You are quoting a story from an 'Extraterrestrial Politics' site? Seriously? Don't you think they might be a little biased?
Shirley McClain is a left wing loon. I would take anything she says with a huge grain of salt. Here's a transcript of the question Russert asked:
RUSSERT: Shirley MacLaine writes in her new book that you sighted a UFO over her home in Washington state, that you found the encounter extremely moving, that it was a triangular craft, silent and hovering, that you felt a connection to your heart and heard directions in your mind. Now, did you see a UFO?
KUCINICH: Uh, I did. And the rest of the account. It was an unidentified flying object, OK? It's like, it's unidentified. I saw something. Now, to answer your question. I'm moving my, and I'm also going to move my campaign office to Roswell, New Mexico, and another one in Exeter, New Hampshire, OK? And also, you have to keep in mind that Jimmy Carter saw a UFO, and also that more people in this country have seen UFOs than I think approve of George Bush's presidency.
I stand by my position that this is being blown out of proportion by people who don't agree with Kucinich's politics.
I was going to slap you down with mah pimp hand, but it looks like you done been slapped already. It is impossible to get real morality from an imaginary sky daddy. Real morality comes from examining the world: right and wrong are pretty obvious when you actually look. You stopped looking as soon as you heard that a sky daddy will spank the evildoers for all eternity. That's not morality, that's pathology.
Really? It's likely that Dennis is lying about seeing a flying object he couldn't identify? Because that is all he said. Didn't say aliens, didn't say anything except that it was flying, it was an object, and he couldn't identify it. Only people looking for an excuse to dismiss Kucinich give that story any credence.
Seeing a flying object that you can't identify is scientifically acceptable. That is all he said. Tim Russert asked him about it, he said that all he has seen was an object he couldn't identify.
Dennis Kucinich is one of the only true liberals left in the Democratic party, and I would vote for him for president in a heartbeat. This UFO story gets blown all out of proportion by right wing loons in order to discredit him. Stop listening to loons.
Also, stop thinking in absolutes, it's tripping you up. When I say, I'm not certain of anything," I mean I don't believe anything absolutely. I hold beliefs based on evidence, and open to change as circumstances dictate.
None of those arguments makes any sense. If I am fated to understand words, I'm fated to understand words. You haven't shown any contradictions in assuming free will. I keep debating you because I keep debating you, not because I either have or lack free will.
It gets worse though, I don't believe in the self either. There is no separation between self and other, therefore the whole point is moot. Free will comes from within. Predestination is imposed from without. There is no within or without, and there certainly is no homunculus living in your head, listening through your ears and looking through your eyes. The sense of self is just another sense. Other senses refer to it when they need to understand how the sense impressions relate to the model of the self. All the senses are like tracks in a movie, but no one is watching.
We don't punish people because they are responsible, we do it to discourage them and others from doing it again. That works whether there is free will or no, it's all part of the chain of cause and effect.
This is why we need the real threat of nationalization, as a kind of corporate death penalty if nothing else. Investors might be a little more cautious in electing boards if they knew they could lose their entire investment due to corporate malfeasance.
It's never pointless to act. Just because we might not have free will, and things might be predestined, does not mean we can't influence people. Cause and effect still work the same way. Whether I am destined to be an effect that helps cause someone else to be destined to believe in free will, or I choose to be an effect that helps cause someone to choose to believe in predestination, I and they are still a part of the chain of cause and effect.
I was predestined to try, and lose, but I had to try anyway. Fortunately, in the process of trying to change your mind and failing, I succeeded at changing dozens of other minds. But I can't take any credit for it, it was meant to happen that way.
It seems as though you feel the need to quote philosophy 101 at me to distract from the fact that you have yet to present any kind of argument for or against free will. "There is no free will," if I had free will or not, I could say that, and it would mean the same thing in either case.
If you do have free will, you play semantic games exactly the same way you would if you don't have free will. There is no way to measure it, there is no way to sense it. I can sense when I've made a decision, but it would feel that way even if my decision were predetermined, or random too.
No he's not confusing anything. These lemur-like creatures were the nerds of their day. Of course they lived in maternal basement caves. Look at their eyes, man. Probably hopped up on Mountain Cacao Pods all the time. They invented the net, and spent all their time trying to find interesting things to put in their nets.
