1. Standard memberknightmeister
    knightmeister
    Uk
    Joined
    21 Jan '06
    Moves
    443
    17 Mar '08 20:251 edit
    If the outcome of a random event is known then does that mean that it suddenly becomes a determined event?

    My friend whitey on another thread seems to believe that simply knowing what has occurred in the past proves that the past MUST be determined and no other outcome was possible . My gut feeling is that this is basically bull really because if he's right then there can be no such thing as a past random event. Infact it would exclude randomness from the known universe.

    Maybe he doesn't believe that random events actually can occurr and that Heisenberg was actually wrong , but I don't think he really thinks that so what's going on? He seems to think that an event simply occurring proves that it has to be a determined event because it exists in a past timeline that has to be unique. But surely he must exclude random events from this (which are by definition not determined events)............

    "Whether or not Hitler knows his future, whether or not he can know his future, he still has a future, and it is still the one I know he had. He therefore had no free will." -- WHITEHEAD

    Here it seems to me that he is saying that simply the fact that he knows what Hitler did in the past proves that his choices must be determined choices. So knowing an event has occurred proves it is a determined event - therefore random past events cannot be known.????? does that add up?
  2. Joined
    17 Jul '07
    Moves
    2949
    17 Mar '08 21:323 edits
    Originally posted by knightmeister
    If the outcome of a random event is known then does that mean that it suddenly becomes a determined event?

    My friend whitey on another thread seems to believe that simply knowing what has occurred in the past proves that the past MUST be determined and no other outcome was possible . My gut feeling is that this is basically bull really because if h a determined event - therefore random past events cannot be known.????? does that add up?
    What does it mean to "have" a future that hasn't taken place yet? How could the future be "yours" if you haven't "had" it yet -- "properly" speaking?

    The ambiguity in the verb "to have" complicates things. It's just a bad metaphor. If you "make" your future instead, I think it's easier to make sense of free will.

    Also there is a slippage between two different ideas of what it means to be "determined." Surely past events are now fixed or determined in time. I can't say that Hitler came before Napolean. But this doesn't mean that it was determined in the sense of free-will vrs. determinism.

    Speaking of Whitehead, another process-philosopher named Henri Bergson has a very powerful critique of the debate between free-will and determinism where he argues (much better than I could) that the debate is a false problem based on the misunderstanding of time. He says we confuse time with space. The book is "Time and Free Will." And if you haven't, I strongly recommend taking a look at it.
  3. Standard memberknightmeister
    knightmeister
    Uk
    Joined
    21 Jan '06
    Moves
    443
    17 Mar '08 22:091 edit
    Originally posted by bjohnson407
    What does it mean to "have" a future that hasn't taken place yet? How could the future be "yours" if you haven't "had" it yet -- "properly" speaking?

    The ambiguity in the verb "to have" complicates things. It's just a bad metaphor. If you "make" your future instead, I think it's easier to make sense of free will.

    Also there is a slippage between t Free Will." And if you haven't, I strongly recommend taking a look at it.
    Thanks , I agree with much of what you say. This book sounds interesting , is it still in print?

    I agree that the past is fixed but that this doesn't prove that the past was determined. The theory of free will does mean that once something is done , then it is done , so to speak.

    However , although Hitler's future (our past) is in front of him it is fixed in the past for us. His future doesn't exist for him in 1939 because at that point in time he hasn't got there yet. We know what his future "holds for him" but actually it's just our knowledge of the future he chose in the end. The key is to realise there is no "now" and that time can be looked differently from different angles or dimensions.

    Whitey has a problem with this for some reason even though he is well acquainted with mathematical models and theoretical physics. Unfortunately , he lacks acquaintance with his own unconscious agenda to snuff out Christian thought wherever he sees it having a chance of success.
  4. Joined
    05 Apr '04
    Moves
    37874
    17 Mar '08 22:30
    Random never really exists. Given enough detail and considering every possible outcome, you can predict anything.

