Who are you really?

This will make you feel better.

Did i say it doesn't exist? You are good at straw man arguments (and not in anything else apparently).

The sense of control and sense of ownership of your own actions, intentions and thoughts are still being manifested into your consciousness by subconsciousness and unconscious mind. Subconsciousness doesn't have a monopoly over your abilities, you are literally your own subconsciousness, i cannot fathom why people keep thinking as if it was a different entity from your consciousness.



We don't have control over our subconsciousness and yes, deeply held fears and beliefs can be changed despite of this.

Your conscious mind you supposedly control is fed information by subconsciousness non-stop. Your supposed free choices you consciously think you are making, are fed into your consciousness by subconsciousness. How you process information, how you change your mind based on the information you receive, all of this is done in a unconscious level in your brain, not by your conscious mind.

Objectively we know that everything that you are consciously aware of, all your thoughts and your intentions and your impulses and your impulses to resist other impulses and thoughts, we know that all those things are preceded by events in your nervous system of which you are not aware, that you didn't create. The state of your brain in every sense this very moment is the product of variables of which you are not responsible for, you didn't pick your genes, your environment, your parents, you were not responsible for how your interaction with the world and other people changed the micro structure of your brain to its current form. You haven't created your neurophysiology and yet that neurophysiology is responsible for every single conscious thought you are going to have. That same neurophysiology is also responsible whether a person is going to defeat its fear of x or to change its deeply hold belief in face of an counter-argument, for example.

Your conscious and subconscious are part of the same system, but they're not interchangeable or the same. Your subconscious doesn't judge or weight things. It can not reason, why people think they're interchangeable is beyond ludicrous.

You're essential arguing self awareness/reflective awareness (and learning) is impossible because "we only know what we know" rather than what we're capable of knowing/percipience. So it's kinda hard to bash at me for "stawmanning" your argument when you imply that. (you literally double down on it, lol)

It's true we can't control many variables in our life but those aren't exactly predetermined either, nor does it disprove "free will". If you want to argue that determinism is true because every current action taken by an agent can be traced to another event you'd have prove that every alike situation have no variance. I understand the temptation to want to argue against responsibility, random or predetermined events won't matter to the average person, as they can be seen as interchangeable to the most cynic minds. But the deterministic argument, that one cannot have free will or be morally responsible because one can't be truly responsible for the way one is false flat if actualization isn't impossible. Unless you can prove all neurons act in a deterministic manner in any neural system under all conditions given...Then you're wrong.

Also we don't know anything objectively. The objective doesn't exist. Axioms and empirically driven conclusions exist but there's still uncertainty.

Your perceived conscious judgement or weighting of things consciously was still fed into your consciousness from subconsciousness. The information you perceive to come up with your conscious alone simply isn't so and we know this through neuroscience.



Self awareness does not equal freedom of will. Reflective awareness does not equal freedom of will either. You are good at arguing against people on their points in a way they were not made. Keep up the good work!



You'd have to prove alike situations even exist (which they don't).



Not having freedom of will and not having moral responsibility are not the same thing. We still have responsibilities even though we don't have freedom of will. I don't get it why people think not having freedom of will some how means that "Oh, well nobody is responsible for their actions since they didn't have the freedom of will to control themselves, we should just release all criminals". No, you already accept the fact that people carry responsibilities despite not being in control of their actions. We understand what psychopathy is, we understand what sociopathy is, under criminal justice system you can be innocent of your actions under the claim of insanity. That person is still responsible for his/her actions, but we understand that his/her brain activity is what caused him/her to do what ever it is he/she did, not his/her conscious mind even though at the time of doing what he/she did, that was his/her conscious mind.

The base of your challenge there is incoherent, fyi.



Objectively as in we know through scientific study and there is no controversy about it. Of coarse it is not absolute, we can learn new information that contradicts what we know today.

Deep... I didn't bother reading anything in this thread.

>still insisting that the subconscious has the ability to reason
>not showing me your magical system that can predict or map neurons in a way that proves they're deterministic
>thinks objective is possible yet believes in determinism

lolno, it's clear with what I'm talking with.

It's a rare treat to meet people who believe determinism is true, but also believe in responsible of said non rational agents.

Yes, i do insist things that science tells us.



Once again, this guy makes statements as if i made them and asks me to prove and point things out that have nothing to do with my argument. Keep up the good work, maybe one day it will work.



I don't expect a person who makes incoherent challenges to understand what i meant by it even AFTER i explained it.



Can't extend the same courtesy to you, you are just another small mind in a very large ocean. Also you don't get any brownie points like i do.

And I guess we've reached our endpoint in this debate. Thanks for the entertainment gentlemen.

