Do you think you ended up where you are now partially because of the people around you ?

[Jean Améry]

Read about determinism and free will being an illusion. Society conditions people to think the self is at fault but that is truly never the case. People are too idiotic to undo social conditioning to realize their starting point being what they were born into is the only thing that mattered till death because nobody can alter fate. All your thoughts, feelings and outlook is outside your control. Your death is fixed even if you die by suicide that was your natural death and wasn't going to be any other way. Nobody is any different than the stars shooting across the night sky by external forces. People just like to believe otherwise because they're socially conditioned and some people are terrified otherwise.

The problem with that is that determinism is a philosophical position, not a scientific fact. Of course scientists assume the whole universe consists of causal relationships and is therefore predictable but to my knowledge that's more of an assumption than a certainty.

I do agree this society is quite fond of blaming the individual when things go wrong, often without any justification at all.

As to suicide: I do hope/believe that if I do it it'll be the product of a rational thought process and not just the end result of the convergence of forces beyond my own will but who knows?

 

[ShadowOfTheDay]

Determinism illustrates how it's possible, every act is the result of the previous and with considering all the external forces sharing the similar rule.
I'll illustrate an example that's barbarically simple to understand. The common fallacy of Adam & Eve with the forbidden fruit and free will. God damning Adam & Eve for disobeying by the act of consuming the fruit and going against the almighty righteousness of the creator. The typical child is conditioned by the story to reinforce the words, "choice, self decisions" from the concept of free will and that's supposedly "given" to Adam & Eve by God. Otherwise the child will think God is at fault for creating the forbidden fruit and making it a possibility for Adam & Eve to get into trouble. Another child may say it's still God's fault because God gave Adam & Eve choice and is at fault. Typically people don't think that deep, they've been conditioned to think they don't want to acknowledge no choice as better without every thinking about it. The irony is we really don't have choice when you study the academic fields illustrating "cause & effect" conclusive science. Every act upon a system has consequences because all variables effect the system and no matter it being a subsystem inside another system. The creator doesn't even have free will once you unravel what determinism entails.

Causal determinism is not incompatible with the colloquial understanding of "free will;" people obviously are capable of making choices, and determinism doesn't absolve people of responsibility for their actions.

 

[bigj75]

It can be a big part of it. Who you hang around and how people treat you in general is how you end up.

 

[CoolGuy9]

Yes, but this is still my fault. Up to the age of 12, my live was fantastic and I really miss those days. In 7th grade I made a few new "friends" and one of them manipulated me into doing stupid stuff for "entertainment". This made me the school clown and started my journey of being worth less than others. I also stopped being with my new "friends" so I became really lonely. This hell I went through may have also effected my learning fucking me really hard, but I'm not sure about that and I may just naturally be a retard.

 

[Addy92]

Yes definitely. I tried so hard to build my vision. I had everything at one point. But people repetitively destroy me each time, and I'm not mentally strong enough to cope. Most people seem to be.

 

[bigj75]

Yes, but this is still my fault. Up to the age of 12, my live was fantastic and I really miss those days. In 7th grade I made a few new "friends" and one of them manipulated me into doing stupid stuff for "entertainment". This made me the school clown and started my journey of being worth less than others. I also stopped being with my new "friends" so I became really lonely. This hell I went through may have also effected my learning fucking me really hard, but I'm not sure about that and I may just naturally be a retard.

You were 12! Your brain wasn't nearly fully developed so lack of intelligence isn't specifically your fault. Kids are taught the wrong thing in school. They dont teach psychological/social intelligence. Book smarts are good but street smarts are necessary.

 

[Lost]

Yes. The person I counted on most has now an affair. Don't get me wrong that's not the only thing what's wrong in my life. I am just tired and want to rest . No worries, no pain

 

[Addy92]

Yes. The person I counted on most has now an affair. Don't get me wrong that's not the only thing what's wrong in my life. I am just tired and want to rest . No worries, no pain

For me. I'm tired of this happening. I seem to be usable. The definition of insanity... Idk what to change. This stems from more than a relationship. Work, family, friends etc.

Maybe it's all the drugs I took at a younger age that got me.

 

[GeorgeJL]

I grew up being treated like someone who doesnt exist by relatives from my father side and I learnt to hate people because of how shitty people are but still get what they want after seeing how my relatives live their lives.My mother always know how to guilt trip people to get people to do what she wants.

As I was kinda away from this forum for a few weeks, I spent time thinking about things and realize how I cant really believe that they are genuinely nice people in the world. I am not one either.

TLDR: I just think that the world is screwed up place to live in, I dont want to live in a world like this.

