Do you tend to dislike people who step on bugs?

This is the main board for discussing philosophy - formal, informal and in between.

Re: Do you tend to dislike people who step on bugs?

Postby iambiguous » Wed Oct 14, 2020 7:48 pm

phyllo wrote:Let's just say that I'm not interested in the stuff that interests you and vice versa. (Ditto on the other thread.)

Bug boy and KT can have their thread back.


As long as you allow me to reduce you down to "retorts" like this, I feel entitled to claim victory.

Me, I'm reduced down to this: :banana-dance: =D> 8) :lol: :wink: :banana-dance:
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=176529
Then here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=185296
And here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=194382
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 38649
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: Do you tend to dislike people who step on bugs?

Postby phyllo » Wed Oct 14, 2020 8:17 pm

You can claim whatever you want.

I read your posts and I have no interest in responding. For various reasons.

I gave you a short form explanation of why you should not be expecting a reply. I could have just gone silent but I decided to say something as an ending. It wasn't a retort.

So that's it.

It's been a slice. :character-shaggy:

Ciao
phyllo
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 12121
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 1:41 am

Re: Do you tend to dislike people who step on bugs?

Postby iambiguous » Wed Oct 14, 2020 8:33 pm

phyllo wrote:You can claim whatever you want.

I read your posts and I have no interest in responding. For various reasons.

I gave you a short form explanation of why you should not be expecting a reply. I could have just gone silent but I decided to say something as an ending. It wasn't a retort.

So that's it.

It's been a slice. :character-shaggy:

Ciao


Okay, only mean it this time. 8)
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=176529
Then here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=185296
And here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=194382
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 38649
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: Do you tend to dislike people who step on bugs?

Postby Jakeyjake » Thu Oct 15, 2020 4:28 am

iambiguous wrote:The determinism/free will conundrum is embedded philosophically in what is called an antinomy: "a contradiction between two beliefs or conclusions that are in themselves reasonable; a paradox."

I'm not trying to be flattering, but your concepts are fascinating to me. Did you know that some people believe that once you accept the revelation that you don't have free will, that you gain free will from that point on? They see it sort of like gaining self-awareness for the first time, by acknowledging your lack of awareness, your lack of ability freely influence things. Somehow, you have more agency through that revelation. I feel like the idea is missing internal logical, but it's interesting all the same.
Both philosophers and scientists have been grappling with it now for thousands of years. And, to the best of my current knowledge, it has not been resolved definitively.

Only I take the quandary even further back. How to explain individual attitudes about stepping on bugs going back to a definitive understanding of existence itself: why does something exist and not nothing? And why this something and not something else?

But: accepting that no one seems able to answer questions like this, let's assume that we have free will and this something does in fact exist and we are in it.

Okay, how then to explain individual reactions to stepping on bugs. As scientists and/or philosophers, can that be pinned down? Maybe. Maybe not.

What I surmise though is embedded in this:

Someone would have to have followed you around 24/7, year in and year out. Noting all of the experiences you had involving bugs until they come to one [or more] that might explain how and why you think and feel as you do "here and now".


Even then they could only partially explain any behavioral motivations, at least if we are assuming the framework in question. As you state:

First, the reason we do things is often buried in all the myriad factors in our lives going back to our childhood. Variables we have little or no real understanding or control over.
Then there are the parts buried in his subconscious and unconscious mind. And who really knows how our genes predispose us to go in different directions.
User avatar
Jakeyjake
 
Posts: 27
Joined: Tue Aug 18, 2020 7:55 am

Re: Do you tend to dislike people who step on bugs?

Postby Jakeyjake » Thu Oct 15, 2020 4:56 am

Karpel Tunnel wrote:Do you sometimes do things without any reason at all?


I think so.

It seems to me it is meaningful or consequential to the one choosing the act or they wouldn't choose it, especially with any regularity.


Hmm... If someone chooses to perform an action, it must be meaningful, you say? Hmm... tell me, what does it signify when someone puts their pants on their left leg first vs. right leg first, or switches between? What does it signify if someone puts water then toothpaste on their toothbrush vs toothpaste then water? What does it signify if someone trims their right fingernails before their fingernails? There are such things at choices are not meaningful or consequential.

It seems to me it is meaningful or consequential to the one choosing the act or they wouldn't choose it, especially with any regularity.

But so far you haven't reached the same stage in our discussion. You haven't said 'I like killing bugs.' Or I like killing bugs more that [activity X] you could have done instead.

