The Cosmic Slot Machine: a metaphor of free will

[blase6]

You’ve only proven how much of self-proclaimed ‘philosophy’ does nothing but throw common sense out the window because you fancy yourself as a non-plebeian.

The point of philosophical thought is often to go beyond common sense. To refine definitions and clarify thought which is distorted in its public use.

 

[Lost_Wanderer]

The point of philosophical thought is often to go beyond common sense. To refine definitions and clarify thought which is distorted in its public use.

Considering what you’ve only demonstrated, ‘going beyond’ seems a whole lot like pointless navel-gazing that is devoid of authentic human experience.

Oh but, that might seem too ‘common’ a perspective for you.

 

[onenow1]

A coin in a slot machine is useless, worthless and meaningless. Therefore it can and should be ignored…

• Science can never tell us why we are here, but Holy Scripture has the answer…

God Bless

 

[blase6]

Considering what you’ve only demonstrated, ‘going beyond’ seems a whole lot like pointless navel-gazing that is devoid of authentic human experience.

Oh but, that might see too ‘common’ a perspective for you.

The ignorance of those who do not have a zeal to know about themselves, the world, and their future fate, is a kind of hell in and of itself.

 

[Lost_Wanderer]

The ignorance of those who do not have a zeal to know about themselves, the world, and their future fate, is a kind of hell in and of itself.

So you equate human experience with a lack of zeal about knowing oneself or thinking heavily about life?

Me thinks your judgment is far too rash. Even the most hedonistic and carefree individuals can have a lot more going in them than your own limited, ‘philosophical’ perceptions can gauge.

 

[blase6]

So you equate human experience with a lack of zeal about knowing oneself or thinking heavily about life?

Me thinks your judgment is far too rash. Even the most hedonistic and carefree individuals can have a lot more going in them than your own limited, ‘philosophical’ perceptions can gauge.

I have found the opposite of what you think to be the case. A hedonistic and carefree life generally does not lead to profound wisdom, but a temperate life can very easily.

 

[Lost_Wanderer]

I have found the opposite of what you think to be the case. A hedonistic and carefree life generally does not lead to profound wisdom, but a temperate life can very easily.

Repeat: What you’ve presented is anything but wisdom.

I have once lived thinking exactly as you have, scorning people who acted like they’ve haven’t done so much thinking and personal reflection compared to myself. This self-righteous, cynical, and anti-social philosopher nearly brought me to all sorts of ruin.

Why? Because I was out of touch. It’s as simple as that. Don’t get too caught up in the cold reasoning of a cynical worldview. It’s a symptom of depression, not philosophical wisdom.

 

[blase6]

Repeat: What you’ve presented is anything but wisdom.

I have once lived thinking exactly as you have, scorning people who acted like they’ve haven’t done so much thinking and personal reflection compared to myself. This self-righteous, cynical, and anti-social philosopher nearly brought me to all sorts of ruin.

Why? Because I was out of touch. It’s as simple as that. Don’t get too caught up in the cold reasoning of a cynical worldview. It’s a symptom of depression, not philosophical wisdom.

I actually don’t know where you are getting this idea of me. I have moved on from being cynical to recognizing that people are usually good but imperfect, and have the power to change themselves.

But it is certainly not pleasant to live without knowing what will happen next. As long as one has hope that God will protect them it is bearable, but I do not have any guarantee that I will stay with God to the end of my life. So it is kind of a state of being both hopeful and hopeless.

 

[Lost_Wanderer]

I actually don’t know where you are getting this idea of me. I have moved on from being cynical to recognizing that people are usually good but imperfect, and have the power to change themselves.

That’s a rather ironic contradiction to a view that denies freedom. When you believe in the power to change, you believe in the power to independently go against the grain being flung in your face. Otherwise, why call it change? Why your constant attribution to circumstance and predisposition?

But it is certainly not pleasant to live without knowing what will happen next. As long as one has hope that God will protect them it is bearable, but I do not have any guarantee that I will stay with God to the end of my life. So it is kind of a state of being both hopeful and hopeless.

And I say to you, choose only one because that alone would make more sense than all your replies put together.

See, it doesn’t matter if you feel uncomfortable. It’s only a feeling. Look at history. Look at all those who fought (and died) so that others could be free. They had courage in the face of uncertainty. It didn’t matter if they didn’t know what they would face but that they would face it still. You think that’s just another ‘common and un-philosophical’ concept as well?

 

[blase6]

That’s a rather ironic contradiction to a view that denies freedom. When you believe in the power to change, you believe in the power to independently go against the grain being flung in your face. Otherwise, why call it change? Why your constant attribution to circumstance and predisposition?

