Determinism vs. Freewill

[TINNY]

To say, however, that "The only difference with skinner's model is the inner speech" is to miss the entire point that Skinner would completely reject that there is even the possibility of this "inner speech". It is completely antithetical to Skinnerian Behaviorism.

well yes. Skinner's black box and empiricist philosophy prevents the notion of looking into our psyche. Thus a reconciliation of skinnerian personality theory with modern cognitive psychology and Dennet's mentalism might result in the addition of inner speech. (dont kill me, i'm just suggesting).

[TINNY]

Also interesting is your inclusion of "(the actions of animals)". As Skinner would never suggest that humans are anything BUT just another species of animal.

but it seems so. bcoz he relies his studies on pigeons (i think :D ). and that the same laws applies to humans. to say that humans are different would entail that the inputs should be more than just environmental and social. below is pasted from the islamic site to offer hints on why it could not be absolutely sure:

One reservation is the idea that behaviourism is a tautology since we define our stimuli by their effect on the responses they are made contingent upon. This is answered in theory, although not in practice(due to the state of the technology) by the fact that it would be possible to determine 'a priori' with absolute certainty, the effect of any stimulus in any contingent relationship with a response if we fully knew the total past learning history of that individual

That is why I so strongly objected to the quote as a lead in to the assertions. It seemed nothing more than an attempt to provide credibility for the claims by being able to mention Skinner's name at the outset.

oh i see.

 

about that blank slate stuff, frankly i don't know enough to discuss and i don't think it is important in this discussion

[Freethinker]

that site is mainly a parenting site intended to convey to muslims how to raise children. so part of it is to explain how learning takes place according to the qur'an, objectively defined by scientific terminology.

"the qur'an, objectively defined by scientific terminology"

Ya but only at the parts that don't embarass the qur'an. Always selective. And I did not see anything in the article that shows correlation in the qur'an.

 

If the qur'an is as claimed, the complete knowledge needed to live, why the need for outside "scientific terminology".

but harun yahya site is different. He is no scientist neither is he a philosopher. Just a prolific writer. Even his researchers aren't scientists. Therefore, his science his rather naive.

Oh to have a time machine! To be able to go back a few months and use this quote when you were trying to support the guys claims!

[TINNY]

no need to start a fight, man.

 

If the qur'an is as claimed, the complete knowledge needed to live, why the need for outside "scientific terminology".

it is to better explain

[TINNY]

Oh to have a time machine! To be able to go back a few months and use this quote when you were trying to support the guys claims!

some people frankly change. but some obfuscate things to cover up defeat.

[TINNY]

back to the topic

interestingly, your nick is freethinker. does that mean you feel you think freely?are you the chosen one to have free will while others are determined? Or are your thinkings determined by the big bang too?

[pgrmdave]

Does anyone else find it amusing that we can debate whether or not we can think? :)

[TMAK]

Whether or not we can think is off-topic, no?

[sanctus]

Whether or not we can think is off-topic, no?

No not completely, because if free-will doesn't exist it implies that you cannot think, you just execute a written program, but if you want to start another thread on that, you're welcome!

 

A part from that, welcome to the forum!

[Freethinker]

back to the topic

interestingly, your nick is freethinker. does that mean you feel you think freely?are you the chosen one to have free will while others are determined? Or are your thinkings determined by the big bang too?

I am mostly a Skinnerian. Have been since bing introduced to his philosophy some 30+ years ago. I do not accept Free Will as existing in it's strict sense. We are electromechanical machines. What "consciousness" is and how it fits into the whole Free Will consciousness paradox is not known. I do not know why I am one of those that follow the thought processes I do any more than I truly understand why *I* occupy the particular physical presence I do. Or that for my minute to minute existence do I find it relevant to know.

 

Yes I admit to living a dicotomy. On one hand, at the most basic level, I do not find any reason to accept the claim of Free Will. But I will swim back to the boat anyway.

 

At some point/ points in my life, I have been exposed to a thought process based on open evaluation of personal philosophy and it has become my defacto operational process. Others have been exposed to the same options and for some "reason" have not adopted it. Perfering to accept religious authority and dogmatic revelation based claims. Others have been exposed to other combinations of possible personal philosophies. Perhaps neither of us have any real "choice" in the matter. But as we seem able to evaluate the results. I find the results of my process to derive more accurate and predictable results. This increases the strength of my support for the Freethought process. I find results for the other processes, especially revelation based philosophies to be far less accurate and the outcome of their predictions to be far from reliable. This also increases my strength of support for a Freethought personal philosophy.

 

None of this requires that humans have unbridled Free Will.

[Freethinker]

Does anyone else find it amusing that we can debate whether or not we can think? :)

Very! And perhaps the closest I come to cognitive dissonense.

 

At least I think I do?

[pgrmdave]

Yes I admit to living a dicotomy. On one hand, at the most basic level, I do not find any reason to accept the claim of Free Will. But I will swim back to the boat anyway.

 

That's not very logical, is it? :)

[Freethinker]

That's not very logical, is it? :)

Better than drowning trying to figure out if I have the free will to decide. :-)

[lindagarrette]

Drowning is a good example of how you don't have a choice. Unless you were able to affect the chain of events leading up to that moment, (and how would you do that unless your were clairvoyant) your fate is sealed. Or there might be a supernatural intervention.:)

[Freethinker]

Drowning is a good example of how you don't have a choice.

Ah but is there anything that proves we DO have a choice?

 

The idea I was promoting is that as we don't know, if you fall in the water you could allow yourself to drown figuring that you do not ultimately have a choice, or you can swim for the boat at least pretending you have a choice in the matter.

[geko]

The idea I was promoting is that as we don't know, if you fall in the water you could allow yourself to drown figuring that you do not ultimately have a choice, or you can swim for the boat at least pretending you have a choice in the matter.

 

Do you think that you could also decide that your life sucked, you were unhappy and this would be a good opportunity to end it?

 

If so that's 3 different paths that could be taken, and the one that does get taken, gets taken because of a history of a particular human that's limited by how it can learn in the first place.

 

The limits of free choice is a determined universe?

[Tormod]

Drowning is a good example of how you don't have a choice. Unless you were able to affect the chain of events leading up to that moment, (and how would you do that unless your were clairvoyant) your fate is sealed. Or there might be a supernatural intervention.:)

Come on, that is a meaningless statement! Accidents do happen and yes, we often cannot predict them and thus cannot avoid them. But if that is a limit on our free will then turn it around and say, "free will lets us decide when accidents will happen". So must we be gods to have free will?