Activity I could have done instead? You make it sound like people are constantly running some sort of computerized cost benefit-analysis so that each action is preplanned and well calculated. If you think so, you're very wrong. Some actions are spontaneous, irrational, and pointless. The decision to skim a rock across a lake isn't "meaningful or consequential." It's pointless act of idle boredom.
Karpel Tunnel wrote:
Jakeyjake wrote:


Also, "attack insects?" That is such weird verbiage. Attack makes it sound like there's a battle. Insects wandering near my feet don't get attacked; they get crushed. :evilfun:
Do you know what the emoticon you chose was? evilfun. That is, with the word fun in there. It's certainly an uneven battle.


That's not fair; I didn't read the emoji. :P

Well, there's the part above about you liking and preferring it to other activities. We can start there.

Let's raise the stakes for a moment to see what I am getting at. If you killed small mammals without any particular cause - they are not pests in your house, they are not trying or succeeding at getting at your food, etc. - this would be considered more problematic to more people. It can even be a sign of mental illness. Now small mammals are closer to us, more likley to elicit empathy and so on. But one might wonder why someone does that. Even you might wonder, despite being a meat eater, pest killer, why someone did that, what their motivation was. You might or might not worry if you came home and found your kid in the backyard stoming on squirrels. Why is this the activity he chooses and not another. Why make even the slight extra effort to kill something when one has no practical motivation to do so?

So while the stakes are lower with insects and the difference between us and them greater, it's still a question why this activity, however short in time each time, is attractive?
Karpel Tunnel
Philosopher

That is false parallel that might even be dishonest. In the case of a child wanting to kill squirrels, my concern would not be "why is he choosing this activity over others." It would be, why the hell is killing a squirrel at all? *That* actually would be cruel, unlike mindlessly stepping on non-sentient ants. Your concern of making a "slight extra effort to kill something" (your words) would not be on my radar. It wouldn't matter how much effort it took for him, how much energy it expended, or what other "activities" were turned down. You're fixated on this ridiculous economy of time and effort and missed activities, when YOU are missing the boat by not appreciating why killing a squirrel is messed up. Hint: it has nothing to do with any of the nonsense you mentioned.

So while the stakes are lower with insects and the difference between us and them greater, it's still a question why this activity, however short in time each time, is attractive?


When someone kill a squirrel, there is DEFINITELY a reason behind it. Killing a squirrel takes a certain type of nerve and morbidity, a lack of empathy, and a disregard for another animal's pain. Stepping on bugs, on the other hand, is business as usual. They don't experience those things.
User avatar
Jakeyjake
 
Posts: 27
Joined: Tue Aug 18, 2020 7:55 am

Re: Do you tend to dislike people who step on bugs?

Postby Karpel Tunnel » Thu Oct 15, 2020 11:13 am

Jakeyjake wrote:
Hmm... If someone chooses to perform an action, it must be meaningful, you say? Hmm... tell me, what does it signify when someone puts their pants on their left leg first vs. right leg first, or switches between? What does it signify if someone puts water then toothpaste on their toothbrush vs toothpaste then water? What does it signify if someone trims their right fingernails before their fingernails? There are such things at choices are not meaningful or consequential.
Notice your examples: In both cases the person in question ends up with the same results. The SAME results. They want to get their pants on and they do. And so with the others. So your examples
are
not
related
to
what
we
are talking
about.

In your example you repeat a behavior of killing bugs when you could do something else. You could kill them or not. Most people do not kill bugs 'for no reason.' They do it accidentally by walking and stepping on them or they kill them for a reason. We have given reasons: pests in the house, pests on food, etc. You do it 'for no reason' which means the bugs are not causing you pain (bites) potentially messing up your food, keeping you awake and so on.

I am asking you why you do this.

Activity I could have done instead? You make it sound like people are constantly running some sort of computerized cost benefit-analysis so that each action is preplanned and well calculated. If you think so, you're very wrong. Some actions are spontaneous, irrational, and pointless. The decision to skim a rock across a lake isn't "meaningful or consequential." It's pointless act of idle boredom.
I like skipping rocks across a lake because it requires some skill, which I got better at, even as a child. I like the way it looks. I like the challenge. I can, unlike you, admit that I like doing it. It is a choice based on what I prefer doing in that moment.

I can take some responsibility for choosing to do it. For you it is a spontaneous impulse out of nowhere, random, not connected to your likes and dislikes, like a tick or a spasm.