Yes and no. Or should I say somewhat. We are all in part a product of our environment to some degree. But sometimes genetics is the main factor.

 

[alizee]

Do you know any easy to understand books I can read up on what you're talking about.? Thanks, I'm interested.

The Ethics by Benedict de Spinoza

eBooks@Adelaide has now officially closed

ebooks.adelaide.edu.au

Hard determinism

Hard determinism - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Neuroscientists can read brain activity to predict decisions 11 seconds before people act

Neuroscientists can read brain activity to predict decisions 11 seconds before people act

In a neuroimaging study, researchers in Australia used brain activity to predict decisions before the participants were conscious of them.

qz.com

Locus of control (worth reading but not specifically about determinism)

Locus of control - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

You can google:
Hard determinism
Free will is an illusion
Psychiatry determinism

Message me if you want more when you're done. I think highly of Benedict de Spinoza's work. Please consider when googling that people have an agenda be it personal or economical to attempt people believe in free will. Academia is filled with religious people who enter respective fields attempting to prove things are not just determined and will try to influence work that exhibits contrary of what they're trying to use as influence.

The problem with that is that determinism is a philosophical position, not a scientific fact. Of course scientists assume the whole universe consists of causal relationships and is therefore predictable but to my knowledge that's more of an assumption than a certainty.

I do agree this society is quite fond of blaming the individual when things go wrong, often without any justification at all.

As to suicide: I do hope/believe that if I do it it'll be the product of a rational thought process and not just the end result of the convergence of forces beyond my own will but who knows?

Science is historically and fundamentally from philosophy, "Philosophy is the study of general and fundamental problems concerning matters such as existence, knowledge, values, reason, mind, and language. Philosophical methods include questioning, critical discussion, rational argument, and systematic presentation". I work with people with "PhDs" being the highest form of education obtainable. PhDs meaning "Doctor of Philosophy" for whatever field studied. Specifically my work involves neuroscience and writing software in collaboration with researchers. Yes there is no conclusive science for the upmost of 100% certainty when concerning determinism but that's similar to physics and neuroscience. Both fields illustrating determinism compared to the contrary. Free will doesn't have anything going for it besides religious ideology and the justice system based around it. Even if true randomness existed and where a person had a random thought inserted into their head. This wouldn't be free will. It would be similar to introducing an external force "some variable" and effecting the person by some reaction caused in some way.

Causal determinism is not incompatible with the colloquial understanding of "free will;" people obviously are capable of making choices, and determinism doesn't absolve people of responsibility for their actions.

Hard determinism is the real deal compared to anything else. Compatibilists are people who don't understand determinism and similar to most people who desire to believe in free will. Free will cannot exist when understanding determinism because they're not compatible.

 

[ShadowOfTheDay]

The Ethics by Benedict de Spinoza

eBooks@Adelaide has now officially closed

ebooks.adelaide.edu.au

Hard determinism

Hard determinism - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Neuroscientists can read brain activity to predict decisions 11 seconds before people act

Neuroscientists can read brain activity to predict decisions 11 seconds before people act

In a neuroimaging study, researchers in Australia used brain activity to predict decisions before the participants were conscious of them.

qz.com

Locus of control (worth reading but not specifically about determinism)

Locus of control - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

You can google:
Hard determinism
Free will is an illusion
Psychiatry determinism

Message me if you want more when you're done. I think highly of Benedict de Spinoza's work. Please consider when googling that people have an agenda be it personal or economical to attempt people believe in free will. Academia is filled with religious people who enter respective fields attempting to prove things are not just determined and will try to influence work that exhibits contrary of what they're trying to use as influence.



Science is historically and fundamentally from philosophy, "Philosophy is the study of general and fundamental problems concerning matters such as existence, knowledge, values, reason, mind, and language. Philosophical methods include questioning, critical discussion, rational argument, and systematic presentation". I work with people with "PhDs" being the highest form of education obtainable. PhDs meaning "Doctor of Philosophy" for whatever field studied. Specifically my work involves neuroscience and writing software in collaboration with researchers. Yes there is no conclusive science for the upmost of 100% certainty when concerning determinism but that's similar to physics and neuroscience. Both fields illustrating determinism compared to the contrary. Free will doesn't have anything going for it besides religious ideology and the justice system based around it. Even if true randomness existed and where a person had a random thought inserted into their head. This wouldn't be free will. It would be similar to introducing an external force "some variable" and effecting the person by some reaction caused in some way.


Hard determinism is the real deal compared to anything else. Compatibilists are people who don't understand determinism and similar to most people who desire to believe in free will. Free will cannot exist when understanding determinism because they're not compatible.