Even if freedom being nonexistent is the truth, it is still better to live one’s life thinking that one can really control their own life. But I think that whatever god existed in that case, would punish those who ignored the truth in order to have a happy outlook of themselves.

So I will still devote myself to finding the certain truth, even if it makes me miserable. I don’t want it held against me that I rejected what seemed to be true.

And I say to you, choose only one because that alone would make more sense than all your replies put together.

See, it doesn’t matter if you feel uncomfortable. It’s only a feeling. Look at history. Look at all those who fought (and died) so that others could be free. They had courage in the face of uncertainty. It didn’t matter if they didn’t know what they would face but that they would face it still. You think that’s just another ‘common and un-philosophical’ concept as well?

This is different. Those people were fighting for temporal peace. They had the hope of God which empowered them to face hardship, because the suffering would not be with them forever.

For me I have to be concerned primarily with myself, because I don’t know if other people are even real certainly! I have to devote myself to finding the absolute certain truth. It most likely is the best course of action.

So when I have a problem with understanding Catholic concepts like hell or freedom, I have to reach out to see if there are any better answers. I am not having good luck!

 

[Lost_Wanderer]

So I will still devote myself to finding the certain truth, even if it makes me miserable. I don’t want it held against me that I rejected what seemed to be true.

Misery for the sake of truth seems a big spit in the face of a loving God, who represents joy among many other good things. Even I know core Church teaching well enough to say this.

This is different. Those people were fighting for temporal peace. They had the hope of God which empowered them to face hardship, because the suffering would not be with them forever.

Peace? I didn’t say peace. I said freedom. Chamberlain sought to make peace. Look at his legacy. Did you really think every single soldier who fought believed in the Christian God and that He was somehow pumping them with liquid courage?

Really, this is just out of touch. Maybe you need a little more courage in your life because you sound like you’re just waiting for it to pop into your heart.

For me I have to be concerned primarily with myself, because I don’t know if other people are even real certainly! I have to devote myself to finding the absolute certain truth. It most likely is the best course of action.

Really? This is you? The person who just accused me of psychopathic thinking? So if I punched you in the face, that wouldn’t be real enough?

So when I have a problem with understanding Catholic concepts like hell or freedom, I have to reach out to see if there are any better answers. I am not having good luck!

As I’ve earlier implied, you don’t sound like you even want that luck. In a sense, I used to be the same. I believed that truth mattered regardless of emotions but that just only put me out of touch with reality (ironically, I actually took pride in being a realist back then). What I didn’t realize was that I was subconsciously rejecting a lot of sound truths for the sake of that very premise!

Your responses aren’t event that good. Just stubborn! Every time someone gives you a literal example of exercised freedom, human courage, and the capacity to change circumstances, you default on putting it in a purely logical vacuum!

 

[blase6]

Misery for the sake of truth seems a big spit in the face of a loving God, who represents joy among many other good things. Even I know core Church teaching well enough to say this.

What about “God is truth”? I thought the Catechism states that the first human obligation before any religious beliefs and rituals is to seek the truth!

Peace? I didn’t say peace. I said freedom. Chamberlain sought to make peace. Look at his legacy. Did you really think every single soldier who fought believed in the Christian God and that He was somehow pumping them with liquid courage?

Really, this is just out of touch. Maybe you need a little more courage in your life because you sound like you’re just waiting for it to pop into your heart.

I actually don’t know the reasons why people fought bravely in human history. It is certainly a lot more complicated than a generalization would cover.

Really? This is you? The person who just accused me of psychopathic thinking? So if I punched you in the face, that wouldn’t be real enough?

To know logical truth one must ignore subjective experience and look at what is objectively certain. I cannot rightly say that I know you, as a real person like me, exist certainly because I have only evidence that a person like you exists. I cannot jump from “there is evidence supporting your existence” to “you exist certainly”. It is not a logically valid conclusion for certain knowledge, even if it is a reasonable assumption.

But you probably will just think I am crazy for believing in solipsism.

As I’ve earlier implied, you don’t sound like you even want that luck. In a sense, I used to be the same. I believed that truth mattered regardless of emotions but that just only put me out of touch with reality (ironically, I actually took pride in being a realist back then). What I didn’t realize was that I was subconsciously rejecting a lot of sound truths for the sake of that very premise!

Your responses aren’t event that good. Just stubborn! Every time someone gives you a literal example of exercised freedom, human courage, and the capacity to change circumstances, you default on putting it in a purely logical vacuum!

Purely logical truth is what is reality. Everything which is not certain truth is just opinions, which very often obscure what is really the case. I don’t know what “truths” you would be rejecting by thinking that truth was objective. In fact, to think that truth is subjective is denounced by the Church as heretical!

