Something Bothering you?/Daily Doldrums

[Adsolution]

I mean how can you truly be someone's friend, you care for them, do crap together, heck even love them as a brother, but how can those emotions be true if you believe they'll go to hell since they don't believe in Islam or Christianity or Judaism? Don't you think that's sick?

It could just as well be a different kind of friendship that yields just as great of an importance to them as the kind of friendship you feel you share with them. While a friend of mine and myself ceased to be friends over the course of the last year due to his increased activity as a Christian and my garnering of an even more distasteful view on what modern religion is, that isn't to say that all people must be put at such shallow odds. This friend may fear for your safety and believes you will go to Hell, but perhaps he also trusts you enough to make your own decisions, and will always respect and admire you for it.

It is obviously our own free will to either believe something or not, it is not our fate.

How can you be sure? By definition, fate is the most logical way of thinking, and it's currently how I believe the Universe works: - Everything that happens is a reaction to something else. It's calculated, it's precise. There can and will only be one precise outcome ever since the beginning of time. "Free will" is the much more abstract concept, as it implies a very illogical concept: That choice isn't a reaction, but something completely different, something we cannot even begin to describe or explain. Choosing to side with the concept of total 'free will' is no more logical than partaking in the act of Religious Literalism.

[Son of Dark]

I completely disagree.

To understand fate is to explain its own undoing, just hear me out-

If I ask you to sit down, what will you do? Stay standing? Okay. So, when did you make that choice? When did you make the choice to keep standing at that point in time, just now? I don't think so.

I believe that every single choice and thing we do was decided before we were even born, even a future choice you have no idea about for example divorcing that guy, you already made the choice, now you're just putting it into play.

It is free will because we chose, I've already made billions of choices before I was born about things I haven't even experienced yet, but I didn't make them consciously, but as these points in time come up, our choices are then made. So if fate does exist, then we control it, not visa versa.

But more importantly, there is no point of fate even existing then, if we made the choices already, why? Why not just make them now? Of course if fate does exist regardless of it having no purpose, then we still make our own choices.

That is my theory and I believe it to be as logical as anything

[Adsolution]

If I ask you to sit down, what will you do? Stay standing? Okay. So, when did you make that choice? When did you make the choice to keep standing at that point in time, just now? I don't think so.

I'm rather confused by what you're trying to convey here. If you're asked to sit down, depending on your brain's likeness of wanting to abide by external commands (given the complexity of human interaction, the reaction would be much more complex), will decide whether it wants to keep you physically standing or sitting.

It is free will because we chose, I've already made billions of choices before I was born about things I haven't even experienced yet, but I didn't make them consciously, but as these points in time come up, our choices are then made. So if fate does exist, then we control it, not visa versa.

Why would that be defined as free will though? If you and I both do view this in a similar fashion which I'm quite sure we do, then you'd know that someone contemplating whether they should eat lasagna or fish for dinner is just as methodical as rust appearing on metal after the rain. Because the metal did eventually rust, does that for some reason grant it the title of possessing free will?

But more importantly, there is no point of fate even existing then, if we made the choices already, why? Why not just make them now?

Why does four come after three? You need to get from one place to another, and no matter how strange the jump may seem, all it really is is a reaction; be it a large one or not.

[Son of Dark]

Don't you think you're going on about 'reaction, cause and effect" rather than fate?

It may have been instinct to stand or sit, but it doesn't have to be, could have thought about it as well, nevertheless it was a choice that was made, and the rust on metal bit, you can't compare that to an organism, free-will cannot be present within an object.

Of course there are these type of ants that can die if constantly going in a circle due to their path being lost, they can't individually think about it, it's instinct, but you can't compare them either as they don't have the ability to think individually as other animals.

EDIT- Okay so I guess the reaction cause and effect is related to fate, but just because something reacts to something does not mean it was destined, it happened because of the cause, simple as, and the cause was chosen, of cause if metal reacts with water that wasn't chosen, it can't be helped, however that does not conclude that it was fate.

[Adsolution]

Don't you think you're going on about 'reaction, cause and effect" rather than fate?