    Take a roulette wheel. Is it random that it lands on 24, or with enough information could you predict accurately it would land on 24, even if a gust of wind came along at the last minute, which you had already taken into your calculations.

    Nothing is random. Everything is specific
  5. Joined
    04 Feb '05
    Moves
    29132
    17 Mar '08 23:08
    Originally posted by knightmeister
    If the outcome of a random event is known then does that mean that it suddenly becomes a determined event?

    My friend whitey on another thread seems to believe that simply knowing what has occurred in the past proves that the past MUST be determined and no other outcome was possible . My gut feeling is that this is basically bull really because if h ...[text shortened]... a determined event - therefore random past events cannot be known.????? does that add up?
    you made a little mistake in the first sentence 😀

    if the outcome of a random event is known then it is not random anymore and yes, it is determined. as in no randomness because you know what is going to happen, get it?.


    next idea please
  6. Joined
    04 Feb '05
    Moves
    29132
    17 Mar '08 23:25
    Originally posted by Mad Mac MacMad
    Random never really exists. Given enough detail and considering every possible outcome, you can predict anything.

    Take a roulette wheel. Is it random that it lands on 24, or with enough information could you predict accurately it would land on 24, even if a gust of wind came along at the last minute, which you had already taken into your calculations.

    Nothing is random. Everything is specific
    no you cannot

    you cannot predict the actions of intelligent life(free will remember?)
  7. Joined
    01 Jun '06
    Moves
    274
    17 Mar '08 23:56
    Originally posted by Zahlanzi
    no you cannot

    you cannot predict the actions of intelligent life(free will remember?)
    I remember it. It is an illusion.

    Penguin (No Added Value).
  8. Joined
    04 Feb '05
    Moves
    29132
    18 Mar '08 00:07
    Originally posted by Penguin
    I remember it. It is an illusion.

    Penguin (No Added Value).
    really? that is very sad for you. anyway, you could see it. its obvious.

    or of course you could give me an example in which you do not have free will

    since you claim you never have free will you should find enough examples. maybe two even
  9. Joined
    28 Aug '07
    Moves
    3178
    18 Mar '08 02:25
    Originally posted by Mad Mac MacMad
    Random never really exists. Given enough detail and considering every possible outcome, you can predict anything.

    Take a roulette wheel. Is it random that it lands on 24, or with enough information could you predict accurately it would land on 24, even if a gust of wind came along at the last minute, which you had already taken into your calculations.

    Nothing is random. Everything is specific
    Wrong.
    In classical mechanics thinking you are right. Quantum mechanics tells us otherwise. We can see truly random things happening (nuclear decay is the easiest to understand I think)
  10. Joined
    28 Aug '07
    Moves
    3178
    18 Mar '08 02:27
    Originally posted by knightmeister
    If the outcome of a random event is known then does that mean that it suddenly becomes a determined event?

    My friend whitey on another thread seems to believe that simply knowing what has occurred in the past proves that the past MUST be determined and no other outcome was possible . My gut feeling is that this is basically bull really because if h ...[text shortened]... a determined event - therefore random past events cannot be known.????? does that add up?
    If the outcome of a random event is known then does that mean that it suddenly becomes a determined event?

    YES. That's exactly the point! Your friend whitey got it right. You see the logic , now?