I'm surprised this kept going so long... I got on tonight and was nailed with 23 notifications.

Well what did you expect? You brought SD material to IB and it just so happens that some of us can actually uphold a lengthy argument.

This was SD material? I thought SD was mostly people stroking each others' internet penises while having no actual passion for the subject.

Though, I might be looking at this wrong, and this is probably exactly what that is.

1. Science hasn't shown us that they're interchangeable. Left and right brains don't function the same way.

2. I can't believe I have to say this but metaphysics and Neurons have everything to do with determining if something is deterministic. If you don't understand how it related to your point of determinism you need to stop talking about determinism.

3. Objectivism is retarded and anyone who claims the "objective" exist is too. Do you not realize the irony in saying something is absolutely true while arguing that humans are deterministic and therefore not able to exist outside of the subjective?

>brownie points
Lol you're still mad about that.

@coconutt-8796419

I'm actually kind of confused... what is this debate about anyway?

It seems like we're still talking about the same thing, but...

In my case, I won't try to support or deny either side of the argument, I'm not educated enough to do that for now.

It seems like both of you had debates in the past, and some of them had unwanted results?

Nevertheless, thank you both for keeping the topic alive for this long, and I'm happy this became an interesting discussion between people.

I managed to get my answer quite a while ago, so I'm happy with the result of making this thread.

I'll just stay on the fence for a while longer, and as I live my life I might eventually come to an actual decision.

I could choose now, but I feel like I should put some time into researching both sides of the topic on my own, and learn these things with my own eyes.

[size=18][color=red]Until next time![/color][/size]

P.S. I quoted you Cruz, because for some reason the @cruz737 function doesn't work even though I typed your name verbatim from your profile URL

Edit: Well, I don't know why it didn't work the first time, but it worked now.

Science has shown to us that when we study the brain while you are making decisions, we are able to predict (in one study it was 95% accuracy) what your decision will be before you are consciously aware of it. I wonder where is your freedom of will if i can know your answer before you do.



Still going i see, sorry, don't need those, bye.



What actually is retarded is for you to keep going about this even after i explained what i meant by the word objective. Oh well, stupid dogs don't learn new tricks i guess.



Seems like you still don't know what sarcasm is.

>Decision mapping is inherently deterministic so this somehow proves the universe and by extension humans are deterministic, also somehow proves that subconscious makes decisions
The best part is you don't give us a link proving this nor any context on what kind of test were given.
Like, as far I know, they've could've walked up a kid, make a punching motion, and then patted themselves on the back when the kid cowers or tries protecting his face first.

>still not proving how the neurons acts in a deterministic way, probably doesn't even know what a neuron is
>still now proving how conscious and subconscious are one in the same despite making this claim multiple times
>claiming objective still exist among scientist

You're awfully persistent for someone who refuses to back up any of their claims. You haven't really proven anything thus far other than you like repeating the same thing over and over again with varying insults.


PS. Sarcasm means you're saying something in an ironic manner. Or "to use words that mean the opposite of what you really want to say especially in order to insult someone, to show irritation, or to be funny". So when you're saying I get no "brownie points" (from who?), you're not making any sense.

http://exploringthemind.com/the-mind/brain-scans-can-reveal-your-decisions-7-seconds-before-you-decide



Just another example of you not being able to actually refute anything, you just want to insert yourself into conversations and try to say something clever about something.



Sigh, the irony, seriously. It is awfully repetitive for small minds to self reflect, and quite a lot in fact. Where is your proof for anything, you just repeat the same thing over and over again with varying insults.



Still going on about this even after i explained it, thinks argument is stupid when in fact is too stupid himself to understand it.

PS. Sarcasm is not necessarily ironic and the sarcastic content of a statement will be dependent upon the context in which it appears. Don't try to lecture people on things you don't understand.

That was your big experiment. Button pressing? It's as meaningful as the joke example I made of physically intimidating children.

And you wonder why I never took you seriously.

Good job proving the consciousness and subconsciousness are one in the same though. Or that the universe itself is deterministic.
:y

[edit] the comment section has more compelling arguments/thoughts than the one's you've brought.



Thanks for the link though. Some tidbits here and there are actually interesting.

I guess all the seriousness is meh so here a video of what im about.

Eidt: whoops i posted foreskins video. MEh.
Kuro ai/ dark love is the sauce, art/winter/rick-kun/otherfgts
Music by a retarded methhead with a casio and a bunch of zombie molly fans

To a small mind, sure it is a small experiment, you probably also fail to see the bigger implication it has, but that is none of my business.



Pretty meaningless quote, after i fixed it, still makes as much sense and still explains nothing.