Unlike most people, I find engaging missionaries on the street (or sidewalk) a productive and enriching activity. When I see two guys in suits wearing nametags trying to start conversations with people, I'll go up to them if I have the time. I feel obligated by my own worldview to challenge them in their beliefs so that they might grow and be better practitioners of their beliefs. I try to give them insight into a worldview that is completely foriegn to them, and hopefully it will result in the missionary having more empathy and understanding of a view of reality that they would otherwise not have.
I use two methods of talking about religion and worldview (I find the term "worldview" a better term, since it encompasses both religion and secular belief systems). The first is to discuss the phenomenological aspects of experience, especially religious experiences. Most religious people have had experiences that caused them to convert to their religious belief, or confirm a pre-existing religious belief. Similarly, most humanists, atheists, or other practitioners of secular worldviews (not to be confused with people who don't have an explicit worldview) have analogous experiences. The key point is that while the experience can be explained, there are aspects of that experience that cannot be conveyed to another person. My experiences that caused me to adopt a humanistic view of reality cannot have the same impact when described to another person.
The second thing I do is to respond to a request with an analogous request. For example, if I am asked to read the Bible or Book of Mormon and make up my mind about it, I will ask them to read Dawkins' The God Delusion, or Dennett's Breaking The Spell, and contemplate whether that is a more rational approach to belief. If they ask me to try to talk to God or pray for some divine revelation, I will ask them to try to look at some of the secular worldviews, and try to understand how those explain belief in God.
The goal in both of these is to avoid the standard rote arguments that have been rehashed for endless years, and to try to create a non-threatening way of engaging and challenging those who are trying to proselytize. In my experience, most every missionary I have used this on has enjoyed the conversation, and I feel that it has helped both parties get a better understanding of the other's worldview.
I will note this method is not good for the showy street preachers who preach hellfire and damnation on streetcorners. Those people aren't interested in rational discussion, rather they are using theatrics to try to provoke a response.
I would appreciate if anyone who has any other ideas for challenging missionaries in a non-advesarial way would post them in the comments.
In my next post, I'll talk about the psychological mechanisms underlying a "crisis of faith" and how it relates to conversion and growth in a persons world view.
Sunday, April 26, 2009
Sunday, March 22, 2009
Can Life Have Meaning Without a God?
One thing I encounter frequently is the argument that a meaningful life can only be derived from religious or metaphysical beliefs. I think this comes up because oftentimes the person making the argument had no meaning in their life until they found religion. I feel that I have found meaning in life without the need to defer to a metaphysical entity. I believe that the meaning of life is to continue living, growing, and improving. Life exists to beget new life, new ideas, and new creations.
So what does that mean on a personal level? It means that personally, you have to figure out your own meaning. One approach to do this is to ask yourself "What is my place in the world?", "What makes me feel fulfilled?", or "What would make me the best 'me' that I can be?". The problem with this approach would be the lack of a clearly defined personal meaning, or a clearly defined means of determining a personal meaning. The advantage is that the meaning I have found for myself is far more satisfying and personal than any purpose that a religion can offer.
So what does that mean on a personal level? It means that personally, you have to figure out your own meaning. One approach to do this is to ask yourself "What is my place in the world?", "What makes me feel fulfilled?", or "What would make me the best 'me' that I can be?". The problem with this approach would be the lack of a clearly defined personal meaning, or a clearly defined means of determining a personal meaning. The advantage is that the meaning I have found for myself is far more satisfying and personal than any purpose that a religion can offer.
Thursday, March 19, 2009
Creating a Humanist Culture
There are several things needed to create a Humanist culture that can effectively replace religious culture. The first of these is a common mythology, but not in the sense of a bunch of made up stories. Rather, these are culturally shared stories that may be a bit idealized or simplified. For Humanism, two obvious examples would be the story of human life evolving, and the second would be Darwin's development of the theory of evolution.
The second thing that needs to be created is a common morality that is practical and understandable. The three Humanist Manifestos are a good start, but are too abstract and vague in nature to be sufficient. Instead, the morality should consist of simple principles demonstrated in examples and backed up by justification. The existence of moral gray areas also should be addressed.