You present a straw man argument above I did not make. Put words in my mouth. Cost benefit analyses....etc.

Earlier give the example of the cars, and I point out that you have not yet done what people do when they choose the color of their cars. I specifically said they would say they like a certain color more than another. It is a choice with consequences they like. You can't manage to do what the people would do IN YOUR OWN EXAMPLE. When this is pointed out, you admit nothing.

Then you give the examples above that are not analogous to your choice to kill bugs because the results are different. And now you can't even imagine or present yourself as not being able to imagine why someone would choose to skip rocks. It's a spontaneous random reaction like someone saying fuck when they have Tourette's.

Here's a solution for you with your problem.

Think of the disliking of people who dislike people who step on bugs as being like your stepping on bugs. You step on bugs for no reason at all. They dislike you for as a spontaneous reaction. A tick.

So if you dislike them for disliking you, you're a hypocrite, but the great thing is you can change. They're being irrational and spontaneous in disliking you. Try to accept them as you expect them to accept you. You can be the Jesus of bug killers, actually accepting others for their irrational reactions just as YOU expect them to accept you for yours. Re-read your posts and find the whine in there. Then see if you are living up to your own whining about others.

Compared to those people, it took me alittle more time to dislike you. They saved time compared to me. They were spontaneous and irrational I came at my disliking you rationally. Through finding you to be a disingenous discussion partner. But you won't experience me anymore so, it won't be a problem for you.

I won't waste my time with you here.
Last edited by Karpel Tunnel on Thu Oct 15, 2020 2:47 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Karpel Tunnel
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3447
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2018 12:26 pm

Re: Do you tend to dislike people who step on bugs?

Postby phyllo » Thu Oct 15, 2020 1:30 pm

You're fixated on this ridiculous economy of time and effort and missed activities, when YOU are missing the boat by not appreciating why killing a squirrel is messed up. Hint: it has nothing to do with any of the nonsense you mentioned.
Why is killing squirrels "messed up"?
phyllo
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 12121
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 1:41 am

Re: Do you tend to dislike people who step on bugs?

Postby Jakeyjake » Thu Oct 15, 2020 3:17 pm

phyllo wrote:
You're fixated on this ridiculous economy of time and effort and missed activities, when YOU are missing the boat by not appreciating why killing a squirrel is messed up. Hint: it has nothing to do with any of the nonsense you mentioned.
Why is killing squirrels "messed up"?


Squirrels have awareness of their environment and they have feelings. They feel pain and experience distress. That is why killing them is messed up.
User avatar
Jakeyjake
 
Posts: 27
Joined: Tue Aug 18, 2020 7:55 am

Re: Do you tend to dislike people who step on bugs?

Postby phyllo » Thu Oct 15, 2020 3:33 pm

People who kill squirrels can say that none of that really matters.

They draw the line differentiating what can be killed without concern, in a different place than you do.

People who object to the killing of bugs draw the line based on another criteria. Probably based on the principle that no living creatures ought to be killed. Or killed for food. Or only killed to protect oneself.
phyllo
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 12121
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 1:41 am

Re: Do you tend to dislike people who step on bugs?

Postby Jakeyjake » Thu Oct 15, 2020 3:36 pm

phyllo wrote:People who kill squirrels can say that none of that really matters.

They draw the line differentiating what can be killed without concern, in a different place than you do.

People who object to the killing of bugs draw the line based on another criteria. Probably based on the principle that no living creatures ought to be killed. Or killed for food. Or only killed to protect oneself.


That's one way of answering my OP, I'll grant you. They have their own set of rules they made for themselves. I guess that's a good reason?

At least you gave a real answer, though, instead of doing some meaningless behavioral motivation probe like karpal tunnnel. :P
User avatar
Jakeyjake
 
Posts: 27
Joined: Tue Aug 18, 2020 7:55 am

Re: Do you tend to dislike people who step on bugs?

Postby obsrvr524 » Thu Oct 15, 2020 4:46 pm

Impetuous child-minded behavior is disliked by more considerate mature-minded people because of its disruptive and often dangerous effects. Mature-minded people are disturbed by child-minded people playing with loaded guns even though the child-minded doesn't think it is an issue.

I think this is merely an issue of more thoughtful people being uneasy around the actions of less thoughtful people.
              You have been observed.
obsrvr524
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1067
Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2019 9:03 am

Re: Do you tend to dislike people who step on bugs?