Sadly, this race of proto-nerds did not survive, as the males of the species were singularly unattractive to the females and they were unable to procreate.
Right. Answer me this, can you choose to look at these words and not know their meaning? Try it. Try not to see the words. Try to just see the shapes of the letters without knowing what they mean.
Now you are getting it, young grass chopper. If you can snatch this small brown pebble-like object out of my hand using only your mouth, the student becomes the master!
Semantic games. Are we talking about theory, or practice? Because you are right in theory, simply by definition and not by any wit or argument, but I am talking about the way we actually think.
Consider also the cost of training. Consider potential workers, one who has paid somehow for commercial software and training, one who has trained him or herself with the help of the community and access to everything for free. Who costs more to train? Who do you think will be willing to work for less as a new hire?
Consider the inconsistencies of Windows' interface and the registry, versus the consistency of the command line, everything's a file, text based configuration.
Consider the existence of open source multilingual support, versus commercially available support. If multilingual support isn't available in a commercial program, how will you get it?
I don't think Dr. Cheikh Modibo Diarra is being entirely honest with his countrymen.
I don't think either of us have any way of knowing his character and goals.:) In fact, the idea of an omniscient, omnipotent being that exists outside of time having 'goals' in any meaningful sense is just silly. The idea of an infinite being having 'character' is also silly. I mean, what could you say about an infinite being's character that would not be true for some finite part of that being?
NO, persuading people still matters if there is no free will. Persuading people is a part of the chain of cause and effect. It doesn't matter if I am predestined to persuade people, or I choose to, persuasion happens just the same, either way.
Nothing changes except an unsupported human idea if free will doesn't exist. Meaningful things do not suddenly lose meaning. Meaning is part of the chain of cause and effect, too.
It isn't the potential lose of 'free will' that has you upset here. It is the loss of your conception of your self, which feels like the loss of self, which feels like dying, to the ego. I've seen it hundreds of times in conversations like this one. The ego simply refuses to let go.
You can reason irrationally. Have you never dated a woman? Have you never been in an argument with one?
No, the story you make up is a partial truth. It will only cover the motivations you find palatable, ignoring the others. So you may have many reasons for doing a thing, some good, some bad. The story you tell yourself about why you did it will generally only cover the subset of motivations you find honorable and good.
We are model makers. We make a model of reality. It outputs sensory signals of its predictions. These signals are compared to the real sensory signals, and if they differ, the sensation rises into consciousness for evaluation. We've seen this brain activity in the lab, therefore, I consider it accurate to call us model makers.
I'm not saying any of this is 'true.' It's a theory, get it?
I'm talking about the jerk customers that take up time and energy for no good reason. Personally, when I see people like that getting the boot from an establishment, I cheer. When I was in Europe, I got great customer service, because I'm not a jerk.
Daniel Hannan is a conservative from southern England who has an antagonistic attitude towards the EU. Take anything he says with a grain of salt. But in any case, who isn't losing business at a rapid pace? It sounds like you have philosophical issues with the EU that color your emotions, so much so that any positive mention of the EU simply MUST be countered.
No, I don't just see events. Based on my life experiences, it would be VERY EASY for me to believe that God talks to me, gives me signs, answers my prayers, and generally looks out for me. The thing is, I don't need to make up that kind of story in order to feel special. If it's true, it's true whether I believe it or not. If he exists, God does not need me thanking Him for the favors He is doing me. I doubt God subsists on 'attaboys' from his creations.
Sure, one bit would be enough to make a pass/fail decision. But they throw away info BEFORE making that determination. You can make a determination and round it down to one bit, but you can't round down to one bit and then make an accurate determination, this is an analog sensing device we are talking about. Throw away everything but one bit, and you don't have a yes/no on the legal limit, you have 'above 2.5v, or below 2.5v.' What's the legal limit, translated into volts, hmmm?
Slashdot Mirror
You are quoting a story from an 'Extraterrestrial Politics' site? Seriously? Don't you think they might be a little biased?
