03 Jun 17
10 edits
Originally posted by apathistModern physics does NOT say determinism is wrong but rather says very little on the matter.
Modern physics. How could [b]you not know this.
It is a very common widely propagated myth among laypeople and , shamefully, even among many scientists, that quantum physics says 'true' randomness exists; ( 'true' randomness specifically as opposed to pseudo-randomness; I will clarify the meaning of that on request ) it says nothing of the sort and true randomness is just a purely metaphysical interpretation of it that is not to be confused with the quantum physics itself and its equations that says nothing on that matter. If you have studied physics at university like I have, you would know this. The equations of quantum physics merely describe the observable probabilistic behavior; nothing in those equations specifically says/implies true randomness, as opposed to pseudo-randomness, must be behind that observable probabilistic behavior; those equations make no such interpretation.
Many modern quantum physicists disagree that the correct interpretation of quantum physics involves true randomness and many have the opposite interpretation called the "realist interpretation of quantum physics" that supports determinism.
Do you not determine your own decisions?
That is strange because it seems to me I at least sometimes determine mine.
Yes, standard meaning.[/b]
then you agree so-called 'free will' is not 'free' but determined thus a misnomer?
And you still haven't answered my question; what did you mean by free will is 'violation'? 'violation' of what?
03 Jun 17
8 edits
Originally posted by apathistYou seem to got all muddled up with the meanings of these words;
Reality is indeterminate. .
The word "indeterminate" means not fully known. Obviously we don't know everything and nobody including I disputes that fact so this is no releavation. What has that got to to with determinism? Determinism isn't about what we know but rather about everything being (or claimed to be) determined by causes REGARDLESS of whether we know those causes (and, more specifically, it means if we very hypothetically did magically know everything and had infinite intellect, we would be able to predict with absolute certainty any outcome from those causes; so no 'true' quantum randomness; only pseudo-randomness. But, as I said, we don't know everything).
03 Jun 17
Originally posted by apathistThen you "understand" wrong. Acknowledging that we cannot rationally dismiss the possibility doesn't imply we 'wish' it. I also acknowledge the possibility of no hidden variables and there being true randomness; do I 'wish' that as well?
I understand that your camp [b]wishes there were hidden variables involved in quantum behavior.[/b]
03 Jun 17
Originally posted by humyAnd that is the fundamental nature of reality. Anyway, so you figure that physics is wrong, and determinism is true. I understand that. It's normal that the dinosaurs have to die off.
You seem to got all muddled up with the meanings of these words;
The word "indeterminate" means not fully known. ...
03 Jun 17
Originally posted by humyThen we've circled around back to the start. Wtf is 'true randomness'? No cause?
Then you "understand" wrong. Acknowledging that we cannot rationally dismiss the possibility doesn't imply we 'wish' it. I also acknowledge the possibility of no hidden variables and there being true randomness; do I 'wish' that as well?
Can't make progress under that old paradigm.
04 Jun 17
14 edits
Originally posted by apathistNO. Modern physics is right and I never said/implied the contrary. Contrary to popular belief, the actual modern physics says very little if anything on the issue of determinism and its just a myth that quantum physics, not to be confused with any metaphysical interpretation of it, says some events are truly random as opposed to merely pseudo random. That doesn't imply true randomness doesn't exist; only that we currently cannot rationally know that it exists even if it does
so you figure that physics is wrong,.
and determinism is true.
I never said that and I just clearly explained I have no opinion on that ( because "it is better to have no opinion than one based on ignorance" ) . Exactly which part of that didn't you understand?
I understand that.
Then you "understand" wrong. Please read what I ACTUALLY say in my posts.