"Hard determinism" is a self-defeating philosophy, as far as I can tell: Did you come to accept hard determinism because you freely acknowledged it to be the most rational perspective, or simply because your brain is physically incapable of drawing any other conclusion? Hard determinism undercuts rational thought in general, including the "rational" decision to accept hard determinism.

Edit: But I definately agree with you that science is impossible without a philosophical underpinning. I think that a course in "philosophy of science" would greatly benefit many people who consider a career in science.

 

[KadathianStr1d3r]

Yes, family,friends, associates, teachers and most importantly genetics. Family cursed me with faulty defective genes and mishandling child growth management, paid more attention to my step brother. Others outside my family either led me astray or put me down to further lessen any self value i had. My older brother might be a lazy shitposting "racist" asshole but he's the only guy that cares about me and is probably the only reason as to why I hadn't "Catched the Train" yet.
I like to bite myself so I can take my anger out onto myself, makes alot of practical sense really.

 

[alizee]

"Hard determinism" is a self-defeating philosophy, as far as I can tell: Did you come to accept hard determinism because you freely acknowledged it to be the most rational perspective, or simply because your brain is physically incapable of drawing any other conclusion? Hard determinism undercuts rational thought in general, including the "rational" decision to accept hard determinism.

Edit: But I definately agree with you that science is impossible without a philosophical underpinning. I think that a course in "philosophy of science" would greatly benefit many people who consider a career in science.

You posting "determinism as a self-defeating philosophy" doesn't make it so. I'm not even sure why you would desire to delude others with how little you wrote if you truly think that way. You're also writing from a defeatist mentality with a straw man argument of it may just be impossible for you to know. In the academia world if you approached any field as that being your argument against anything proposed.. you would be laughed out of the presentation.

Basically the summation of your human expression in the paragraph appears to be negativity towards hard determinism without much explanation but vagueness. Rational thought is the basis of logic and determinism equates with (cause and effect) logic. The mere process of physics follows fundamental rules and determinism illustrates how the rules are ordered; with every variable fundamentally important. My own thoughts are outside my control yes and it's fated the conversation be this way.

Understanding why I'm taking my actions and how my actions are controlled not by myself but by the stuff around me...Considerably makes me more real in the moment than before without understand determinism. A being acting independently of its own volition is more real than one constantly dependent on something else is something we cannot ever obtain in a reality with external forces effecting the self. Although acknowledging how things are is notably as important in achieving the highest level of awareness as the self in a reality with external forces effecting who you are.

 

[ShadowOfTheDay]

You posting "determinism as a self-defeating philosophy" doesn't make it so. I'm not even sure why you would desire to delude others with how little you wrote if you truly think that way. You're also writing from a defeatist mentality with a straw man argument of it may just be impossible for you to know. In the academia world if you approached any field as that being your argument against anything proposed.. you would be laughed out of the presentation.

Basically the summation of your human expression in the paragraph appears to be negativity towards hard determinism without much explanation but vagueness. Rational thought is the basis of logic and determinism equates with (cause and effect) logic. The mere process of physics follows fundamental rules and determinism illustrates how the rules are ordered; with every variable fundamentally important. My own thoughts are outside my control yes and it's fated the conversation be this way.

Understanding why I'm taking my actions and how my actions are controlled not by myself but by the stuff around me...Considerably makes me more real in the moment than before without understand determinism. A being acting independently of its own volition is more real than one constantly dependent on something else is something we cannot ever obtain in a reality with external forces effecting the self. Although acknowledging how things are is notably as important in achieving the highest level of awareness as the self in a reality with external forces effecting who you are.

Whatever you say, dog. Learn how to construct meaningful sentences, and perhaps you and I could have an intelligible conversation.

 

[CoolGuy9]

You were 12! Your brain wasn't nearly fully developed so lack of intelligence isn't specifically your fault. Kids are taught the wrong thing in school. They dont teach psychological/social intelligence. Book smarts are good but street smarts are necessary.

I always saw my self as an idiot for doing the things I was told to do, but I never really thought about the fact that 12 year olds are all idiots and a lot of others would done the same in my position. Thanks for that.

 

[alizee]

Whatever you say, dog. Learn how to construct meaningful sentences, and perhaps you and I could have an intelligible conversation.

You appear to not want an intelligent conversation with the opportunity I gave to you. I don't have much of an ego from understanding determinism and I find it remarkable that you were fated to write "Learn how to construct meaningful sentences" with the preceding statements. I'm always willing to pursue discussion if a person wishes for it. You apparently want nothing from the discourse and to just influence others with little to nothing constructed.