I keep repeating the word because that's what everything is. There logically is no way to change the outcome, as the motive of whatever would change it is simply another reaction caused by something else. It essentially is fate.

It may have been instinct to stand or sit, but it doesn't have to be, it could have thought about it as well,

I'm not sure why, but you are for some reason assuming a reaction can only be certain things. Our thoughts are reactions to what's going on around us; it's not instinct in the sense that we don't think about it - we do think about it, but our thoughts are simply another reaction with a logical outcome. If we 'change our minds,' that's yet another logical chemical reaction taking place. Our brains' complexions are simply playing out in front of us. The fact that we're able to experience our brains thinking about something doesn't for some reason separate ourselves from the pretty solidly known fact that our thoughts, motives, every step we take and every emotion felt are just a logical chemical reaction taking place. If an entirely identical brain - identical cell-for-cell - were in an absolutely, 100% identical environment, then logically every single thought and motive that occurs would be the exact same.

and the rust on metal bit, you can't compare that to an organism, free-will cannot be present within an object.

Why not? I don't agree with the existence of total 'free will' in the first place, but in what way are organisms not just very complicated objects? I was under the assumption that you did not believe in entities.

Of course there are these type of ants that can die if constantly going in a circle due to their path being lost, they can't individually think about it, it's instinct, but you can't compare them either as they don't have the ability to think individually as other animals.

Of course they do, just not nearly on the same level. The more developed a brain is, the greater level of consciousness (self-awareness) it perceives. Ants have extraordinarily miniscule brains that are likely only somewhat more complex than a modern, top-of-the-line AI, but it just as well would have some level of awareness. I'm not sure if there's anything specific required for consciousness to exist in the first place as no one really does, but logically, there's nothing separating an ant from a human, an ant from a very well-programmed AI, and an AI from a load of metal.

EDIT- Okay so I guess the reaction cause and effect is related to fate, but just because something reacts to something does not mean it was destined, it happened because of the cause, simple as, and the cause was chosen, of cause if metal reacts with water that wasn't chosen, it can't be helped, however that does not conclude that it was fate.

All I'm implying by 'fate' is that there is one possible outcome within a circumstance. The notion is the technical equivalent to fate, as due to there only being one possible outcome, an observer of the isolated system would see the outcome if it could peer into the future - an observer being something outside our Universe, watching, but not interacting. The moment they interact with anything in or about it, they are then a part of it.

[Son of Dark]

I keep repeating the word because that's what everything is. There logically is no way to change the outcome, as the motive of whatever would change it is simply another reaction caused by something else. It essentially is fate.

I don't get what you're saying here, what do you mean there's no way to change it? Change what? If you're on about events of course they can't be changed, but can be chosen, so how is it essentially fate?

I'm not sure why, but you are for some reason assuming a reaction can only be certain things. Our thoughts are reactions to what's going on around us; it's not instinct in the sense that we don't think about it - we do think about it, but our thoughts are simply another reaction with a logical outcome. If we 'change our minds,' that's yet another logical chemical reaction taking place. Our brains' complexions are simply playing out in front of us. The fact that we're able to experience our brains thinking about something doesn't for some reason separate ourselves from the pretty solidly known fact that our thoughts, motives, every step we take and every emotion felt are just a logical chemical reaction taking place. If an entirely identical brain - identical cell-for-cell - were in an absolutely, 100% identical environment, then logically every single thought and motive that occurs would be the exact same.

Okay, Jellyfish have no brains, they only rely on instinct and senses, so how can this argument be justified? Of course they'd be the same in that instance, but that's not reality. And it still would not be fate, just a 100% knowing that that would be because of the given situation.

Why not? I don't agree with the existence of total 'free will' in the first place, but in what way are organisms not just very complicated objects? I was under the assumption that you did not believe in entities.

Hold on just a minute, you cannot state that something is just an advanced version of the other thing, they're complete different things. You're telling me that the metal has a choice in something? I don't think so

Of course they do, just not nearly on the same level. The more developed a brain is, the greater level of consciousness (self-awareness) it perceives. Ants have extraordinarily miniscule brains that are likely only somewhat more complex than a modern, top-of-the-line AI, but it just as well would have some level of awareness. I'm not sure if there's anything specific required for consciousness to exist in the first place as no one really does, but logically, there's nothing separating an ant from a human, an ant from a very well-programmed AI, and an AI from a load of metal.

