential equation. In other words, translating poor English language to superior mathematical (logical) language requires thought processing(logical meaning) not only word processing (dictionary meaning).

No shit, Sherlock. I'm glad you're here to tell this to us. Your my own personal Jesus Christ!

You remind me of this bus driver I talked to one day. He asked me what I was studying in college, and I said math. Then he asked me, "Whats 25 x 25?" I don't do arithmetic in my head really well, so it took me about 10 seconds to come up with the answer. When he do he starts telling me that teenagers in China would've told the answer strait way, and that a college education was a waste of time (yes, coming from a bus driver). I thought, "Sigh, another noob who thinks math majors sit around all day doing arithmetic."

What's the point of this story...not memorizing 25 x 25 has really nothing to do with being a math major. Likewise, your question doesn't really prove anything about me.


Timf1234
Posts: 186
Joined: 2007-07-30
User is offlineOffline
MrRage wrote: Timf1234

MrRage wrote:
Timf1234 wrote:
Would you please point out where the question is ambiguous?
Let P = "Richard is an atheist", and R = "Richard believes in free will." We can boil your two choices down to A = P B = P and ~R ("~" means "not".) When you formally state the choices this way you leave out the ambiguity, because A is logically equivalent to "P and (R and ~R)", which is what you meant. But, since you gave the choices in a non-formal way, and some people could interpret the choices as a either/or dichotomy, they could think that A meant "P and R", which is not what you intended.
Timf1234 wrote:
But MattShizzle's reasoning was clearer. He did not get double minded. He did not stumble. He was sure.
Don't mean to say anything bad about MattShizzle, but you gave at trivial problem. There's nothing wrong with what changing the problem a little to try to make sense of what you're trying to do.
Timf1234 wrote:
Are you now trying to cover it up now? I can't let you do that.
What the fuck are you talking about?! What am I trying to cover up? Where do you get off? You scold us with a patronizing tone when people don't catch on to your little "trick" question. You don't realize that my first post was a joke?
Timf1234 wrote:
By the way, all real world problems are not as clear cut as we have been trained in universities. In the real world deceptions, lies and truth comes mixed together. Far more skill is required to sort out politics, emotions, logic, faith than solving differential equation. In other words, translating poor English language to superior mathematical (logical) language requires thought processing(logical meaning) not only word processing (dictionary meaning).
No shit, Sherlock. I'm glad you're here to tell this to us. Your my own personal Jesus Christ! You remind me of this bus driver I talked to one day. He asked me what I was studying in college, and I said math. Then he asked me, "Whats 25 x 25?" I don't do arithmetic in my head really well, so it took me about 10 seconds to come up with the answer. When he do he starts telling me that teenagers in China would've told the answer strait way, and that a college education was a waste of time (yes, coming from a bus driver). I thought, "Sigh, another noob who thinks math majors sit around all day doing arithmetic." What's the point of this story...not memorizing 25 x 25 has really nothing to do with being a math major. Likewise, your question doesn't really prove anything about me.

Mr. Rage,

Why are you giving me the opportunity of making fun of your?

All you had to say, "yes, it was a mistake". It would have been the end of the story. We could have moved to the next topic. You did not. You are then trying to cover up your blunder. Justifying your wrong answer. I do not get stuck with people's slip of tounge or for slight error. I do not like when people try to cover it up with wrong reasons. That's when I get pissed.

I already have translated the question to mathematical formula. Scroll up and take a look for yourself. Here it is again.

Which of the following is more probable?

1) A

2) A AND B 

There is nothing more to it. Get that?

There is no ambiguity in the question. Are you going to accept that or not?

The topics I have been posting such as:

1. Justice vs. Compassion

2. Is there a Free Will

3. Co-relationship with Smartness and Wealth

4. Selfishness vs. Altruism

5. Brain Wash versus Understood

are real world's very complex issues. These problems don’t come in mathematical language. Therefore, to check one's ability to understand and process complex thoughts, a problem that is already translated to mathematical language wouldn't be appropriate.

The bottleneck is not one's ability to do pure mathematical problem or not having good command of English ( or any) language but the inability to translate from word problem to more accurate math problem. Making matter even worse is the most people reliance of dictiionary definition instead of logical definition.