 

[ShadowOfTheDay]

You appear to not want an intelligent conversation with the opportunity I gave to you. I don't have much of an ego from understanding determinism and I find it remarkable that you were fated to write "Learn how to construct meaningful sentences" with the preceding statements. I'm always willing to pursue discussion if a person wishes for it. You apparently want nothing from the discourse and to just influence others with little to nothing constructed.

I presented my point (hard determinism is self-defeating), and defended it. In response, you accused me of having a "desire to delude others," and you ignored my question,so I'll ask again: Did you choose to accept the philosophy of hard determinism because it made the most sense to you, or do you believe it because you are incapable of not believing it? That is why I said hard determinism is self-defeating: if you eliminate the possibility of choice, then you are undermining your own ability to think rationally, and to choose one point of view over another based on rational thought.

I agree with the statement "every event has a cause," but this doesn't mean that people do not have "free-will," in the sense that we are capable of making decisions.

 

[alizee]

I presented my point (hard determinism is self-defeating), and defended it. In response, you accused me of having a "desire to delude others," and you ignored my question,so I'll ask again: Did you choose to accept the philosophy of hard determinism because it made the most sense to you, or do you believe it because you are incapable of not believing it? That is why I said hard determinism is self-defeating: if you eliminate the possibility of choice, then you are undermining your own ability to think rationally, and to choose one point of view over another based on rational thought.

I agree with the statement "every event has a cause," but this doesn't mean that people do not have "free-will," in the sense that we are capable of making decisions.

My perception right now is the previous responses answer your original question. I'll be even more direct in this reply, "No to you" I did not choose anything in life and that doesn't undermine the ability to think rationally. Furthermore I wrote how understanding "how knowing what around you effects you as a positive and even when no choice exists" and you haven't included a criticism besides assuming no choice is a negative from writing its defeating.

The concept of what's rational thought compared to "irrational" still exists in a reality and when people have no choice. Humans are capable of performing actions based on logic by following the scientific method. Statistics shows positivity compared to negativity in research following the scientific procedure. Humans desire positive outcomes when evidence exhibits it.

 

[ShadowOfTheDay]

My perception right now is the previous responses answer your original question. I'll be even more direct in this reply, "No to you" I did not choose anything in life and that doesn't undermine the ability to think rationally. Furthermore I wrote how understanding "how knowing what around you effects you as a positive and even when no choice exists" and you haven't included a criticism besides assuming no choice is a negative from writing its defeating.

The concept of what's rational thought compared to "irrational" still exists in a reality and when people have no choice. Humans are capable of performing actions based on logic by following the scientific method. Statistics shows positivity compared to negativity in research following the scientific procedure. Humans desire positive outcomes when evidence exhibits it.

Thanks for the response. My criticism of causal determinism/ hard determinism is this: if we don't have choice, then we don't choose the things we believe based on evidence. If we don't choose what we believe, then we have no reason to think that our beliefs correspond to reality. That's a pretty straightforward point, I think.

 

[Jc40]

The Ethics by Benedict de Spinoza

eBooks@Adelaide has now officially closed

ebooks.adelaide.edu.au

Hard determinism

Hard determinism - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Neuroscientists can read brain activity to predict decisions 11 seconds before people act

Neuroscientists can read brain activity to predict decisions 11 seconds before people act

In a neuroimaging study, researchers in Australia used brain activity to predict decisions before the participants were conscious of them.

qz.com

Locus of control (worth reading but not specifically about determinism)

Locus of control - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

You can google:
Hard determinism
Free will is an illusion
Psychiatry determinism

Message me if you want more when you're done. I think highly of Benedict de Spinoza's work. Please consider when googling that people have an agenda be it personal or economical to attempt people believe in free will. Academia is filled with religious people who enter respective fields attempting to prove things are not just determined and will try to influence work that exhibits contrary of what they're trying to use as influence.



Science is historically and fundamentally from philosophy, "Philosophy is the study of general and fundamental problems concerning matters such as existence, knowledge, values, reason, mind, and language. Philosophical methods include questioning, critical discussion, rational argument, and systematic presentation". I work with people with "PhDs" being the highest form of education obtainable. PhDs meaning "Doctor of Philosophy" for whatever field studied. Specifically my work involves neuroscience and writing software in collaboration with researchers. Yes there is no conclusive science for the upmost of 100% certainty when concerning determinism but that's similar to physics and neuroscience. Both fields illustrating determinism compared to the contrary. Free will doesn't have anything going for it besides religious ideology and the justice system based around it. Even if true randomness existed and where a person had a random thought inserted into their head. This wouldn't be free will. It would be similar to introducing an external force "some variable" and effecting the person by some reaction caused in some way.