What you just stated is actually irrelevant, you said it yourself, ants don't share the same level of consciousness as we do, they still make choices however, and even if they're not exactly conscious of making their choices, they still make choices, their instinct and senses play a part.

All I'm implying by 'fate' is that there is one possible outcome within a circumstance. The notion is the technical equivalent to fate, as due to there only being one possible outcome, an observer of the isolated system would see the outcome if it could peer into the future - an observer being something outside our Universe, watching, but not interacting. The moment they interact with anything in or about it, they are then a part of it.

I don't fully understand what you're implying here, but what do you mean there's only one possible outcome? The possibilities of anything are infinite, the only reason you could state that is if you believe in 'time', well it's not only fate I don't believe in but it's time as well. Time only exists as much as length, weight, mass, and other measurements exist, time itself is not real.

I do not believe in future at all, because another point is that if you believe in time, which I assume everyone here does, then you must also believe in fate, I am the only one who believes in neither, I think that there's point going deep into this matter as it's a simple question of free-will to be honest, you seem to be going so deep that the relevance of what you are discussing is steering from fate, this argument could keep going back and forth, when there is but a simple question, do we choose? Of course we do, you're 'reaction only occurs because the circumstance' lecture, I could easily go against a reaction to prove it, just for the sake of it, and then you could state, 'oh, but it was "for the sake of it" that you did that, so my reaction theory is true'

See how there is no answer for this, it just shows that you can't go deep into this, it makes no sense, evidently resulting that fate has no purpose, therefore should not exist, and the same goes for time


Lecture above





It's not as if without fate everything will be frozen, paradox this that and the other, nothing would be in balance, or would it?

We can make our own choices without fate, surely?

You may be able to argue against all my points intellectually, and I accept that, but can you answer me this?

Does fate even have a purpose?

If so care to tell me what it is? Do you even know?!

[Adsolution]

I don't get what you're saying here, what do you mean there's no way to change it? Change what? If you're on about events of course they can't be changed, but can be chosen, so how is it essentially fate?

"Choosing" is a very fake term in the sense that it corresponds with the illogicality of "free will". We realistically aren't choosing what we follow through on, we're experiencing the emotion of "thought" brought upon us by our conscience experiencing these chemical reactions that play out the only physically logical outcome.

Okay, Jellyfish have no brains, they only rely on instinct and senses, so how can this argument be justified? Of course they'd be the same in that instance, but that's not reality. And it still would not be fate, just a 100% knowing that that would be because of the given situation.

Jellyfish and bugs do have brains, but especially in the case of jellyfish, they're referred to as a 'ganglia' instead of a brain, as their control center is not centralised, but rather spread out throughout their entire body. This information is very entry-level when it comes to biology, and you are currently demonstrating a thorough lack of understanding as to how these things work. Instinct comes from the brain (or ganglia), just like everything else; all instinct is are fundamental things that are programmed into our minds directly from birth and are not learned through experience or taught. Instinct exists so that we have somewhere to start, and as such are the most preserved and integral parts of our mind.

In the case of jellyfish specifically, they're a relatively unique species given that they're by far the simplest lifeforms around relative to their size. What is clear though is that consciousness and self-awareness is entirely relative to the complexity of the mind, so there's not a very good chance that jellyfish are complex enough to have developed much of a conscience at all. The fundamental point however is that there isn't anything that separates an organism from an idle object, it's all to do with how complex that object is; the more complex it is, the more of a developed conscious it will assume. At least, that's what we can confirm for the time being - believing in a much less grounded theory would just be idiotic unless you're willing to provide just as much evidence of its validity as what's been provided for this theory.

Hold on just a minute, you cannot state that something is just an advanced version of the other thing, they're complete different things.

Why have you come to that conclusion? The only way matter could differentiate itself like that is through the presence of an entity, something that does not abide by the laws of physics.

It's not as if without fate everything will be frozen, paradox this that and the other, nothing would be in balance, or would it?