Shirley McClain is a left wing loon. I would take anything she says with a huge grain of salt. Here's a transcript of the question Russert asked:
RUSSERT: Shirley MacLaine writes in her new book that you sighted a UFO over her home in Washington state, that you found the encounter extremely moving, that it was a triangular craft, silent and hovering, that you felt a connection to your heart and heard directions in your mind. Now, did you see a UFO?
KUCINICH: Uh, I did. And the rest of the account. It was an unidentified flying object, OK? It's like, it's unidentified. I saw something. Now, to answer your question. I'm moving my, and I'm also going to move my campaign office to Roswell, New Mexico, and another one in Exeter, New Hampshire, OK? And also, you have to keep in mind that Jimmy Carter saw a UFO, and also that more people in this country have seen UFOs than I think approve of George Bush's presidency.
I stand by my position that this is being blown out of proportion by people who don't agree with Kucinich's politics.
God doesn't exist yet because we haven't evolved into Him yet. We got it all backwards.
Don't be dissing on the Hitler Channel. Those who are ignorant of Hitler are doomed to use him in Internet arguments.
I was going to slap you down with mah pimp hand, but it looks like you done been slapped already. It is impossible to get real morality from an imaginary sky daddy. Real morality comes from examining the world: right and wrong are pretty obvious when you actually look. You stopped looking as soon as you heard that a sky daddy will spank the evildoers for all eternity. That's not morality, that's pathology.
Really? It's likely that Dennis is lying about seeing a flying object he couldn't identify? Because that is all he said. Didn't say aliens, didn't say anything except that it was flying, it was an object, and he couldn't identify it. Only people looking for an excuse to dismiss Kucinich give that story any credence.
Seeing a flying object that you can't identify is scientifically acceptable. That is all he said. Tim Russert asked him about it, he said that all he has seen was an object he couldn't identify.
Dennis Kucinich is one of the only true liberals left in the Democratic party, and I would vote for him for president in a heartbeat. This UFO story gets blown all out of proportion by right wing loons in order to discredit him. Stop listening to loons.
Also, stop thinking in absolutes, it's tripping you up. When I say, I'm not certain of anything," I mean I don't believe anything absolutely. I hold beliefs based on evidence, and open to change as circumstances dictate.
None of those arguments makes any sense. If I am fated to understand words, I'm fated to understand words. You haven't shown any contradictions in assuming free will. I keep debating you because I keep debating you, not because I either have or lack free will.
It gets worse though, I don't believe in the self either. There is no separation between self and other, therefore the whole point is moot. Free will comes from within. Predestination is imposed from without. There is no within or without, and there certainly is no homunculus living in your head, listening through your ears and looking through your eyes. The sense of self is just another sense. Other senses refer to it when they need to understand how the sense impressions relate to the model of the self. All the senses are like tracks in a movie, but no one is watching.
We don't punish people because they are responsible, we do it to discourage them and others from doing it again. That works whether there is free will or no, it's all part of the chain of cause and effect.
This is why we need the real threat of nationalization, as a kind of corporate death penalty if nothing else. Investors might be a little more cautious in electing boards if they knew they could lose their entire investment due to corporate malfeasance.
As a medical doctor, I recommend that you begin a course of irony supplements, stat.
It's never pointless to act. Just because we might not have free will, and things might be predestined, does not mean we can't influence people. Cause and effect still work the same way. Whether I am destined to be an effect that helps cause someone else to be destined to believe in free will, or I choose to be an effect that helps cause someone to choose to believe in predestination, I and they are still a part of the chain of cause and effect.
I was predestined to try, and lose, but I had to try anyway. Fortunately, in the process of trying to change your mind and failing, I succeeded at changing dozens of other minds. But I can't take any credit for it, it was meant to happen that way.
It seems as though you feel the need to quote philosophy 101 at me to distract from the fact that you have yet to present any kind of argument for or against free will. "There is no free will," if I had free will or not, I could say that, and it would mean the same thing in either case.
If you do have free will, you play semantic games exactly the same way you would if you don't have free will. There is no way to measure it, there is no way to sense it. I can sense when I've made a decision, but it would feel that way even if my decision were predetermined, or random too.
Okay, maybe they died out because they had no sense of humor.
