I mean, addiction is a bitch, but we also punish people socially for things like being tall or short of needing glasses or being gay, so, yes.“The world is really screwed up and made much, much more unfair by the fact that we reward people and punish people for things they have no control over,” Sapolsky said. “We’ve got no free will. Stop attributing stuff to us that isn’t there.”
Ah, so you don't punish people for DUI because they had no choice? OK.
What I take from it is that we should never let offenders out of prison because they lack the capacity to not re-offend. It's Calvinism without the god part and with a lipstick of pseudo-science.“The world is really screwed up and made much, much more unfair by the fact that we reward people and punish people for things they have no control over,” Sapolsky said. “We’ve got no free will. Stop attributing stuff to us that isn’t there.”
Ah, so you don't punish people for DUI because they had no choice? OK.
If this were true, I'd own a much nicer video card.ITT ATOTers get pissed off when they learn their brain has been making decisions before they’ve been consciously aware of them for their entire lives.
If you can't help yourself and MUST drive drunk you should be punished to the extent that you are not allowed to own or drive a motor vehicle. It's common sense.I mean, addiction is a bitch, but we also punish people socially for things like being tall or short of needing glasses or being gay, so, yes.
I tend to think like that too if the offenders' crimes are sufficiently egregious. If they are in addition irredeemable they should remain in detention. It happens plenty. Debates about "free will" are superfluous.What I take from it is that we should never let offenders out of prison because they lack the capacity to not re-offend. It's Calvinism without the god part and with a lipstick of pseudo-science.
You were compelled to post that here, then, after your brain had committed to post, you unconsciously made up a rationale that explains to you why you "chose" to post it.You chose to post that here. So freewill is real.
You were compelled to post that here, then, after your brain had committed to post, you unconsciously made up a rationale that explains to you why you "chose" to post it.
Free will is clearly false.
Can you, though? Prove it.Dumb. Lots of stuff isn't really a decision we've made as much as it is 'normal' for us to make said decision, but we still have free will. I can smash my hand with a hammer if I feel like it, regardless of how dumb or against my nature it'd be.
Prove what, that I can make a decision about something not decided by my genes? You can't prove a negative. It's still illogical to suggest that everything we do is predestined though.Can you, though? Prove it.
eh? I shitpost, there is no will involved. it's what I do.
It is true. All of it.Stanford scientist, after decades of study, concludes: We don’t have free will
You may think you chose to read this, but Stanford scientist Robert Sapolsky would disagree. He says virtually all human behavior is beyond our conscious control.www.latimes.com
This sounds like an interesting read.
Prove that you can smash your hand with a hammer, dummy.Prove what, that I can make a decision about something not decided by my genes? You can't prove a negative. It's still illogical to suggest that everything we do is predestined though.
What makes you think he's not been exposed to other forms of reasoning?This only shows the demented side of following one form of reasoning without exposure to others.
LOL okay.Scientists are put up on an unnecessary pedestal of intellectual superiority.
They never introspect or realize they operate under presumption and greed just as much as any other man to achieve ulterior motives.
As in you think I am compelled to post here. But I am not.Wait, you're saying there's a lack of will too?
Did... did I just win an argument on the internet?
Is that toast I smell? *wanders off muttering