Free will, probability, losers and ballers.

[Jameel]

I've never understood getting so emotionally invested in disliking people and ideas. I like Sam Harris and gotten lots of value from a few of his books. Found the ones about religion too boring and didn't even read them past chapter one.

 

[skohh]

penis

 

[tomaszjot]

Let's get down to it. You didn't think his argument could be refuted easily. I did so by saying that to prove a scientific Truth, you need, you know... evidence and he didn't present any. I think that qualifies as an easy take down of his entire speech.

Upon getting that reply you go quiet on the actual argument at hand.

Now you want to switch the argument to what is elite and how I would classify something as elite if I knew nothing of a topic.

I'll tear apart any new, extremely weak arguments you present only after having put to rest the original one presented: That Free will is false and it is now a scientific Theory. Admit he is states shit he has no proof of and therefore is no better than a theologian, or provide the proof requested.

First, and foremost:

how is your logic mister if from the fact I've posted Sam Harris' video you come to the conclusion my views are in line with his and you argue with my arguments I've never even presented in this thread.

I do not argue with you on free will - you only assume I do. I DID NOT presented any arguments for or against free will and if you carefully read my OP you will see that I've asked others for their stance on free will.

In my post responding to your calling my threads beyond the limits of stupidity I called you out because of your laziness. If you come to shit in someones thread and call it stupid at least say why. And if you see the argument and take time to write that you could tear it apart then do it. You didn't expect anyone will actually challange you on this one, did you?

You finally responded to argument in the video - good for you. Now I understand why you think it is stupid.

Second:

I do not switch arguments - I was just clarifying what I meant because you assumed I share Harris views by calling him elite. Mister - please check your logic again. From the fact I called someone elite you cannot draw a conclusion that I share this person's views.

I do not switch arguments because I do not argue on or against free will. I hope it became clear for you now.

As for you tearing apart his argument... define tearing apart because what you did was barely a scratch, if anything.

 

[insectlife]

I've read his short book on Free Will and it's not very good, well explained or structured in an accessible style.

His argument isn't really philosophical, but rooted in the emerging field of Neuroscience.

Essentially, studies have shown brain activity before the group make a decision and to some degree can predict what they will do [within the very limited confines of the experiment].

The implications are therefore obvious [And older than the Sun...] - to what extent are we then responsible for our actions?

He doesn't really say, except for some handpicked cases of murderers/people with Mental disorders.

/end.