    More... God contradicts the laws of determinism in quantum mechanics, but I don't want to go this way.
  11. Cape Town
    Joined
    14 Apr '05
    Moves
    52945
    18 Mar '08 06:45
    Originally posted by knightmeister
    However , although Hitler's future (our past) is in front of him it is fixed in the past for us. His future doesn't exist for him in 1939 because at that point in time he hasn't got there yet. We know what his future "holds for him" but actually it's just our knowledge of the future he chose in the end. The key is to realise there is no "now" and that time can be looked differently from different angles or dimensions.
    1. Does existence change, when looked at from different angles?
    2. Does Hitlers future exist? Is that question meaningless unless a perspective is given? You have told us that it doesn't exist from one perspective and does exist from another.
    3. You have also claimed that he has possible alternative futures. Do those also exist from certain perspectives?
    4. What do you mean by 'possible' even when it is outside the realm of all existence (from any perspective).
    5. If God can see all perspectives then he can see all existence - and thus all futures exist for him. So does Hitler not starting WWII and being an icon of peace exist for God? If not, then how can you claim that it is possible?
  12. Joined
    05 Apr '04
    Moves
    37874
    18 Mar '08 08:17
    Originally posted by Zahlanzi
    no you cannot

    you cannot predict the actions of intelligent life(free will remember?)
    I disagree - people are extremely predictable
  13. Standard memberknightmeister
    knightmeister
    Uk
    Joined
    21 Jan '06
    Moves
    443
    18 Mar '08 08:571 edit
    Originally posted by Zahlanzi
    you made a little mistake in the first sentence 😀

    if the outcome of a random event is known then it is not random anymore and yes, it is determined. as in no randomness because you know what is going to happen, get it?.


    next idea please
    I said known in the past not in the future. If you look at whitey's quote you will see he refered to Hitler who lived in our past. He said just knowing (in the past) Hitler's choices proves his choices must have been determined.

    You just need to slow down and read the thing properly. Did you read it at all?
  14. Standard memberknightmeister
    knightmeister
    Uk
    Joined
    21 Jan '06
    Moves
    443
    18 Mar '08 09:042 edits
    Originally posted by twhitehead
    1. Does existence change, when looked at from different angles?
    2. Does Hitlers future exist? Is that question meaningless unless a perspective is given? You have told us that it doesn't exist from one perspective and does exist from another.
    3. You have also claimed that he has possible alternative futures. Do those also exist from certain perspectives and being an icon of peace exist for God? If not, then how can you claim that it is possible?
    But you are not addressing the thread are you. You said that simply knowing what Hitler did in the past proves that his actions must have been determined. It's there in black and white.

    What I am doing is taking YOUR logic and applying it to past random quantum events. By your logic if the outcome of a past random event is known by us then that means it must be determined , but that's an obvious contradiction.

    Let's say Hitler made all his decisions using a random number generator (based on quantum uncertainty) . You now would know the outcome of his decisions by looking at history and yet his decisions would not be random. How would you be able to say that simply knowing his future (as your past) makes his decisions determined (when obviously they would be random)?

    So stop deflecting and answer the point.

    The problem is you love your science and you say you are logical but when I start using both of these to make what you and I both know is a valid point you just can't handle it.

    I have logically proved that simply knowing that an event has occurred does not prove that said event HAS to be determined.

    I am going to choose to make a decision based on generating a random number using my computer now -----76---- . This means that I will make myself a milkshake . HMMMM ..lovely.... Ok , you know the outcome of this choice because you must be reading this after I posted it. Now , prove that my choice HAS TO BE determined simply because you now know about it. You can't . Care to retract your statement about you knowing Hitler's choices proves his choices were determined?
  15. Standard memberknightmeister
    knightmeister
    Uk
    Joined
    21 Jan '06
    Moves
    443
    18 Mar '08 09:08
    Originally posted by serigado
    [b]If the outcome of a random event is known then does that mean that it suddenly becomes a determined event?

    YES. That's exactly the point! Your friend whitey got it right. You see the logic , now?

    More... God contradicts the laws of determinism in quantum mechanics, but I don't want to go this way.[/b]
    I said known in the past not "in advance" ! You guys really need to learn how to read and stop making assumptions. Read CAREFULLY.

    Someone makes a decision in the past based on a random effect or event. Let's say a physicist is playing around one day and decides to do something based on that radnomness. You then get to read about what he did. You now know what happened. Does you knowing what happened prove the decision was determined?
Back to Top