Postby iambiguous » Thu Oct 15, 2020 6:31 pm

Jakeyjake wrote:
iambiguous wrote:The determinism/free will conundrum is embedded philosophically in what is called an antinomy: "a contradiction between two beliefs or conclusions that are in themselves reasonable; a paradox."

Did you know that some people believe that once you accept the revelation that you don't have free will, that you gain free will from that point on? They see it sort of like gaining self-awareness for the first time, by acknowledging your lack of awareness, your lack of ability freely influence things. Somehow, you have more agency through that revelation. I feel like the idea is missing internal logical, but it's interesting all the same.


That sort of thinking -- compatibilism? -- makes less sense to me. If you go from stepping on bugs for a reason to accepting that you are compelled by the laws of nature to step on bugs for that reason then how are you not in turn compelled by the laws of matter to reframe it all as "gaining self-awareness for the first time" of what you are doing?

In a wholly determined universe as "I" understand it here and now, I was never able to not type these words and you were never able to not read them. And what the words convey are also inherent, necessary descriptions of the only possible things that we can ever think, feel, say and do. About bugs and everything else.

Both philosophers and scientists have been grappling with it now for thousands of years. And, to the best of my current knowledge, it has not been resolved definitively.

Only I take the quandary even further back. How to explain individual attitudes about stepping on bugs going back to a definitive understanding of existence itself: why does something exist and not nothing? And why this something and not something else?

But: accepting that no one seems able to answer questions like this, let's assume that we have free will and this something does in fact exist and we are in it.

Okay, how then to explain individual reactions to stepping on bugs. As scientists and/or philosophers, can that be pinned down? Maybe. Maybe not.

What I surmise though is embedded in this:

Someone would have to have followed you around 24/7, year in and year out. Noting all of the experiences you had involving bugs until they come to one [or more] that might explain how and why you think and feel as you do "here and now".



Jakeyjake wrote: Even then they could only partially explain any behavioral motivations, at least if we are assuming the framework in question.


Which, it would seem, is why [compelled by nature or not] we invent the Gods...or a God, the God, my God.

With the existence of Kant's "transcending font" there would be the all-knowing vantage point able to explain why someone -- why anyone -- would step on bugs. Either for no reason or for any particular reason. And if there is a dispute among mere mortals as to whether this is something that is rational or moral, God would be there again to resolve it.

First, the reason we do things is often buried in all the myriad factors in our lives going back to our childhood. Variables we have little or no real understanding or control over.

Then there are the parts buried in his subconscious and unconscious mind. And who really knows how our genes predispose us to go in different directions.


And, in my view, it is precisely in order to avoid these profoundly problematic complexities that some become objectivists. They think themselves -- again, compelled by nature or not -- into believing that they are in sync with their own true self able to know all that needs to be known about stepping on bugs in order for them to judge the behaviors of others that either do or do not step on them and for whatever reason. Or for no reason at all.

Here, alas, my own "I" is "fractured and fragmented". Whereas for folks like Karpel Tunnel there seems to be this "deep down inside him" Self that just somehow knows whether and when to be revulsed in regard to stepping on bugs.
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=176529
Then here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=185296
And here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=194382
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 38649
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: Do you tend to dislike people who step on bugs?

Postby obsrvr524 » Thu Oct 15, 2020 7:08 pm

I thought that whole "determinism versus freewill conundrum" was debunked.

Without causal determinism a freewill could never come about. And once it comes about only causal determinism gives it prominence to motivate action. Freewill is never, at any time, free of causal determinism - before, during, or after. And then there is the reasonable concern that freewill was never actually about being free from determinism anyway.
              You have been observed.
obsrvr524
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1067
Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2019 9:03 am

Re: Do you tend to dislike people who step on bugs?

Postby iambiguous » Thu Oct 15, 2020 7:17 pm

obsrvr524 wrote:I thought that whole "determinism versus freewill conundrum" was debunked.

Without causal determinism a freewill could never come about. And once it comes about only causal determinism gives it prominence to motivate action. Freewill is never, at any time, free of causal determinism - before, during, or after. And then there is the reasonable concern that freewill was never actually about being free from determinism anyway.


So, if this is a brilliant assessment or an utterly foolish one, how would we go about determining if it was ever only the assessment that you were ever only able to make?
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=176529
Then here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=185296
And here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=194382
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 38649
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: Do you tend to dislike people who step on bugs?

Postby obsrvr524 » Thu Oct 15, 2020 7:35 pm

iambiguous wrote:how would we go about determining if it was ever only the assessment that you were ever only able to make?