Our universities do not even offer courses on these topic. The ability to sort out relevant information from irrelevant is another key. Even people who have excellent command of English language measurably fail in this aspect. Therefore, the problem must be described the way it is described. I have various version of it. If I am talking to a Christian then I will change the question to bring in Jesus. If I am talking to Liberals then I will bring in issues of abortion etc. that would have no impact on the answer or the reasoning.

One of the objectives of the test is to see can you keep your emotion and logic separate. Another objective if one understand the logical meaning of words. 

Any question?

Now, about your anecdotal, 25 x 25 question from a bus driver.

Memorization (data storage in mind) and processing (networked) connection are two different aspect of human mind. Both are important and necessary.

A brain with lot of data and no connectivity is useless. Corollary: A brain with a lot of connectivity without data is useless. We need both.

Plus we need speed. Speed is because the short term memory span is very short. If it take too long to come to an intermediate conclusion then by the time this intermediate conclusion arrives to the short term memory the original question’s attributes slips away from one’s conscious mind. Hence memorization is important too. Lack of memorization (data, knowledge) can also have detrimental effect on processing. Yes, I have memorized a lot of stuff too. I wish I could have more. I agree, that networking is less prevalent. Memorizing and processing both are interdependent.  


silentseba
silentseba's picture
Posts: 131
Joined: 2007-07-19
User is offlineOffline
Why do you feel the need to

Why do you feel the need to change the color of your posts? You think you opinions should stand out over the rest of the community?

This question was formulated the same way you have made the other questions in previous posts. And you answer was the same one: You are dumb for picking the wrong answer. You keep trying to trick people into thinking you are actually making questions about the actual topic, when in reality all you are doing is presenting two ambiguous answers and calling people dumb when they call out the less probable.

 


ParanoidAgnostic
ParanoidAgnostic's picture
Posts: 402
Joined: 2007-05-20
User is offlineOffline
Tim If you had stated the

Tim

 If you had stated the mathematical definition of your problem initially then you would be right but you posted it in english and any english speaker knows that unless you are very careful about the words you use and how you use them it is easy to create an ambiguous statement. Maybe other languages are more logical but english is inherently ambiguous, especailly when written rather than spoken. Most of the cues that allow us to recognise which meaning is the intended one are in the use of the voice, slight pauses and changes in pitch, sometimes even emphasising certain words with volume.

My initial answer to your question was an answer to a literal interpretation of the question, trying to translate it as exactly as possible into a non-ambiguous mathematical question. However when this is done the question is trivial, anyone with a basic understanding of set theory (even if they don't know it's called set theory) can instantly recognse the answer is obvious.

Due to this triviality I went looking for other interpretations as there is little point to asking a completely trivial question. I believe that this is the thinking (even if it was largely subconsious) of everone who 'failed' this test of yours. There saw that trivial interpretation but ignored it due to it's triviality and answered the non-trivial interpretation.

For the non-trivial, there are indications in your question that the first option implies that the person still belives in free will. Mostly it is the implication in the question style that presents the options as exclusive. As both options state that the person is still an atheist the only option within the framework of the question is that the person still believes in free will.

If someone interprets your words incorrectly then maybe you should look at you ability to convey your intended meaning unambiguously rather than insulting thier inteligence... but then the whole point of you little trick was the ambiguity wasn't it. You present an ambiguous statement and insult those who choose the wrong interpretation.

As for the real world... we have more than just a poorly communicated question to base decisions on in real world problems. We can ask questions, look at evidence and understand the situation without the ambiguity.

So really all you've done is show your arrogance. If you really are here to learn then stop assuming you're the smartest guy in the room.

Oh, a lesson in not changing history from Mr. I'm-My-Own-Grandpa!


Timf1234
Posts: 186
Joined: 2007-07-30
User is offlineOffline
About the ambiguity/non

About the ambiguity/non ambiguity of the question.

Actually, i did not make this question myself.  This question is made by a group of psychologist and logician. i think, at MIT and published in the book, called "The Mind" by Richard M. Restak, M.D., 1988, page 236.