Third, a set of common, purposeful rituals need to be developed. For example, a community ritual (like going to church on Sundays) could help connect Humanists and allow Humanists to develop their understanding of Humanism. Acknowledging your own place in yourself, your relationships, society, the world, and universe at some regular, predetermined times (say after waking and before falling asleep) to help keep your life in context of your beliefs. There are countless other rituals that could be used.
Fourth, Humanism needs to clearly state why and how a life can be purposeful without a need to defer to the divine. This may sound simple, but this needs to carry enough weight that it can stand next to the divine arguments made by religions.
Finally, Humanism needs a clear and formal set of threats and promises to differentiate it from religions. These can be based off of a Humanist view of the future, combined with the shortcomings of religion. Threats and promises create incentive for people to convert, and also act to combat the argument that an atheistic belief system is inherently nihilistic.
So what would these things do? It would make Humanism more appealing and useful for its adherents and potential converts. It would also allow Humanism to engage in dialectical relationships with the more reasonable manifestations of religion. Finally, it creates a pseudo-religious religion alternative that isn't lacking (after leaving Christianity 6 years ago, I still miss many aspects of having a church).
Also, I don't think this list is complete or infallable, nor do I have any good ideas for implementation. As always, feedback is much appreciated, either directly or using the comment system.
On a side note, I now Twitter, so feel free to add punkideas, and friend me on MySpace and Facebook. Also, I'm trying to get a feel for my readership, so let me know if you are a reader (thanks to David for being the one person to let me know he's reading)
The second thing that needs to be created is a common morality that is practical and understandable. The three Humanist Manifestos are a good start, but are too abstract and vague in nature to be sufficient. Instead, the morality should consist of simple principles demonstrated in examples and backed up by justification. The existence of moral gray areas also should be addressed.
Third, a set of common, purposeful rituals need to be developed. For example, a community ritual (like going to church on Sundays) could help connect Humanists and allow Humanists to develop their understanding of Humanism. Acknowledging your own place in yourself, your relationships, society, the world, and universe at some regular, predetermined times (say after waking and before falling asleep) to help keep your life in context of your beliefs. There are countless other rituals that could be used.
Fourth, Humanism needs to clearly state why and how a life can be purposeful without a need to defer to the divine. This may sound simple, but this needs to carry enough weight that it can stand next to the divine arguments made by religions.
Finally, Humanism needs a clear and formal set of threats and promises to differentiate it from religions. These can be based off of a Humanist view of the future, combined with the shortcomings of religion. Threats and promises create incentive for people to convert, and also act to combat the argument that an atheistic belief system is inherently nihilistic.
So what would these things do? It would make Humanism more appealing and useful for its adherents and potential converts. It would also allow Humanism to engage in dialectical relationships with the more reasonable manifestations of religion. Finally, it creates a pseudo-religious religion alternative that isn't lacking (after leaving Christianity 6 years ago, I still miss many aspects of having a church).
Also, I don't think this list is complete or infallable, nor do I have any good ideas for implementation. As always, feedback is much appreciated, either directly or using the comment system.
On a side note, I now Twitter, so feel free to add punkideas, and friend me on MySpace and Facebook. Also, I'm trying to get a feel for my readership, so let me know if you are a reader (thanks to David for being the one person to let me know he's reading)
Monday, March 02, 2009
Atheism, Humanism, and Religion
I don't believe in a god in any sort of traditional sense, but I reject the label of Atheist. I think the word, besides having a negative connotation, does not convey what I really believe. I consider myself a Humanist in a broad and general sense, since I feel that the label more properly conveys what I believe, rather than what I don't believe. Atheism is only the belief in no god, and has no other intrinsic beliefs. Humanism, on the other hand, is the belief that people and humanity are the most important thing in human existence. Also, Atheism is the second most disliked "religion", behind only Scientology, probably because all that outspoken Atheists do is attack religion.
I think that people who don't believe in a god or other supernatural powers, or don't claim to know whether a god exists need to move away from labels that say what they are against (like "Atheist" and "Agnostic"), and begin using labels that state what are the most important principles of their beliefs (like "Humanist" or "Naturalist"). I think that the outspoken Atheists, like Richard Dawkins, need to focus more on the negative outcomes of fundamentalist religion, rather than the absurdity of the premises of religion. This will help reduce the marginalization of non-religious beliefs. I also think that non-religious people need to stop condemning religious moderates who are not imposing their views on others.
