Serious or not serious?

[neobi]

I find that if you take people less seriously, they are much more bearable. I tend to be arguementative over everything, heck w/o conflict what interest at all would there be? I also tend to be as stubborn as a bull(who came up that bulls are stubborn?). Anyways, I find that you have to get a feel for people. Those that you consider jerks your being to serious with. Those that throw things at you after everything you say are either (A)those you should take lightly or (B)those who take you too seriously (C) Do we still need a "C"? There are those that'll never figure this out and forever hate the net for it's "jerks", but possibly these are the true jerks who need to lighten up?

Oh can I also stir trouble by saying that we have "no Choice" as human beings? Clearly all matter follows the laws of physics, and complexity doesn't make choice. There is a certain degree of choice, but it's not true choice, it is nothing more than our brain creating chemicals and reacting them to perform certain actions. All we are is the complexity of chemical equations. If I were to freeze time right now I could technically work all mathematical/scientific equations backwards and find out what you did a year ago. If this is true, then you can also work forward to see what you will do a year from now. We can't change the future nor past. Choiceless....

[Magus]

Re: Serious or not serious?

I take few things seriously.

*Farts in your face*

[Caciss]

Re: Serious or not serious?

[tamoki]

Re: Serious or not serious?

cool

[neobi]

Re: Serious or not serious?

Sorry Gluem but no, Right now your body's state where every chemical reaction is and in which state is set. Now electrons spin around the nucleus, and atoms react with other atoms only certain ways. They can't change, they can't be random. The laws are set in stone, all they are is following out the laws. Thus for exactly how everything is now, every past event and future event has been determined. And if you can work backwards you HAVE to be able to work forwards. And I repeat "complexity, doesn't make choice", we can't even get computers to make choice, they can only do what we make them to do. Computers can't even come up with a true random number, they are falsely random based off statistics and such.

[Caciss]

Re: Serious or not serious?

I spelt intelligence wrong on purpose, Glooms.

[IRC]

Re: Serious or not serious?

[Crimson Knight]

Re: Serious or not serious?

There is a set future for us. However, we are allowed to make our own decisions, and that changes our futures. PWNT.

[Gustaff 13]

Re: Serious or not serious?

Weird... The chemical reactions in my brain are telling me to give Neonash negitive rep...

[Caciss]

Re: Serious or not serious?

I guess I simply have no choice but to hate him.

[Manyak]

Re: Serious or not serious?

Yeah, my brain is creating chemicals and I'm filled with the urge to give Nash negative rep.

I guess I just don't have a choice.

[Crimson Knight]

Re: Serious or not serious?

See where closed-minded beliefs get you!?

[IRC]

Re: Serious or not serious?

There is a set future for us. However, we are allowed to make our own decisions, and that changes our futures. PWNT.

Then how is it set? I'm pretty sure I get what you mean though.

[Crimson Knight]

Re: Serious or not serious?

Okay, let's say you're put into a forest with 3 paths, one with a sign saying "GOOD LIFE HERE!". You are told this after you are blindfolded. You do not know which path leads to where. So, you just go do what you want. If you stray from the original path, another way to that path is presented to you(without your knowledge) along your current way. If you seem to be pretty dense about it, you'll get "nudged" towards the path.

And then there's my philosophy about your spirit guides giving you directions but not necessarily telling you where to go once in a while.

[neobi]

Re: Serious or not serious?

Either way, Chaos Theory won't let you determine one's fate with your "Destiny Dictator".

Sensitive dependence on initial conditions is evident in the flip of a coin.

There are two variables in a flipping coin: how soon it hits the ground, and
how fast it is flipping. Theoretically, it should be possible to control these
variables entirely and control how the coin will end up. In practice, it is
impossible to control exactly how fast the coin flips and how high it flips.
It is possible to put the variables into a certain range, but it is impossible
to control it enough to know the final results of the coin toss.

We are essentially free to make our own choices.

On the most literal level we theoretically may not be, but the our
choices seem to be our own anyway. It's bascially the same thing.

First off the flipping of the coin thing is wrong only because you've only factored in 2 variables, when quite literaly there are infinite. Things such as the arc it's flipped at, what it lands on(fabric, wood), what side it starts on, air pressure, gravity, etc... There is only one way for that coin to land based on all it's starting variables, it's just that since there are infinite variables it wouldn't be practical for us to calculate all of them. We can however use enough variables to get an extremely low % of error for the expected outcome over the real one.
And thus the more complex the situations, the more significant variables there are. Making calculating things like choice certainly unfeasable. However just because it's not practical to do doesn't make it exempt from the laws, it still happens exactly as it should based on all conditions. I find it funny how some people don't understand this or are unwilling to understand this.