Timf1234
Posts: 186
Joined: 2007-07-30
User is offlineOffline
silentseba wrote: Why do

silentseba wrote:

Why do you feel the need to change the color of your posts? You think you opinions should stand out over the rest of the community?

This question was formulated the same way you have made the other questions in previous posts. And you answer was the same one: You are dumb for picking the wrong answer. You keep trying to trick people into thinking you are actually making questions about the actual topic, when in reality all you are doing is presenting two ambiguous answers and calling people dumb when they call out the less probable.

 

Question was about probability.

What you just did is called cover up.

The only answer, clear answer was a)

Why you have to defend the wrong answer?

I won't mind at all if you accept and let's move on to the next topic.

 

 


ParanoidAgnostic
ParanoidAgnostic's picture
Posts: 402
Joined: 2007-05-20
User is offlineOffline
Timf1234 wrote: Why you

Timf1234 wrote:

Why you have to defend the wrong answer?

Why do you fail to see that it's only the wrong answer if you interpret the question your way?

Oh, a lesson in not changing history from Mr. I'm-My-Own-Grandpa!


Timf1234
Posts: 186
Joined: 2007-07-30
User is offlineOffline
ParanoidAgnostic

ParanoidAgnostic wrote:
Timf1234 wrote:

Why you have to defend the wrong answer?

Why do you fail to see that it's only the wrong answer if you interpret the question your way?

 

PA,

I know you are smarter than this. I have read your posts. You are smart.

Interpretation is the key issue. The entire test is deisgned by psychologist and logicians to test if peole interpret it correctly. To process complex moral, social, political, religious issue, command of English language (or any other language for that matter) is not the botle neck but not being able to translate from poor English language (dictionary defintion) to superior language of mathemetics (logical definition of words) is the bottle neck. Whether, it is an issue of Free Will, Altruism, Justice vs. compassion all depend upon how one interpret, right? Entire subject communication is about how we interpret.

Tell me why the following should be interpreted differently?

Mr. Abdul Rahman was born in 70s, in the Western province (NWFP) of Pakistan. He was born in a poor family, attended local school (Madrasa) for 9 years. At the age of 25 he moved to Afghanistan. For few years he was involved in drug smuggling. Then he joined Taliban and became a pious and strong Muslim. He grew long beard and started praying 5 times a day according to strict Islamic rule. He vehemently fought against US forces in Afghanistan. He was captured by the US forces. He became friend to a Muslim US army prisoner guard named Jabbar.. Jabbar spent a lot of time with him to educate him with the Western values. Later Mr. Rahman was released.

 

Which of the following is more probable?

a)      Mr. Rahman is now a teacher in a Madrasa in Pakistan.

b)      Mr. Rahman is now a teacher in a Madrasa in Pakistan and doesn’t believe in the Taliban version of Islam anymore.

 


ParanoidAgnostic
ParanoidAgnostic's picture
Posts: 402
Joined: 2007-05-20
User is offlineOffline
Tim I'm simply pointing out

Tim

I'm simply pointing out that the english language, when not used carefully creates ambiguity. Your statement was ambiguous.

I interpreted it your prefered way but the way you presented it, in casual english, left it open to multiple interpretations. I cannot fault people for not choosing the literal interpretation because 1) You did not present it formally, 2) Casual English has much that is not taken literally, 3) Things left unstated in casual English imply things too, it's called reading between the lines. 4) The literal interpretation was trivial and 5) The context implied non-triviality. If this question was in a test on logic then I'd expect people to choose the literal interpretation but this is a discussion board. In the context of a discussion board questions are asked to provke discussion, not to simply be trick questions.

If you were as wise as you claim you'd know that.

Oh, a lesson in not changing history from Mr. I'm-My-Own-Grandpa!


Timf1234
Posts: 186
Joined: 2007-07-30
User is offlineOffline
OK, Which part of the

Error


Timf1234
Posts: 186
Joined: 2007-07-30
User is offlineOffline
OK, Which part of the

OK, Which part of the question do you think created interpretation problem? The paragraph that described Richard or the choice a) and b)?


Timf1234
Posts: 186
Joined: 2007-07-30
User is offlineOffline
Vessel wrote:This isn't a

Vessel wrote:

This isn't a joke? Really?

Did you ever stop to consider that if there is actually no freewill then there is no use in you trying to persuade people there is no freewill? Its not like they are going to change their minds.

I have to this because I have no free will either.

Get it.

See there is not way out of this No Free Will thingy.

 

Hey, vessel,

Do you play 15 balls pool?

You striked the 15 ball cluster. Balls started to roll. Now let's watch this in slow motion while the balls are still rolling but have not gone in to any pocket yet. You, me and veryone are waiting and looking. Do you think the fate of the balls are already locked-in even before it goes to any pocket?

Now think of this pool game example with Big-Bang. Fates were locked 16 billions years ago.

Now bring in quantum mechanics QM. QM allows some wiggle room, therefore, the fate is not 100% dertermine at the time of the big bang but still we do not define or control the quantum mechanics rules or the result.

Now, tell me where is the flow in the logic?


ParanoidAgnostic
ParanoidAgnostic's picture
Posts: 402
Joined: 2007-05-20
User is offlineOffline
The whole thing.  The

The whole thing.

 The context (A discussion board) implied non-triviality.

The options if taken strictly literally make the question trivial.

For non triviality there had to be some part of a that is not in b.

a and b both explicitly state that the person is still an atheist, the question only discusses one other quantity (belief in free will)

For a non trivial interpretation the belief in free will must be different in the two outcomes.

It is not stated explicitly in 'a' so it's logical to interpret that it is implied in a that the person still believes in free will. It is also implied that in 'a' the persons state has not changed (still atheist), while in b the state has (still atheist but...)

 

I interpret everything as a mind game, it's the way my brain works but I think it's arrogant to think yourself smarter than someone who chose to look at the idea rather than the words. Especially as you have told us many times that your english is not good and shown an interest in the concept of free will. 

 

 

Oh, a lesson in not changing history from Mr. I'm-My-Own-Grandpa!


vexed
vexed's picture
Posts: 104
Joined: 2007-06-03
User is offlineOffline
Timf1234 wrote: Now, tell

Timf1234 wrote:

Now, tell me where is the flow in the logic?

There is no logic.

Non-Sequitur In Latin this term translates to "doesn't follow". This refers to an argument in which the conclusion does not necessarily follow from the premises. In other words, a logical connection is implied where none exists.

"I contend we are both atheists, I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours."--Stephen F. Roberts


Timf1234
Posts: 186
Joined: 2007-07-30
User is offlineOffline
vexed wrote: Timf1234

vexed wrote:
Timf1234 wrote:

Now, tell me where is the flow in the logic?

There is no logic.

Non-Sequitur In Latin this term translates to "doesn't follow". This refers to an argument in which the conclusion does not necessarily follow from the premises. In other words, a logical connection is implied where none exists.

Which particle in your brain doesn't have to follow the strict laws of nature?

Do you think each and every particle in your mind and body follow strict laws of nature or some might violate the laws?


vexed
vexed's picture
Posts: 104
Joined: 2007-06-03
User is offlineOffline
Timf1234 wrote: vexed

Timf1234 wrote:
vexed wrote:
Timf1234 wrote:

Now, tell me where is the flow in the logic?

There is no logic.

Non-Sequitur In Latin this term translates to "doesn't follow". This refers to an argument in which the conclusion does not necessarily follow from the premises. In other words, a logical connection is implied where none exists.

Which particle in your brain doesn't have to follow the strict laws of nature?

Do you think each and every particle in your mind and body follow strict laws of nature or some might violate the laws?

I think these questions are irrelevant. I only want your data, I'll make my own conclusions.

"I contend we are both atheists, I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours."--Stephen F. Roberts


Timf1234
Posts: 186
Joined: 2007-07-30
User is offlineOffline
vexed wrote: Timf1234

vexed wrote:
Timf1234 wrote:
vexed wrote:
Timf1234 wrote:

Now, tell me where is the flow in the logic?

There is no logic.

Non-Sequitur In Latin this term translates to "doesn't follow". This refers to an argument in which the conclusion does not necessarily follow from the premises. In other words, a logical connection is implied where none exists.

Which particle in your brain doesn't have to follow the strict laws of nature?