Finally, I think that non-religious people need to come together and form some sort of common culture. Specifically, I think that Humanists and others need to take a page from religion. Religion is based on supernatural threats and promises, like hell and heaven. Humanism should promise a fulfilling life based on rational thought, while stating the belief in metaphysical entities can lead to a wasted life and the misleading of others. Furthermore, there needs to be a community. All the Humanist forums and many of the blogs I have found online are dominated by religion-bashing, rather than good discourse about how people can live and be moral without a god or something similar. Instead of spending all our time saying what we are not, we should spend our time defining ourselves, and contrasting it to what we are not.
If anyone knows of a place where a progressive Humanist can talk with like minded people, you should let me know
David
I think that people who don't believe in a god or other supernatural powers, or don't claim to know whether a god exists need to move away from labels that say what they are against (like "Atheist" and "Agnostic"), and begin using labels that state what are the most important principles of their beliefs (like "Humanist" or "Naturalist"). I think that the outspoken Atheists, like Richard Dawkins, need to focus more on the negative outcomes of fundamentalist religion, rather than the absurdity of the premises of religion. This will help reduce the marginalization of non-religious beliefs. I also think that non-religious people need to stop condemning religious moderates who are not imposing their views on others.
Finally, I think that non-religious people need to come together and form some sort of common culture. Specifically, I think that Humanists and others need to take a page from religion. Religion is based on supernatural threats and promises, like hell and heaven. Humanism should promise a fulfilling life based on rational thought, while stating the belief in metaphysical entities can lead to a wasted life and the misleading of others. Furthermore, there needs to be a community. All the Humanist forums and many of the blogs I have found online are dominated by religion-bashing, rather than good discourse about how people can live and be moral without a god or something similar. Instead of spending all our time saying what we are not, we should spend our time defining ourselves, and contrasting it to what we are not.
If anyone knows of a place where a progressive Humanist can talk with like minded people, you should let me know
David
Monday, February 02, 2009
Michael Phelps and Keeping Our Illusions about Marijuana
Recently a picture of Michael Phelps taking a bong hit has been circulating around the Internet. This doesn't bother me in the least. What bothers me is how he was forced to publicly admit his "wrongdoing". I am sick how American society can't stand the idea of successful people responsibly using marijuana recreationally (at least outside the world of entertainment). I think Phelps's forced apology is an example of America enforcing the myth that you have to be weed free to be successful. I know that there are college professors, professional athletes, and small business owners who smoke marijuana without negative effects to their livelihood.
The research on marijuana supports the idea that it is relatively harmless compared to alcohol, tobacco, and hard drugs. Virtually all of the lab studies "demonstrating" how harmful marijuana lack any sort of ecologlical validity. It's not to say marijuana is completely harmless, but that the level of harm it causes does not warrent keeping it illegal. Also, the claim that marijuana is a gateway drug has been effectively debunked. Even the history of marijuana criminalization shows how ludicris the war against weed has always been.
The poor economic state of the US provides a new opportunity to push for legalization and regulation as a replacement for criminalizing marijauana. Marijuana legalization would reduce the prison costs and create new tax revenue and jobs. Sounds like something we need right now.
We should not force our modern day heros to apologize for smoking a relatively harmless plant, but we should use this as an opportunity to lose the illusions that harm our society.
UPDATE: Tony Newman wrote about the incident over at the Huffington Post
I've been inactive lately, but I feel like ranting about a bunch of shit, so I'll be posting a few more posts that I'm working on over the next couple of weeks. If I have signs of any readership, this could become a (semi) regular thing again
The research on marijuana supports the idea that it is relatively harmless compared to alcohol, tobacco, and hard drugs. Virtually all of the lab studies "demonstrating" how harmful marijuana lack any sort of ecologlical validity. It's not to say marijuana is completely harmless, but that the level of harm it causes does not warrent keeping it illegal. Also, the claim that marijuana is a gateway drug has been effectively debunked. Even the history of marijuana criminalization shows how ludicris the war against weed has always been.