If you've ever read up on String Theory - likely one of the most intriguing concepts that tackles time and the dimensions in a very logical way, then perhaps you'll be a lot less on-edge about this. Like anything, there's no point in religiously believing in a theory, but it's a theory; they give you something to think about, a place to work from. Regardless of whether or not it's true, what else do we have? String Theory, for instance, is so far the only theory I've read on the subject that seems to make perfect sense in every regard so far.

You may be able to argue against all my points intellectually, and I accept that, but can you answer me this?

Does fate even have a purpose?

If so care to tell me what it is? Do you even know?!

I can't, but that's what everyone's trying to find out. Perhaps we will figure it out at some point, but we have no idea what we're up against.

[spiraldoor]

You may be able to argue against all my points intellectually, and I accept that, but can you answer me this?

Yes.

Does fate even have a purpose?

No, it's just a bunch of complex stuff arising from physical processes.

If so care to tell me what it is? Do you even know?!

N/A

[Adsolution]

Given the fact that we have no idea what could lie outside of the Universe if anything at all, maybe it plays by different set of rules and the formation of this place wasn't by means of something that makes sense within our own Universe. It could be absolutely anything, literally, but in order to find out what, I'd go off the inference that it was something we can understand, so a bunch of physical processes.

[Dark Lum Lord]

This planet in general bothers me, so does human behavior and the human population in general, as well as myself and my life [Insert more teenage angst here]. Anyways, I usually listen to "Free Bird" while thinking about that shit even though it only depresses me much more, because I like to listen to songs fitting with my feelings.

[Son of Dark]

If you think about it logically time can't exist either

[Earth Gwee]

I'd like to share this with those who haven't seen it:
This is my Buddy. I wanted to celebrate his life by drawing the perfect representation of how I want to remember him.


I am slowly coming to full acceptance of his passing, but I ended up crying again tonight. I feel like he should be in my room in the morning, but reality keeps hitting me hard. I'm not looking forward to the bawling I'll be doing when I wake up tomorrow.

[Son of Dark]

"Choosing" is a very fake term in the sense that it corresponds with the illogicality of "free will". We realistically aren't choosing what we follow through on, we're experiencing the emotion of "thought" brought upon us by our conscience experiencing these chemical reactions that play out the only physically logical outcome.

I understand

Jellyfish and bugs do have brains, but especially in the case of jellyfish, they're referred to as a 'ganglia' instead of a brain, as their control center is not centralised, but rather spread out throughout their entire body. This information is very entry-level when it comes to biology, and you are currently demonstrating a thorough lack of understanding as to how these things work. Instinct comes from the brain (or ganglia), just like everything else; all instinct is are fundamental things that are programmed into our minds directly from birth and are not learned through experience or taught. Instinct exists so that we have somewhere to start, and as such are the most preserved and integral parts of our mind.

In the case of jellyfish specifically, they're a relatively unique species given that they're by far the simplest lifeforms around relative to their size. What is clear though is that consciousness and self-awareness is entirely relative to the complexity of the mind, so there's not a very good chance that jellyfish are complex enough to have developed much of a conscience at all. The fundamental point however is that there isn't anything that separates an organism from an idle object, it's all to do with how complex that object is; the more complex it is, the more of a developed conscious it will assume. At least, that's what we can confirm for the time being - believing in a much less grounded theory would just be idiotic unless you're willing to provide just as much evidence of its validity as what's been provided for this theory.

Possibly, but I still cannot agree that their is no difference between an organism and idle object, you elaborate on the fact of the 'conscious' level differs, but I think the more relevant point you should be pursuing is the fact that 'oh, the rust occurred because it was there, was always going to happen thus it was fate', comparing to a human 'his emotions said that, and his environment told his instincts to do this, so his brain chose that, making it fate'.

Very well

Why have you come to that conclusion? The only way matter could differentiate itself like that is through the presence of an entity, something that does not abide by the laws of physics.

I could ask you the same thing, why have you come to that conclusion? You're just disagreeing with my point and bringing up your own without explaining. I have come to my conclusion because it's obvious. I look at a mini-fan and cloud, or myself, if you state they are advanced versions of the same thing, then your individually categorizing, which is wrong as a great many factors come to play when it comes to comparing things.