Do you think each and every particle in your mind and body follow strict laws of nature or some might violate the laws?

I think these questions are irrelevant. I only want your data, I'll make my own conclusions.

so you are ducking my questions?


Timf1234
Posts: 186
Joined: 2007-07-30
User is offlineOffline
vexed wrote: Timf1234

vexed wrote:
Timf1234 wrote:
vexed wrote:
Timf1234 wrote:

Now, tell me where is the flow in the logic?

There is no logic.

Non-Sequitur In Latin this term translates to "doesn't follow". This refers to an argument in which the conclusion does not necessarily follow from the premises. In other words, a logical connection is implied where none exists.

Which particle in your brain doesn't have to follow the strict laws of nature?

Do you think each and every particle in your mind and body follow strict laws of nature or some might violate the laws?

I think these questions are irrelevant. I only want your data, I'll make my own conclusions.

so you are ducking my questions?

 

do


Timf1234
Posts: 186
Joined: 2007-07-30
User is offlineOffline
vexed wrote: Timf1234

vexed wrote:
Timf1234 wrote:
vexed wrote:
Timf1234 wrote:

Now, tell me where is the flow in the logic?

There is no logic.

Non-Sequitur In Latin this term translates to "doesn't follow". This refers to an argument in which the conclusion does not necessarily follow from the premises. In other words, a logical connection is implied where none exists.

Which particle in your brain doesn't have to follow the strict laws of nature?

Do you think each and every particle in your mind and body follow strict laws of nature or some might violate the laws?

I think these questions are irrelevant. I only want your data, I'll make my own conclusions.

so you are ducking my questions?

 

do

you


Timf1234
Posts: 186
Joined: 2007-07-30
User is offlineOffline
vexed wrote: Timf1234

vexed wrote:
Timf1234 wrote:
vexed wrote:
Timf1234 wrote:

Now, tell me where is the flow in the logic?

There is no logic.

Non-Sequitur In Latin this term translates to "doesn't follow". This refers to an argument in which the conclusion does not necessarily follow from the premises. In other words, a logical connection is implied where none exists.

Which particle in your brain doesn't have to follow the strict laws of nature?

Do you think each and every particle in your mind and body follow strict laws of nature or some might violate the laws?

I think these questions are irrelevant. I only want your data, I'll make my own conclusions.

so you are ducking my questions?

Do


Timf1234
Posts: 186
Joined: 2007-07-30
User is offlineOffline
vexed wrote: Timf1234

vexed wrote:
Timf1234 wrote:
vexed wrote:
Timf1234 wrote:

Now, tell me where is the flow in the logic?

There is no logic.

Non-Sequitur In Latin this term translates to "doesn't follow". This refers to an argument in which the conclusion does not necessarily follow from the premises. In other words, a logical connection is implied where none exists.

Which particle in your brain doesn't have to follow the strict laws of nature?

Do you think each and every particle in your mind and body follow strict laws of nature or some might violate the laws?

I think these questions are irrelevant. I only want your data, I'll make my own conclusions.

so you are ducking my questions?

Do

you


Timf1234
Posts: 186
Joined: 2007-07-30
User is offlineOffline
vexed wrote: Timf1234

vexed wrote:
Timf1234 wrote:
vexed wrote:
Timf1234 wrote:

Now, tell me where is the flow in the logic?

There is no logic.

Non-Sequitur In Latin this term translates to "doesn't follow". This refers to an argument in which the conclusion does not necessarily follow from the premises. In other words, a logical connection is implied where none exists.

Which particle in your brain doesn't have to follow the strict laws of nature?

Do you think each and every particle in your mind and body follow strict laws of nature or some might violate the laws?

I think these questions are irrelevant. I only want your data, I'll make my own conclusions.

so you are ducking my questions?

Do

you fell


Timf1234
Posts: 186
Joined: 2007-07-30
User is offlineOffline
vexed wrote: Timf1234

vexed wrote:
Timf1234 wrote:
vexed wrote:
Timf1234 wrote:

Now, tell me where is the flow in the logic?

There is no logic.

Non-Sequitur In Latin this term translates to "doesn't follow". This refers to an argument in which the conclusion does not necessarily follow from the premises. In other words, a logical connection is implied where none exists.