The poor economic state of the US provides a new opportunity to push for legalization and regulation as a replacement for criminalizing marijauana. Marijuana legalization would reduce the prison costs and create new tax revenue and jobs. Sounds like something we need right now.
We should not force our modern day heros to apologize for smoking a relatively harmless plant, but we should use this as an opportunity to lose the illusions that harm our society.
UPDATE: Tony Newman wrote about the incident over at the Huffington Post
I've been inactive lately, but I feel like ranting about a bunch of shit, so I'll be posting a few more posts that I'm working on over the next couple of weeks. If I have signs of any readership, this could become a (semi) regular thing again
Monday, May 05, 2008
The Decline: Epic Punk Rock for a Cause
The Decline is a 18+ minute long punk rock song by NOFX about the socio-political state of America. I was lucky enough to see this song played live, in its entirety, last weekend, when NOFX played in Denver. Even though the song was originally recorded 9 years ago, I believe that it is even more relevant now, in post 9-11 America, than when it was written.
The Decline consists of 8 main sections (by my count, feel free to disagree), tied together with interludes, along with an intro and an outro. Each section addresses a different issue or issues. My approximate breakdown is as follows (once again, my opinion, feel free to disagree, feel free to correct if you are in NOFX):
1. Conformity and ignorance
2. Gun Control (plus a little bit on religion and dumbing down America)
3. Drug Prohibition and Punishment
4. War Profiteering/Corporate Control of Government
5. Depression, Despair and Suicide
6. Media Control, Brainwashing, Apathy
7. Aquiescience to the current problems
8. Why we need to act (it's a conclusion of sorts)
Each section has it's own distinct style and sound.
As for it's overall message and stance, it says the country is royally fucked up, and addresses the specific problems more than NOFX's other polical works. I think it is more impactful because it calls you out on your apathy, unlike many other political songs.
The climax of the song, in my opinion, is around the 14 minute mark. The lyrics for that part are:
And so we go, on with our lives
We know the truth, but prefer lies
Lies are simple, simple is bliss
Why go against tradition when we can
Admit defeat, live in decline
Be the victim of our own design
The status quo, built on suspect
Why would anyone stick out their neck?
I think this part throws all the issues in the listeners face, and forces them to address them in some fasion.
As far as the sales of the record itself, proceeds were donated to a bunch of human and animal rights organization, which is consistent with the message of the album. This just adds to the evidence that the motivation of this song was emotional above all else.
A criticism that could be made is that The Decline is really a bunch of songs that were glued together with interludes. My response is how else can you make a long song without it being boring and repetitive? This actually could be considered the punk rock equivalent of a classical multi-part work, like Handel's Messiah, or a long progressive rock work, like Pink Floyd's The Wall.
Another criticism could be that it doesn't offer solutions, and is a bunch of bitching. First, I disagree. The solution is to stop being apathetic, and do something about it.
The reason I feel that as a solution is more effective than more specific solutions, is it doesn't come across as preachy, nor does it become irrelevant as long as the issues remain relevant.
Finally, I think it's just a fun and energizing song. It's one of my favorites to sing along to. It was also one of my first punk album purchases, and the first single I ever bought.
If you haven't heard it, find a copy and listen to it. It is a great song
Maybe if I feel inspired, I'll do a piece on Operation Ivy next week.
The Decline consists of 8 main sections (by my count, feel free to disagree), tied together with interludes, along with an intro and an outro. Each section addresses a different issue or issues. My approximate breakdown is as follows (once again, my opinion, feel free to disagree, feel free to correct if you are in NOFX):
1. Conformity and ignorance
2. Gun Control (plus a little bit on religion and dumbing down America)
3. Drug Prohibition and Punishment
4. War Profiteering/Corporate Control of Government
5. Depression, Despair and Suicide
6. Media Control, Brainwashing, Apathy
7. Aquiescience to the current problems
8. Why we need to act (it's a conclusion of sorts)
Each section has it's own distinct style and sound.
As for it's overall message and stance, it says the country is royally fucked up, and addresses the specific problems more than NOFX's other polical works. I think it is more impactful because it calls you out on your apathy, unlike many other political songs.