I don't think that you individually are ever able to determine anything. You seem to always just want to change the subject and usually toward one person's thoughts.

There is a difference between "What is the reason behind this" (causality/determinism) and "What is the purpose behind this" (intention/goals). There being some causality behind people disliking others for stepping on bugs is different than there being some purpose in disliking people who step on bugs.

And both of those are actually distinct from the question as to whether someone dislikes others for stepping on bugs (the actual question of the thread).
              You have been observed.
obsrvr524
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1067
Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2019 9:03 am

Re: Do you tend to dislike people who step on bugs?

Postby iambiguous » Thu Oct 15, 2020 7:49 pm

obsrvr524 wrote:
iambiguous wrote:how would we go about determining if it was ever only the assessment that you were ever only able to make?

I don't think that you individually are ever able to determine anything. You seem to always just want to change the subject and usually toward one person's thoughts.

There is a difference between "What is the reason behind this" (causality/determinism) and "What is the purpose behind this" (intention/goals). There being some causality behind people disliking others for stepping on bugs is different than there being some purpose in disliking people who step on bugs.

And both of those are actually distinct from the question as to whether someone dislikes others for stepping on bugs (the actual question of the thread).


That's not my point. If I am not able to change anything then I am compelled by the laws of nature "to seem to always just want to change the subject and usually toward one person's thoughts."

And, in a determined universe as I understand it, any differences that we point out are only those differences we were ever able to point out.

Just as the reasons or lack of reasons we give for stepping or not stepping on bugs was never not going to be otherwise.

Same with distinctions. We make the ones we do because whatever brought into existence both matter and the immutable laws it abides by either is or is not applicable to the human brain.

Those interactions that, among others, neuroscientists continue to explore experientially and experimentally. And, to the best of my current knowledge, the definitive final verdict here [compelled by nature or not] is not yet in.
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=176529
Then here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=185296
And here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=194382
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 38649
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: Do you tend to dislike people who step on bugs?

Postby obsrvr524 » Thu Oct 15, 2020 8:11 pm

iambiguous wrote:If I am not able to change anything then I am compelled by the laws of nature "to seem to always just want to change the subject and usually toward one person's thoughts."

If you are not able to change anything, you are not able to talk about it.
              You have been observed.
obsrvr524
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1067
Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2019 9:03 am

Re: Do you tend to dislike people who step on bugs?

Postby iambiguous » Thu Oct 15, 2020 8:19 pm

obsrvr524 wrote:
iambiguous wrote:If I am not able to change anything then I am compelled by the laws of nature "to seem to always just want to change the subject and usually toward one person's thoughts."

If you are not able to change anything, you are not able to talk about it.


John steps on a bug because he was never able to not step on it. He talks about stepping on a bug because he was never able to not talk about it. Then going back to how this fits into an ontological -- teleological? -- understanding of existence itself.
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=176529
Then here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=185296
And here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=194382
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 38649
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: Do you tend to dislike people who step on bugs?

Postby obsrvr524 » Thu Oct 15, 2020 8:25 pm

iambiguous wrote:
obsrvr524 wrote:
iambiguous wrote:If I am not able to change anything then I am compelled by the laws of nature "to seem to always just want to change the subject and usually toward one person's thoughts."

If you are not able to change anything, you are not able to talk about it.


John steps on a bug because he was never able to not step on it. He talks about stepping on a bug because he was never able to not talk about it. Then going back to how this fits into an ontological -- teleological? -- understanding of existence itself.
If he stepped on a bug, he was able to change something .. and did.

If I dislike him for doing so, I am able to change something .. and do.

The inherent questions are only why either of us do so (either purpose or cause).
              You have been observed.
obsrvr524
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1067
Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2019 9:03 am

Re: Do you tend to dislike people who step on bugs?

Postby promethean75 » Thu Oct 15, 2020 8:33 pm

Nobody seems to object to bugs stepping on people in this thread, and that's incredibly bias and contrary to the indifference needed to examine the facts impartially. I feel like there's some favoritism here that will certainly interfere with a fair assessment of the ethical concerns surrounding the question of stepping on a bug whom might very well step on you if given the opportunity.
promethean75
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3648
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2019 7:10 pm

Re: Do you tend to dislike people who step on bugs?

Postby iambiguous » Thu Oct 15, 2020 8:44 pm

obsrvr524 wrote:If he stepped on a bug, he was able to change something .. and did.