Hard determinism is the real deal compared to anything else. Compatibilists are people who don't understand determinism and similar to most people who desire to believe in free will. Free will cannot exist when understanding determinism because they're not compatible.

Thanks for the links. To be honest I didn't understand it all.
Was thinking today at about decisions already decided with 3 or more choices, I'd like to test it out. I tried at work but realised I do things by routine there but im not sure I agree with you (sorry). Or maybe I don't like the ideas that the links present.
What's the point in trying anything? I know I have definitely made wrong choices in life and was down to me, I know people could have been supportive when weren't..sorry am rambling.
I've not finished reading but found it a bit depressing.
Thanks again. I don't have the words to express more really.

 

[alizee]

Thanks for the response. My criticism of causal determinism/ hard determinism is this: if we don't have choice, then we don't choose the things we believe based on evidence. If we don't choose what we believe, then we have no reason to think that our beliefs correspond to reality. That's a pretty straightforward point, I think.

Your perception of "we don't choose things based on evidence" if we don't have choice isn't important as an argument against determinism. The words "rational & irrational" are just tools for human expression to be shared and the context matters. As an example a computer is based around logic and determinism. Nothing is random about computers. Even random numbers generated in a computer, cannot be true randomness and is actually faked. It's simply simulated based on an equation as true randomness doesn't exist and I'm speaking from a CS background. Encryption & RNG are designed where the timeframe needed to be able to break it (a long time typically is the goal) makes both "encryption & rng" secure to use for the intended purposes. So the main point I'm attempting to express with this example is the deterministic system that makes a computer function is still produceable of correct output or fulfilling the goal of the system. Humans are similar when functioning and civilization slowly progresses based on trial an error. That's basically the scientific method "trial & error" and is considered rational in a deterministic system. Irrational would be doing something repetitively over & over and never caring if it produces the same error. Such as praying to God in the past of human history and where we never had diseases or problems cured. That's irrational in a deterministic system.

Thanks for the links. To be honest I didn't understand it all.
Was thinking today at about decisions already decided with 3 or more choices, I'd like to test it out. I tried at work but realised I do things by routine there but im not sure I agree with you (sorry). Or maybe I don't like the ideas that the links present.
What's the point in trying anything? I know I have definitely made wrong choices in life and was down to me, I know people could have been supportive when weren't..sorry am rambling.
I've not finished reading but found it a bit depressing.
Thanks again. I don't have the words to express more really.

I don't expect it's possible for anyone to read all of Spinoza's ethics in a short timeframe and understand it reasonably well. Your mind has to process concepts that are difficult. Specially when you've been conditioned by society to typically think choice existing is a no brainer and making it difficult to not have a bias. Understanding determinism is like anything in life if it happens it was fated and similar if you cannot understand it.
One example relatable to you, about your day at work and thinking of 3 or more choices. Well you wouldn't have thought about it if an event didn't happen triggering the thought. The event being you reading on this forum and finding my post. That was the cause & effect for you to think about it at work. Now basically the concept of determinism is every moment in life (birth->moment->moment->moment->...->death) is based on the preceding moment. You're never able to have real choice that isn't influenced by external forces and thus making you really without any choice because what you do isn't truly your own volition.

 

[ShadowOfTheDay]

Your perception of "we don't choose things based on evidence" if we don't have choice isn't important as an argument against determinism. The words "rational & irrational" are just tools for human expression to be shared and the context matters. As an example a computer is based around logic and determinism. Nothing is random about computers. Even random numbers generated in a computer, cannot be true randomness and is actually faked. It's simply simulated based on an equation as true randomness doesn't exist and I'm speaking from a CS background. Encryption & RNG are designed where the timeframe needed to be able to break it (a long time typically is the goal) makes both "encryption & rng" secure to use for the intended purposes. So the main point I'm attempting to express with this example is the deterministic system that makes a computer function is still produceable of correct output or fulfilling the goal of the system. Humans are similar when functioning and civilization slowly progresses based on trial an error. That's basically the scientific method "trial & error" and is considered rational in a deterministic system. Irrational would be doing something repetitively over & over and never caring if it produces the same error. Such as praying to God in the past of human history and where we never had diseases or problems cured. That's irrational in a deterministic system.

Thanks for "choosing" to respond.

 

[alizee]

Thanks for "choosing" to respond.

It wasn't a choice, all my previous events in life made the outcome and I had no choice in it.