The climax of the song, in my opinion, is around the 14 minute mark. The lyrics for that part are:
And so we go, on with our lives
We know the truth, but prefer lies
Lies are simple, simple is bliss
Why go against tradition when we can
Admit defeat, live in decline
Be the victim of our own design
The status quo, built on suspect
Why would anyone stick out their neck?
I think this part throws all the issues in the listeners face, and forces them to address them in some fasion.
As far as the sales of the record itself, proceeds were donated to a bunch of human and animal rights organization, which is consistent with the message of the album. This just adds to the evidence that the motivation of this song was emotional above all else.
A criticism that could be made is that The Decline is really a bunch of songs that were glued together with interludes. My response is how else can you make a long song without it being boring and repetitive? This actually could be considered the punk rock equivalent of a classical multi-part work, like Handel's Messiah, or a long progressive rock work, like Pink Floyd's The Wall.
Another criticism could be that it doesn't offer solutions, and is a bunch of bitching. First, I disagree. The solution is to stop being apathetic, and do something about it.
The reason I feel that as a solution is more effective than more specific solutions, is it doesn't come across as preachy, nor does it become irrelevant as long as the issues remain relevant.
Finally, I think it's just a fun and energizing song. It's one of my favorites to sing along to. It was also one of my first punk album purchases, and the first single I ever bought.
If you haven't heard it, find a copy and listen to it. It is a great song
Maybe if I feel inspired, I'll do a piece on Operation Ivy next week.
Tuesday, July 24, 2007
5 Most Underrated Strung Out Songs
Ok, this is a post just because I feel like it. The 5 songs by the band Strung Out I think are the most underrated
5. Scarecrow
This song off of The Element of Sonic Defiance is often overlooked in favor of the more produced or faster songs on the album, but I think it is a great indictment of certain aspects of religion.
4. Barfly
A great song off of the Crossroads and Illusions EP that gets overlooked because it is the only real selling point for the EP (two of the other songs are on Twisted by Design and the other song is relatively unremarkable). Also on Live in a Dive, it gets lost between all the big hits.
3. Lost Motel
Originally released as the B-side on the Dig single, the only readily available version is on Live in a Dive. It's catchy and fun to sing along to.
2. Novocaine
Strung Out's contribution to the Live Fat, Die Young comp, it is often forgotten or missed simply because it never made it on a regular release.
1. Betrayal
This song has it all: strong musical parts, intense vocals, a kickass guitar solo as part of a bridge and good lyrics. Almost no one has heard it simply because two versions of this song were released on two obscure compiliations about ten years ago, and it is almost never played live.
Hmm, every song I've listed here deals with existential issues in one way or another. Maybe that's why I like them and think they're underrated.
5. Scarecrow
This song off of The Element of Sonic Defiance is often overlooked in favor of the more produced or faster songs on the album, but I think it is a great indictment of certain aspects of religion.
4. Barfly
A great song off of the Crossroads and Illusions EP that gets overlooked because it is the only real selling point for the EP (two of the other songs are on Twisted by Design and the other song is relatively unremarkable). Also on Live in a Dive, it gets lost between all the big hits.
3. Lost Motel
Originally released as the B-side on the Dig single, the only readily available version is on Live in a Dive. It's catchy and fun to sing along to.
2. Novocaine
Strung Out's contribution to the Live Fat, Die Young comp, it is often forgotten or missed simply because it never made it on a regular release.
1. Betrayal
This song has it all: strong musical parts, intense vocals, a kickass guitar solo as part of a bridge and good lyrics. Almost no one has heard it simply because two versions of this song were released on two obscure compiliations about ten years ago, and it is almost never played live.
Hmm, every song I've listed here deals with existential issues in one way or another. Maybe that's why I like them and think they're underrated.
Friday, July 13, 2007
Meme Generator
I've started a new blog called Meme Generator which is focusing specifically on memes and memetics. I will still post stuff here, but Meme Generator will get updates more frequently. Check it out.
Tuesday, June 26, 2007
The Most Simple Principle in Behavior
The most simple principle in behavior is that everyone, including people, animals, groups, etc. will act in their own perceived self interest. This may be harmful or helpful to others, but which is largely incidental.