If you've ever read up on String Theory - likely one of the most intriguing concepts that tackles time and the dimensions in a very logical way, then perhaps you'll be a lot less on-edge about this. Like anything, there's no point in religiously believing in a theory, but it's a theory; they give you something to think about, a place to work from. Regardless of whether or not it's true, what else do we have? String Theory, for instance, is so far the only theory I've read on the subject that seems to make perfect sense in every regard so far.

So fate has no purpose as the theory then explains, these strings are all we need

I can't, but that's what everyone's trying to find out. Perhaps we will figure it out at some point, but we have no idea what we're up against.

Another way to put it would be if there even is anything we're up against. You see, no-one knows the purpose of fate, existence is only present because of purpose, and we all know that without purpose, nothing would exist.

You may urge to state that "we don't have a purpose though", no, you do not, not an individual purpose no, but as a whole you do have one.

You see we can go into all the theories and mechanics of everything, but in the end it all comes down to purpose, why?


LECTURE ABOVE

but then if I'm asked to simply pick up the blue can or the green one, and I choose one, how is that 'fate' choosing it? regardless of favored color or any other factor, and just pick one randomly, what's the point of that being 'fate', why not just me choosing to pick it, and think about it Adsolution, if it's really "our thoughts, emotions, experience of consciousness and instinct that led us to that choice, so fate!" are you saying all those things were not our own? I mean the thought process delves from our experience and personality, so it's all us, leading US to choose it, never mind if it "was fate", it was our choice that made it fate, which explains how we control fate, also explaining how there is no point of it existing



You cannot explain whether fate has a purpose or not, however evidently I have...



MAIN POINT (BELOW)

You say it's all our thoughts and consciousness that lead to what we do so that was always going to happen so fate exists, well in that way of course it does Adsolution, but how can you be so blind? Are my thoughts not my own? What I think and feel is me, personal and individual, the given situation and environment shaped things so fate predicts the reaction, but it was me all along, once again resulting in the fact that fate knows OUR choices, once again proving that fate has no purpose whatsoever and therefore has no reason to exist in the first place

[Haruka]

@EG My condolences, Gwee.

It was pretty much a shock for me when my persian cat passed away. He had the habit of sleeping in the corner of my bed when I was going to sleep...

[Son of Dark]

Losing a pet can be incredibly saddening, when I was 13 I had a Syrian Hamster, he managed to live out for 2 and a half years, then he was having trouble to breathe, so we took him to the vet, they put Clyde on an oxygen tank but he couldn't really live like that. The nurse then secretly asked my mother that it's best to put him down, and she agreed.

When I was told by the vet at the time, I was cool with it and I knew it was the right thing, but I will never forgive my mother for not consulting me about that, ever...

I don't know what it's like to lose a dog or cat, they're much bigger and live a lot longer than a Syrian Hamster, I'm very sorry to hear about those passings.

If you don't mind me asking, did you both bury your cat and dog or cremate them, or something else?

[Haruka]

Actually 95% of the persian cats usually don't last more than 3 years because of a genetical decease that develops a fatal ill in their kidnies, and sadly the same thing happened for our cat. It happened from a day to other, it was pretty much a shock. We buried him but if it was happening now we couldn't since the law that started in the beginning of this year forces animals to be cremated. I think it should have been the solution in first place since we could have kept the ashes.

[Son of Dark]

Aw man, I cremated Clyde but I never got the ashes, I should have cremated him myself, instead of sending him of, apparently he was burned along with a hedgehog, the vet told me that "you need extremely high temperatures to burn hamsters!", I don't care, I should have done it myself, damn it.

Syrian hamsters' average lifespan is 2 to 2 and a half years, so at least he lived to his full, your Persian cat only lived 3 years too eh

[Earth Gwee]

We cremated Buddy. We should be getting his ashes soon. Mom wants to use them to nurture one of our young trees.

He lived for over 16 years, four years past his life expectancy. I am happy for that at least.

[spiraldoor]

If you think about it logically time can't exist either

[Son of Dark]

What? You believe length and weight exist? Time only exists as much as a measurement does, since that's what it is