No he's not confusing anything. These lemur-like creatures were the nerds of their day. Of course they lived in maternal basement caves. Look at their eyes, man. Probably hopped up on Mountain Cacao Pods all the time. They invented the net, and spent all their time trying to find interesting things to put in their nets.
Sadly, this race of proto-nerds did not survive, as the males of the species were singularly unattractive to the females and they were unable to procreate.
Right. Answer me this, can you choose to look at these words and not know their meaning? Try it. Try not to see the words. Try to just see the shapes of the letters without knowing what they mean.
Now you are getting it, young grass chopper. If you can snatch this small brown pebble-like object out of my hand using only your mouth, the student becomes the master!
Semantic games. Are we talking about theory, or practice? Because you are right in theory, simply by definition and not by any wit or argument, but I am talking about the way we actually think.
Consider also the cost of training. Consider potential workers, one who has paid somehow for commercial software and training, one who has trained him or herself with the help of the community and access to everything for free. Who costs more to train? Who do you think will be willing to work for less as a new hire?
Consider the inconsistencies of Windows' interface and the registry, versus the consistency of the command line, everything's a file, text based configuration.
Consider the existence of open source multilingual support, versus commercially available support. If multilingual support isn't available in a commercial program, how will you get it?
I don't think Dr. Cheikh Modibo Diarra is being entirely honest with his countrymen.
I don't think either of us have any way of knowing his character and goals. :) In fact, the idea of an omniscient, omnipotent being that exists outside of time having 'goals' in any meaningful sense is just silly. The idea of an infinite being having 'character' is also silly. I mean, what could you say about an infinite being's character that would not be true for some finite part of that being?
NO, persuading people still matters if there is no free will. Persuading people is a part of the chain of cause and effect. It doesn't matter if I am predestined to persuade people, or I choose to, persuasion happens just the same, either way.
Nothing changes except an unsupported human idea if free will doesn't exist. Meaningful things do not suddenly lose meaning. Meaning is part of the chain of cause and effect, too.
It isn't the potential lose of 'free will' that has you upset here. It is the loss of your conception of your self, which feels like the loss of self, which feels like dying, to the ego. I've seen it hundreds of times in conversations like this one. The ego simply refuses to let go.
You can reason irrationally. Have you never dated a woman? Have you never been in an argument with one?
No, the story you make up is a partial truth. It will only cover the motivations you find palatable, ignoring the others. So you may have many reasons for doing a thing, some good, some bad. The story you tell yourself about why you did it will generally only cover the subset of motivations you find honorable and good.
We are model makers. We make a model of reality. It outputs sensory signals of its predictions. These signals are compared to the real sensory signals, and if they differ, the sensation rises into consciousness for evaluation. We've seen this brain activity in the lab, therefore, I consider it accurate to call us model makers.
I'm not saying any of this is 'true.' It's a theory, get it?
I'm talking about the jerk customers that take up time and energy for no good reason. Personally, when I see people like that getting the boot from an establishment, I cheer. When I was in Europe, I got great customer service, because I'm not a jerk.
Daniel Hannan is a conservative from southern England who has an antagonistic attitude towards the EU. Take anything he says with a grain of salt. But in any case, who isn't losing business at a rapid pace? It sounds like you have philosophical issues with the EU that color your emotions, so much so that any positive mention of the EU simply MUST be countered.
No, I don't just see events. Based on my life experiences, it would be VERY EASY for me to believe that God talks to me, gives me signs, answers my prayers, and generally looks out for me. The thing is, I don't need to make up that kind of story in order to feel special. If it's true, it's true whether I believe it or not. If he exists, God does not need me thanking Him for the favors He is doing me. I doubt God subsists on 'attaboys' from his creations.
I neither believe in God, nor disbelieve in God.
Sure, one bit would be enough to make a pass/fail decision. But they throw away info BEFORE making that determination. You can make a determination and round it down to one bit, but you can't round down to one bit and then make an accurate determination, this is an analog sensing device we are talking about. Throw away everything but one bit, and you don't have a yes/no on the legal limit, you have 'above 2.5v, or below 2.5v.' What's the legal limit, translated into volts, hmmm?