Do you believe in casuality in real life?

[Buffy]

Systems provide a framework for defining causality. These frameworks allow predictions to be made to a high *degree* of certainty. There are sources of uncertainty, however in many frameworks, these random effects are completely overwhelmed by the rules of the framework. Conversely some systems are highly sensitive to these random inputs and such systems are classified as being non-deterministic.

 

(Whoa, worthy of the Weasel Words thread, eh?)

 

So, yeah, there's causality, but its not totally deterministic...

 

<Gruesome sounds of a cadaverous equine thoroughbred being thrashed>

 

Stochastically,

Buffy

[hallenrm]

So, yeah, there's causality, but its not totally deterministic...

 

So!!! Can one concur that their is hardly any causality in the social events in life?

[paigetheoracle]

This is like your other poll - do you believe in destiny? I think it's the same thing - willpower. You either cause things to happen or sabotage your own life, so that they don't happen, be it an individual or racial destiny you're forsaking (suicide or creationism: I do, therefore I don't think or I think, therefore I don't do).

[IDMclean]

I find it interesting that according to chaos theory, one can have a completely deterministic system and still end up with undeterministic result. Complete order can result in complete chaos. Which is of course proper for an inherently dualistic system.

[HydrogenBond]

I believe that reality is spatial or 3-D, but we as humans see things in a causual or 2-D way, i.e, x=cause and y=affect. The influence of the extra third dimension or z is where the random appears in causual relationships. If we knew how to include z, it would no longer be random but part of the natural 3-D order of things.

 

For example, unifying all the force of nature into one relationship, would take away some of the randomness of experiment compared to reducing the unified force into four separate force equations. Each force equation works up to a point. But with the other three also having some unclear impact, we now lump this spatial influence into the randomness within our causual relationship.

 

The universe shows gravity affects at the various macro-levels to create a wide range of phenomena. But the universe also shows a spatial connection associated with the expansion. Most gravity theory does not include both simultaneously, with the 3-D affect having an influence on all the 2-D affects.

 

As a more human example, when two people meet and fall in love, one may call this fate or a random occurance. But if oxygen and hydrogen met in the same bar to unite as one as water, this would be due to a causual law of chemistry. In the second case we have a handle on the spatial laws of chemistry but in the first case we don't. It is easier to call it random or fate than to admit ignorance of what we do not understand.

 

Fate attempts to include the third dimension, although the explanation tells us very little of how it is spatially integrated. Random does the same same thing but lumps 3-D into chaos instead of order. Both sense the third dimension but lump it into one fuzzy dimension.

[paigetheoracle]

I find it interesting that according to chaos theory, one can have a completely deterministic system and still end up with undeterministic result. Complete order can result in complete chaos. Which is of course proper for an inherently dualistic system.

 

Don't knock it totally - war and peace alternate after all and that is chaos and order (Talking of order - where is that suitcase I sent for last month?):)