Think about it.
Think about it.
Thursday, May 31, 2007
Create and Modify Memes!
Ok, this may sound a bit crazy (I know, that's pretty normal for this blog), but I had an epiphany. We need to spend less time intaking and filtering through the masses of information that is available to us, and spend more time creating and modifying existing information. This means becoming less of an information consumer and more of an information producer. This is the way of becoming influential and effective. Sitting around consuming information keeps people complacent and occupied.
Tuesday, May 22, 2007
My computer lives again!
I finally fixed my computer! This means I will be more likely to make blog posts in the future, since I don't have to share a computer. I should have something vaguely interesting to talk about in the next few days, so check back soon.
Tuesday, January 30, 2007
Finding the Truth?
Ok, so this topic has been stewing in my brain for a while, so I'm going to give it an attempt. What is Truth? (note the capital "T") . There are two different kinds of truth, truth and Truth. Little "t" truth is what is in accordance with reality. This is what most people are familiar with, since we attempt to determine if something is true or not on a regular basis. The other kind of truth, Truth, is much harder to define and understand. I define it as truth that exists independently of reality, but defines or affects reality. This implies that Truth isn't part of reality, but that reality at most can only point to Truth.
So why is Truth important? Truth would include any cosmic forces that act upon reality, such as God or karma. Truth includes the answers to questions like what happens at death. Truth includes anything that exists outside the realm of reality and in the realm of speculation.
So if Truth isn't inside reality, then where does that leave us? There have been countless attempts to find, or even just assert Truth throughout time. I'm going to say that many may contain elements of Truth, but none contain a complete picture of it. I use the approach of trying to understand as many different perspectives and beliefs as possible. This has led me to a conclusion, that Truth is incredibly elusive. Understanding Truth comes less from what others have said about it and more from one's own pursuit. One person's understanding of Truth may be radically different than someone else's, and both can be correct.
There is one major trap in the pursuit of Truth: Believing that you know Truth in its entirety. Understanding Truth is a journey, not a destination. When you believe that journey is complete, there is no where else to go. Just by the nature of Truth, it is impossible to complete this journey in a lifetime. But it doesn't mean you shouldn't try.
If this is incoherent, it means I need to blog less after a sleep deprived night and a long day, late that night.
So why is Truth important? Truth would include any cosmic forces that act upon reality, such as God or karma. Truth includes the answers to questions like what happens at death. Truth includes anything that exists outside the realm of reality and in the realm of speculation.
So if Truth isn't inside reality, then where does that leave us? There have been countless attempts to find, or even just assert Truth throughout time. I'm going to say that many may contain elements of Truth, but none contain a complete picture of it. I use the approach of trying to understand as many different perspectives and beliefs as possible. This has led me to a conclusion, that Truth is incredibly elusive. Understanding Truth comes less from what others have said about it and more from one's own pursuit. One person's understanding of Truth may be radically different than someone else's, and both can be correct.
There is one major trap in the pursuit of Truth: Believing that you know Truth in its entirety. Understanding Truth is a journey, not a destination. When you believe that journey is complete, there is no where else to go. Just by the nature of Truth, it is impossible to complete this journey in a lifetime. But it doesn't mean you shouldn't try.
If this is incoherent, it means I need to blog less after a sleep deprived night and a long day, late that night.
Thursday, January 04, 2007
Free Will
After a long hiatus, I am back. I will be making periodic updates whenever I am inspired to. The reason I was gone was college, in its various aspects, had consumed my life. Now that I have graduated, it should not be a problem until I (hopefully) go off to grad school. But enough of my rambling.
One question people have wrestled with is the topic of whether free will exists or not. I have come up with several ways of approaching this problem. The first is determinism, the idea that people do not have free will, and their minds, bodies, behaviors, etc follow a strict cause and effect pattern. This means that human behavior is in theory completely predictable given enough information, and that there is no unpredictable factors such as free will or other random variations that affect people.
