The fact that after centuries of science discounting such stuff as precognition, prophecy and other means of predicting the future, always claiming that the future is fluid, we now have science telling us that the future is not fluid. THAT bothers me, when it comes from the scientists. (Myself, I never truly believed in free will, it is nothing but an illusion; I've believed that all actions we might take, are indeed taken, but only one version of our consciousness is ever aware of those actions; this plays into the whole Parallel Worlds theory).
Of course, cosmologists also talk about quantum entanglement, which is pretty "spooky" IMO (yes pun intended if you know what Einstein said about entanglement), and almost (I said ALMOST) gives credence to concepts of astrology (that distant stellar bodies can have an effect on us here on Earth).
For me, it isn't so much the fact that our future seems to be fixed, but that science is now coming to that conclusion, when previously that sort of concept was the province of theologians and philosophers.
Of course, cosmologists also talk about quantum entanglement, which is pretty "spooky" IMO (yes pun intended if you know what Einstein said about entanglement), and almost (I said ALMOST) gives credence to concepts of astrology (that distant stellar bodies can have an effect on us here on Earth).
For me, it isn't so much the fact that our future seems to be fixed, but that science is now coming to that conclusion, when previously that sort of concept was the province of theologians and philosophers.
You probably don't have free will in any metaphysical sense, but who cares? Your brain will continue to function just as if you did have free will. Because who is you, other than your brain's choice-making and -monitoring processes? In other words, adding a metaphysical "Abracadabra!" doesn't really change anything to what is actually happening. It adds nothing. You are complete as-is.
The true worry is not whether we have free will, but whether our natural will is optimal. And the troubling thing is that it certainly is not. But it is optimizing, at least. We are a sweet wine that is ages well.
The true worry is not whether we have free will, but whether our natural will is optimal. And the troubling thing is that it certainly is not. But it is optimizing, at least. We are a sweet wine that is ages well.
Death to the Regressives of the GOP and the TeaParty. No mercy for Conservatives. Burn them all at the stake for the hateful satanists they are.
Science Question
13/10/2012 09:01:08 PM
- 615 Views
In general, effects of gravity on a nanoscale system are negligible.
13/10/2012 09:54:50 PM
- 458 Views
To get an intuition of how weak gravity is...
13/10/2012 10:33:14 PM
- 408 Views
Perhaps I say it as should not, but that is oversimplified to the point of inaccuracy.
15/10/2012 11:16:50 PM
- 512 Views
You can calculate gravity pretty precisely, but let me explain conceptually how we know
14/10/2012 03:54:40 AM
- 447 Views
thanks all (and some more Qs)
14/10/2012 07:30:04 PM
- 425 Views
You're welcome and some more A's
15/10/2012 01:40:01 AM
- 448 Views
Then I have another question
16/10/2012 05:52:33 PM
- 417 Views
You can rest easy.
16/10/2012 08:46:37 PM
- 454 Views
the part that bothers me actually is
16/10/2012 11:16:04 PM
- 382 Views
He's talking about the Andromeda Paradox
17/10/2012 07:11:01 AM
- 395 Views