Which particle in your brain doesn't have to follow the strict laws of nature?

Do you think each and every particle in your mind and body follow strict laws of nature or some might violate the laws?

I think these questions are irrelevant. I only want your data, I'll make my own conclusions.

so you are ducking my questions?

Do you fell cornered?


vexed
vexed's picture
Posts: 104
Joined: 2007-06-03
User is offlineOffline
Timf1234 wrote: so you are

Timf1234 wrote:

so you are ducking my questions?

Do you fell cornered?

LoL, you've ducked giving me your 'double-blind' test data results, so I'm not going to reply to irrelevant questions. You've said more than enough in your posts, all I want is data now.

 

I'm on Earth btw.

 

 

"I contend we are both atheists, I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours."--Stephen F. Roberts


Timf1234
Posts: 186
Joined: 2007-07-30
User is offlineOffline
vexed wrote: Timf1234

vexed wrote:
Timf1234 wrote:

so you are ducking my questions?

Do you fell cornered?

LoL, you've ducked giving me your 'double-blind' test data results, so I'm not going to reply to irrelevant questions. You've said more than enough in your posts, all I want is data now.

I'm on Earth btw.

You will have to spend your time and money to get the data you want. I already gave you the algorithm for it.


vexed
vexed's picture
Posts: 104
Joined: 2007-06-03
User is offlineOffline
Timf1234 wrote:vexed

Timf1234 wrote:
vexed wrote:
Timf1234 wrote:

so you are ducking my questions?

Do you fell cornered?

LoL, you've ducked giving me your 'double-blind' test data results, so I'm not going to reply to irrelevant questions. You've said more than enough in your posts, all I want is data now.

I'm on Earth btw.

You will have to spend your time and money to get the data you want. I already gave you the algorithm for it.

Translation:

'Vexed, I don't have any evidence to back up my claims.' - Timf1234 

 

edit:clarity

"I contend we are both atheists, I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours."--Stephen F. Roberts


silentseba
silentseba's picture
Posts: 131
Joined: 2007-07-19
User is offlineOffline
I claim there is a unicorn

I claim there is a unicorn behind your head, but you can't see it because it will always be behind you. His image doesn't reflect on any surface. If you want proof of this, you will have to make your own studies and spend your own money to figure this out.


ParanoidAgnostic
ParanoidAgnostic's picture
Posts: 402
Joined: 2007-05-20
User is offlineOffline
silentseba wrote: I claim

silentseba wrote:
I claim there is a unicorn behind your head, but you can't see it because it will always be behind you. His image doesn't reflect on any surface. If you want proof of this, you will have to make your own studies and spend your own money to figure this out.

Will it show up in a webcam?

or I suppose I could ask 5 random people, who are not aware of your unicorn theory, if there's something behind me 

Oh, a lesson in not changing history from Mr. I'm-My-Own-Grandpa!


Susan
Susan's picture
Posts: 3561
Joined: 2006-02-12
User is offlineOffline
ParanoidAgnostic

ParanoidAgnostic wrote:

Will it show up in a webcam?

Probably not.  It's much like how a vampire does not reflect in a mirror.

 

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.


MrRage
Posts: 896
Joined: 2006-12-22
User is offlineOffline
Timf1234 wrote: All you had

Timf1234 wrote:
All you had to say, "yes, it was a mistake". It would have been the end of the story. We could have moved to the next topic. You did not. You are then trying to cover up your blunder.

Of course I picked the wrong answer, but it wasn't a mistake. If you go and read my first post, you'll see that I flipped a coin to determine my answer. I didn't choose b, I literally flipped a coin. I didn't even give your problem one moment's thought. It was supposed to be a joke about free will...get it?

In later post, I was was trying to justify why paranoidagnostic would reformulate your question, not why I flipped a coin.

I find it ironic that you can't seem to grasp what I'm writing all the while you're trying to make us look like fools because we supposedly can solve a simple word problem.


Susan
Susan's picture
Posts: 3561
Joined: 2006-02-12
User is offlineOffline
MrRage, don't hold your

MrRage, don't hold your breath waiting for a reply.

See the bottom of this page