The second way this problem can be approached is that free will does exist. First, free will is defined as a conscious, non-physical self that makes decisions about behavior, that has some level of independence from the physical mind. Free will can be divided up into two categories, unlimited and limited. Unlimited free will is the idea that people can do whatever they want whenever they want, without limitations. This is the only approach that I can reject outright, since I cannot right now start speaking in Chinese or Sanskrit because I lack the knowledge to. Thus, my own knowledge limits my free will (if I have free will). Limited free will is the idea that free will does exist, but there are limitations to it in one manner or another.
The third approach is probabilism, which is the idea that human thoughts and behavior do have variation, but it can be described using probability models. This can also be divided into two categories, free will and random. In free will probabilism free will exists, but is limited and affected by probabilities of which behaviors are more likely than others, and which ones are not likely to happen. The other possibility is that a random factor determines which behavior happens, with likelihoods affected by probabilities of certain behaviors either happening or not happening.
In conclusion, there are many ways the problem of free will can be approached, but only one can be dismissed.
I hope this little discussion adds to your knowledge of the topic.
One question people have wrestled with is the topic of whether free will exists or not. I have come up with several ways of approaching this problem. The first is determinism, the idea that people do not have free will, and their minds, bodies, behaviors, etc follow a strict cause and effect pattern. This means that human behavior is in theory completely predictable given enough information, and that there is no unpredictable factors such as free will or other random variations that affect people.
The second way this problem can be approached is that free will does exist. First, free will is defined as a conscious, non-physical self that makes decisions about behavior, that has some level of independence from the physical mind. Free will can be divided up into two categories, unlimited and limited. Unlimited free will is the idea that people can do whatever they want whenever they want, without limitations. This is the only approach that I can reject outright, since I cannot right now start speaking in Chinese or Sanskrit because I lack the knowledge to. Thus, my own knowledge limits my free will (if I have free will). Limited free will is the idea that free will does exist, but there are limitations to it in one manner or another.
The third approach is probabilism, which is the idea that human thoughts and behavior do have variation, but it can be described using probability models. This can also be divided into two categories, free will and random. In free will probabilism free will exists, but is limited and affected by probabilities of which behaviors are more likely than others, and which ones are not likely to happen. The other possibility is that a random factor determines which behavior happens, with likelihoods affected by probabilities of certain behaviors either happening or not happening.
In conclusion, there are many ways the problem of free will can be approached, but only one can be dismissed.
I hope this little discussion adds to your knowledge of the topic.
Wednesday, September 06, 2006
One of these days
I will make an actual post. I promise. I just haven't been sufficiently inspired to do so.
Monday, May 01, 2006
Long time, No See
This semester has been busy as hell. I am going to post some stuff on memes in the (hopefully) near future. Seriously. I'm almost done for the semester.
Monday, February 27, 2006
I'm still alive
Despite regular posts, I still intend on posting, however the updates will be irregular. I'm working on some new material to post, and hopefully will have something up in the near future. 70 hours of obligations a week are fun!
Wednesday, December 14, 2005
Thursday, November 10, 2005
Getting My Shit In Line
I'm starting to get some direction as to what I want to do after college (or my undergraduate, more specifically). I want to study memes which are pieces of information that are passed by imitation which change over time. A classic example is the urban legend about the guy who gets drugged and wakes up in a bathtub without his kidneys. It has been passed around countless times, and has slowly changed over time. There's a lot more to it than that (hence the Wikipedia link), but it is a really new field with plenty of fields to be worked in.
But to get there, I have to do stuff to make a graduate school application look good (it's how things work), so I've been doing all that stuff to help. That's resulted in a shortage of free time, elevated stress levels, and never enough sleep. I can't wait for break, I am ready for it.
David
But to get there, I have to do stuff to make a graduate school application look good (it's how things work), so I've been doing all that stuff to help. That's resulted in a shortage of free time, elevated stress levels, and never enough sleep. I can't wait for break, I am ready for it.
David
Friday, October 28, 2005
Life at 900 MPH
Lately, it feels like my life has been flying by at an incredible rate. I'm not complaining, but I haven't had a lot of downtime. That's probably why I haven't updated my blog lately. When I do have time, I don't really feel like it. It doesn't look like it's going to slow down anytime soon either. I'll try making more frequent posts, as I am doing some reading in some pretty interesting subject areas.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