If I dislike him for doing so, I am able to change something .. and do.

The inherent questions are only why either of us do so (either purpose or cause).


Note to others:

What important point is he making here that he thinks I keep missing?

If the laws of matter are applicable to the human brain then anything we "choose" to do and any "reactions" we have to the behaviors of others are but inherent, necessary components of the laws of matter.

If nothing was ever able to change, then the reason "why" things do change is because they were never able to not change into an altogether different reality. Which would be the case if we had to wait to see what did change given that we don't know what those who possess free will might in fact choose differently.
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=176529
Then here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=185296
And here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=194382
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 38649
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: Do you tend to dislike people who step on bugs?

Postby Jakeyjake » Thu Oct 15, 2020 9:29 pm

obsrvr524 wrote:I thought that whole "determinism versus freewill conundrum" was debunked.

Without causal determinism a freewill could never come about. And once it comes about only causal determinism gives it prominence to motivate action. Freewill is never, at any time, free of causal determinism - before, during, or after. And then there is the reasonable concern that freewill was never actually about being free from determinism anyway.

How can it be "debunked?" It isn't like you can run randomized controlled studies on subject in question.

It is an intangible and unmeasurable interpretation of the nature of the universe that you can ignore or give credence.
User avatar
Jakeyjake
 
Posts: 27
Joined: Tue Aug 18, 2020 7:55 am

Re: Do you tend to dislike people who step on bugs?

Postby Jakeyjake » Thu Oct 15, 2020 9:37 pm

iambiguous wrote:
obsrvr524 wrote:If he stepped on a bug, he was able to change something .. and did.

If I dislike him for doing so, I am able to change something .. and do.

The inherent questions are only why either of us do so (either purpose or cause).


Note to others:

What important point is he making here that he thinks I keep missing?

If the laws of matter are applicable to the human brain then anything we "choose" to do and any "reactions" we have to the behaviors of others are but inherent, necessary components of the laws of matter.

If nothing was ever able to change, then the reason "why" things do change is because they were never able to not change into an altogether different reality. Which would be the case if we had to wait to see what did change given that we don't know what those who possess free will might in fact choose differently.


Because he doesn't want to work within the framework that you're using. It may be because he doesn't comprehend it, but I think it's because he just doesn't buy into it.
User avatar
Jakeyjake
 
Posts: 27
Joined: Tue Aug 18, 2020 7:55 am

Re: Do you tend to dislike people who step on bugs?

Postby obsrvr524 » Thu Oct 15, 2020 10:44 pm

Jakeyjake wrote:How can it be "debunked?"

If a person could follow the logic he would have done so and wouldn't have to ask that question. Considering the question has been asked....


iambiguous wrote:What important point is he making here that he thinks I keep missing?

As always it seems - the basic question that is the topic of the thread.
              You have been observed.
obsrvr524
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1067
Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2019 9:03 am

Re: Do you tend to dislike people who step on bugs?

Postby Jakeyjake » Fri Oct 16, 2020 6:40 am

promethean75 wrote:Nobody seems to object to bugs stepping on people in this thread, and that's incredibly bias and contrary to the indifference needed to examine the facts impartially. I feel like there's some favoritism here that will certainly interfere with a fair assessment of the ethical concerns surrounding the question of stepping on a bug whom might very well step on you if given the opportunity.

You make a really good point. Ants would kill us without a thought, given the opportunity. Yet people in this thread act like they are such inoffensive creatures.

I'll quote a post I made once in another thread: Insects aren't exactly helpless, and they are quite brutal toward all living things. They are nature's little pre-programmed killing machines, and they are hard-wired to the core. Even though they don't know any better, they are ruthless. Two things most insects strive for: reproducing like crazy (often cannibalizing one another after doing so) and invading each other's territory for resources. Ants especially are practically genocidal, warring with and killing rival colonies without regard for the individual lives of their own soldiers and sometimes even abducting larvae from the conquered in order to produce a generation of slaves for the colony.

Even on an individual level, ants have no regard for even their own lives. If they sense that they have sufficient numbers to sacrifice, which is all through chemical signals, they will continue trying to gather food from a dangerous location even when some jerk like me is stepping on them. I'd be one to know: I’ve stepped on a lot of ants. :evilfun:
User avatar
Jakeyjake
 
Posts: 27
Joined: Tue Aug 18, 2020 7:55 am

PreviousNext

Return to Philosophy



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot]