Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   update: freedom found, natural selection theory pushed aside
Straggler
Member
Posts: 10333
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 286 of 318 (481554)
09-11-2008 3:43 PM
Reply to: Message 283 by Syamsu
09-11-2008 2:51 PM


Re: Instants Not Decisions
Why do you deny the existence and importance of instants when you are experiencing one now? And another. And another. Your resistance is irrational. You should seek to understand. Rejecting the reality of instants will not help you move forwards intellectually.
You just need to make the paradigm shift from decisions to moments. Of course moments are the way in which we as decision making beings experience collections of instants within the limitations of our perception. If you make that transdimensional breakthrough then the collective moment of instantaneous realisation will manifest itself upon you.
Consider for example the moment of conception. This profound moment in the timeline traversion of every living thing is a key collection of initiation instants. Of course some instants are more important than others. Some instants last longer than others in objective time. In the case of conception some moments are also all too instant. Alas. It is this relationship that you need to grasp in order to get beyond a mere approximation theory of decisons such that you can appreciate the true instantiated nature of time progression in a closed dimensional manifold space.
If you are just willing to forego all reason, rationality and decsion making ability then you too will understand this all encomapssing concept.
Feel free to ask any questions. I am here to help.
Edited by Straggler, : Edited a sentance that made no sense

This message is a reply to:
 Message 283 by Syamsu, posted 09-11-2008 2:51 PM Syamsu has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 287 by Syamsu, posted 09-11-2008 3:59 PM Straggler has replied

  
Syamsu 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5590 days)
Posts: 1914
From: amsterdam
Joined: 05-19-2002


Message 287 of 318 (481558)
09-11-2008 3:59 PM
Reply to: Message 286 by Straggler
09-11-2008 3:43 PM


Re: Instants Not Decisions
There seems to be little difference between what you write now, and your philosophical meanderings in th evolution of consciousness thread.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 286 by Straggler, posted 09-11-2008 3:43 PM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 288 by Straggler, posted 09-11-2008 4:14 PM Syamsu has replied

  
Straggler
Member
Posts: 10333
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 288 of 318 (481560)
09-11-2008 4:14 PM
Reply to: Message 287 by Syamsu
09-11-2008 3:59 PM


Re: Instants Not Decisions
The consistency of simultaneaously consecutive instants or 'momentary lapse theory' as I like to call it is indeed a fascinating topic. How can one instant precede another whilst seemingly contradicting all prior and subsequent instants?
The answer of course lies in perceptory moments and the angular momentum of thought. Especially in relation to the decision making process. Where the momentum of conscious thought is conserved (as it must be) an instant can lie outside of the moment such that the contradiction co-efficient is reversed and the "anti-instant" cancels out the momentarily perceived contradiction. The mathematicss of this is relatively simple and can be demonstrated if you are unable to derive this for yourself.
As regards your secondary point I refer you to my previous post.
For a simple overview of the founding principles of 'instants theory' see the link provided http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/0206063

This message is a reply to:
 Message 287 by Syamsu, posted 09-11-2008 3:59 PM Syamsu has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 289 by Syamsu, posted 09-11-2008 4:28 PM Straggler has replied

  
Syamsu 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5590 days)
Posts: 1914
From: amsterdam
Joined: 05-19-2002


Message 289 of 318 (481562)
09-11-2008 4:28 PM
Reply to: Message 288 by Straggler
09-11-2008 4:14 PM


Re: Instants Not Decisions
You can just enter it in your meandering thread about the evolution of consciousness which presents your actual knowledge of freedom.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 288 by Straggler, posted 09-11-2008 4:14 PM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 290 by Straggler, posted 09-11-2008 4:48 PM Syamsu has replied

  
Straggler
Member
Posts: 10333
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 290 of 318 (481563)
09-11-2008 4:48 PM
Reply to: Message 289 by Syamsu
09-11-2008 4:28 PM


Re: Instants Not Decisions
Syamsu
Why do you deny the reality of instants? See the link provided in the previous post. Ask questions if you need to. I am here to guide you if you are willing to be guided.
Open your mind and follow the logic of that which you personally experience continually. Instants.
You can just enter it in your meandering thread about the evolution of consciousness which presents your actual knowledge of freedom.
Because of obvious moderator bias and a general closed mindedness against instants and moment theory I don't think my revelations will be allowed in a real science forum. In this respect at least, namely our willingness to go against the flow and challenge conventional wisdom, we are united.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 289 by Syamsu, posted 09-11-2008 4:28 PM Syamsu has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 291 by Syamsu, posted 09-11-2008 5:09 PM Straggler has replied

  
Syamsu 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5590 days)
Posts: 1914
From: amsterdam
Joined: 05-19-2002


Message 291 of 318 (481565)
09-11-2008 5:09 PM
Reply to: Message 290 by Straggler
09-11-2008 4:48 PM


Re: Instants Not Decisions
Its incomprehensible to me. Alternatives in the future I understand well enough since I use that logic all the time in daily life in making decisions.
Hyperincursive math is more difficult, but Dubois provides examples and tries to use basic language in explaining it. So I can grasp the basic principles of it, which also make sense, because they are much consistent with creationism.
At first I set out to analyze the structure in common knowledge about freedom. No philosophical meandering like you engage in, but the practical knowledge I use when buying groceries or anything.
So that is why I end up with strong logic, logic that is practically useful. And once the logic is accepted, it follows that everything is decided, just as like materialists think everything is caused. Including toothbrushes, which are either in a state of alternatives prior to entering the bathroom, or their state is decided of themselves. I prefer the last.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 290 by Straggler, posted 09-11-2008 4:48 PM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 292 by Straggler, posted 09-11-2008 5:59 PM Syamsu has replied
 Message 294 by likemindedchocolatebar, posted 09-11-2008 10:37 PM Syamsu has replied

  
Straggler
Member
Posts: 10333
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 292 of 318 (481572)
09-11-2008 5:59 PM
Reply to: Message 291 by Syamsu
09-11-2008 5:09 PM


Re: Instants Not Decisions
Your philosophical need to cling onto flawed notions of decisions as the progressional means of time traversation is understandable. However once you appreciate the sequential instancing of reality into snapshot perceptual moment mechanisms you will see decisions for what they are. Namely alternative moments in a trans sequential timeline of instants.
When you consider your groceries do you really decide? Is that choice between smooth or crunchy peanut butter a choice of freewill or something even more profound? Do you choose the peanut butter or does the peanut butter choose you? The answers provided by instant theory suggest that the superposition of transitive states is a conglomorate of all the available options. The past instants of the peanut butter are merged with the past instants of your own grocery experiences to form a quantised field of present perceptual moments. Thus the eventual "choice" is a sum of those moments perceived by both you and the peanut butter. The relative effect of each decision making entity in the field equation is defined by the contradiction co-efficient and the advertsing budget of the peanut butter manufacturer concerned.
Such examples of instants and moment theory in everyday practical situations have affirmed my certainty in the veracity of the theory.
Logic and lack of philosophical bias are inherent to the foundations of instant theory. If only you can look past decisions and see that which lies behind. That of which decisions themselves are constructed. Namely moments formed of instants.
The toothbrush conundrum is where our theories part and where the two can be most easily distinguished. Toothbrushes quite evidently do not contribute to the perceptual moments field. Decision making toothbrushes are quite patently ridiculous. Read the previously linked to article to see how the gravitational effects of bathroom cabinets influence the behaviour and moral proclivities of such non-contributing mechanistic entities as toothbrushes and, to a lesser extent, toothpaste tubes.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 291 by Syamsu, posted 09-11-2008 5:09 PM Syamsu has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 293 by Syamsu, posted 09-11-2008 7:17 PM Straggler has replied

  
Syamsu 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5590 days)
Posts: 1914
From: amsterdam
Joined: 05-19-2002


Message 293 of 318 (481590)
09-11-2008 7:17 PM
Reply to: Message 292 by Straggler
09-11-2008 5:59 PM


Re: Instants Not Decisions
This is not parody anymore, you have to refer to instants as true according to common knowledge now.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 292 by Straggler, posted 09-11-2008 5:59 PM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 297 by Straggler, posted 09-12-2008 9:05 AM Syamsu has replied

  
likemindedchocolatebar
Junior Member (Idle past 5672 days)
Posts: 5
From: Hershey, Pennsylvania
Joined: 09-09-2008


Message 294 of 318 (481627)
09-11-2008 10:37 PM
Reply to: Message 291 by Syamsu
09-11-2008 5:09 PM


Re: Instants Not Decisions
So I can grasp the basic principles of it, which also make sense, because they are much consistent with creationism.
And if they were inconsistant with creationism they would be ignored like you do with the rest of the evidence then? The rabbit hole is getting smaller. More red m & m's

This message is a reply to:
 Message 291 by Syamsu, posted 09-11-2008 5:09 PM Syamsu has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 296 by Syamsu, posted 09-12-2008 5:59 AM likemindedchocolatebar has not replied

  
Open MInd
Member (Idle past 1253 days)
Posts: 261
Joined: 01-24-2007


Message 295 of 318 (481628)
09-11-2008 10:59 PM
Reply to: Message 14 by bluescat48
07-25-2008 10:33 AM


Re: Theory in science
How can Evolution be tested? Would you not have to go back in time and observe the evolution? Furthermore, can't you bend the theory of evolution to fit around any data? Please give an example of evidence that would disprove evolution?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by bluescat48, posted 07-25-2008 10:33 AM bluescat48 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 298 by bluescat48, posted 09-12-2008 9:06 AM Open MInd has replied
 Message 299 by Straggler, posted 09-12-2008 9:18 AM Open MInd has replied
 Message 314 by ramoss, posted 09-12-2008 3:48 PM Open MInd has not replied

  
Syamsu 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5590 days)
Posts: 1914
From: amsterdam
Joined: 05-19-2002


Message 296 of 318 (481688)
09-12-2008 5:59 AM
Reply to: Message 294 by likemindedchocolatebar
09-11-2008 10:37 PM


Re: Instants Not Decisions
No for example, at first I was convinced that decisions had a location, and at this location is nothing. Then I found a paper saying decisions come from nothing and are nowhere. I then adopted the finding of the paper as best I can. Apparently we cant have decisions be predertimined by position either, so that must also be zero.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 294 by likemindedchocolatebar, posted 09-11-2008 10:37 PM likemindedchocolatebar has not replied

  
Straggler
Member
Posts: 10333
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 297 of 318 (481718)
09-12-2008 9:05 AM
Reply to: Message 293 by Syamsu
09-11-2008 7:17 PM


Re: Instants Not Decisions
Are you not experiencing instants now? In the form of perceptualised moment mechanisms? We all have practical common knowledge of instants all of the time. Now. And now. And now. Etc.
You cannot deny this. The evidence is irrefutable.
This is not parody anymore
What parody?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 293 by Syamsu, posted 09-11-2008 7:17 PM Syamsu has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 300 by Syamsu, posted 09-12-2008 9:29 AM Straggler has replied

  
bluescat48
Member (Idle past 4189 days)
Posts: 2347
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2007


Message 298 of 318 (481719)
09-12-2008 9:06 AM
Reply to: Message 295 by Open MInd
09-11-2008 10:59 PM


Re: Theory in science
How can Evolution be tested? Would you not have to go back in time and observe the evolution? Furthermore, can't you bend the theory of evolution to fit around any data? Please give an example of evidence that would disprove evolution?
Finding human fossils in Precambrian rock would be one way.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 295 by Open MInd, posted 09-11-2008 10:59 PM Open MInd has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 305 by Open MInd, posted 09-12-2008 12:28 PM bluescat48 has not replied

  
Straggler
Member
Posts: 10333
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 299 of 318 (481724)
09-12-2008 9:18 AM
Reply to: Message 295 by Open MInd
09-11-2008 10:59 PM


Re: Theory in science
How can Evolution be tested?
By predicting the specifics of new observational evidence.
Would you not have to go back in time and observe the evolution?
No
can't you bend the theory of evolution to fit around any data?
Specific predictions of new data based on theory. You can make theory falsely fit the facts but you are not going to be able to easily make new facts fit the theory. This is the scientific way of avoiding the subjective interpretation of facts that you rightly point out as a potential problem. This is why prediction is superior to mere interpretation in terms of objectivity and reliability. Evolution has numerous examples of verification. ID, for example, has not a single one. Ask yourself why that might be.
Please give an example of evidence that would disprove evolution?
Mammal fossils in the precambrian. Genetic evidence against common ancestry. A method of inheritance that does not allow for descent with modification or the inheritance of modifiable traits etc. etc. etc.
Edited by Straggler, : No reason given.
Edited by Straggler, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 295 by Open MInd, posted 09-11-2008 10:59 PM Open MInd has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 306 by Open MInd, posted 09-12-2008 12:34 PM Straggler has replied

  
Syamsu 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5590 days)
Posts: 1914
From: amsterdam
Joined: 05-19-2002


Message 300 of 318 (481727)
09-12-2008 9:29 AM
Reply to: Message 297 by Straggler
09-12-2008 9:05 AM


Re: Instants Not Decisions
Well I do experience instants yes. But I think you are not true to the evidence of the experience, and the practical use of the knowledge of instants. For example, according to common knowledge one can decide in an instant, and I can experience it. But you say instants exclude decisions.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 297 by Straggler, posted 09-12-2008 9:05 AM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 301 by Straggler, posted 09-12-2008 10:08 AM Syamsu has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024