 

[davidv]

What about “God is truth”? I thought the Catechism states that the first human obligation before any religious beliefs and rituals is to seek the truth!

I actually don’t know the reasons why people fought bravely in human history. It is certainly a lot more complicated than a generalization would cover.

To know logical truth one must ignore subjective experience and look at what is objectively certain. I cannot rightly say that I know you, as a real person like me, exist certainly because I have only evidence that a person like you exists. I cannot jump from “there is evidence supporting your existence” to “you exist certainly”. It is not a logically valid conclusion for certain knowledge, even if it is a reasonable assumption.

But you probably will just think I am crazy for believing in solipsism.

Purely logical truth is what is reality. Everything which is not certain truth is just opinions, which very often obscure what is really the case. I don’t know what “truths” you would be rejecting by thinking that truth was objective. In fact, to think that truth is subjective is denounced by the Church as heretical!

The religion claim as your own records in Scripture that Jesus said He was “… the Truth…”. This is a real person other than yourself who suffered, died and rose from the dead so you could be eternally happy with Him in heaven. How can you possibly have any kind of meaningful argument to say He is not real? You belief in solipsism is a slap in God’s face.

 

[blase6]

The religion claim as your own records in Scripture that Jesus said He was “… the Truth…”. This is a real person other than yourself who suffered, died and rose from the dead so you could be eternally happy with Him in heaven. How can you possibly have any kind of meaningful argument to say He is not real? You belief in solipsism is a slap in God’s face.

Evidence does not bring certainty, no matter how much there is. I can only certainly trust what I know within myself. Everything else is secondary and uncertain.

 

[davidv]

Evidence does not bring certainty, no matter how much there is. I can only certainly trust what I know within myself. Everything else is secondary and uncertain.

Time check out what your Church teaches.

7 Faith is certain. It is more certain than all human knowledge because it is founded on the very word of God who cannot lie. To be sure, revealed truths can seem obscure to human reason and experience, but "the certainty that the divine light gives is greater than that which the light of natural reason gives."31 "Ten thousand difficulties do not make one doubt."32

Do you lack faith?

 

[Lost_Wanderer]

What about “God is truth”? I thought the Catechism states that the first human obligation before any religious beliefs and rituals is to seek the truth!

I’ll just simply second davidv’s reply. Even if you cite the doctrine of God is truth that is not our only doctrine.

I actually don’t know the reasons why people fought bravely in human history. It is certainly a lot more complicated than a generalization would cover.

My point is that these people faced uncertainty and that the acceptance/surrender you have espoused in the past three pages isn’t the only response there was. There was not a singular path presented before them. This is why I keep saying how out of touch you are.

Every time you talk about how uncertainty cripples you, I see a person who doesn’t know what real courage feels like (whether it comes from God or from yourself, you just don’t seem to indicate belief in it at all).

To know logical truth one must ignore subjective experience and look at what is objectively certain.

So my fist isn’t objectively certain enough for you?

But you probably will just think I am crazy for believing in solipsism.

No, I think you’re crazy because you would still doubt that I poured coffee over your head even while standing face-to-face.

In fact, to think that truth is subjective is denounced by the Church as heretical!

I used to think so too but then I doubted. Lo and behold, I’ve found several topics where people actually deemed it unhealthy for one’s own faith to stick so rigidly (and scrupulously) to absolutist objectivity. Threads on the moral propriety of fashions, songs, family size, social/familial/business politicking… the list is endless!

Me thinks your understanding of the doctoral body of Church teaching is no more solid than mine. I suggest you open yourself up to more correction rather than just take every response given to you and stuff it into your logic-centric vacuum.

 

[blase6]

Time check out what your Church teaches.
Do you lack faith?

There are so many assumptions in that CCC quote that I don’t even know if I am on the same ground of understanding of certainty. I think my idea of certainty is different from the Church. So if the Church’s definition of “certainty” is wishy-washy and not logically absolute, then of course I can accept what they say.

 

[blase6]

So my fist isn’t objectively certain enough for you?

Nope. All I know for certain is that I experience something which seems like your fist. But I cannot jump to say I know for certain that your fist is there.

No, I think you’re crazy because you would still doubt that I poured coffee over your head even while standing face-to-face.

If a lack of certainty is “doubt” to you, then go ahead and think I’m crazy. It won’t matter that much to me because from my perspective, you are not as real as I am.

I used to think so too but then I doubted. Lo and behold, I’ve found several topics where people actually deemed it unhealthy for one’s own faith to stick so rigidly (and scrupulously) to absolutist objectivity. Threads on the moral propriety of fashions, songs, family size, social/familial/business politicking… the list is endless!

Me thinks your understanding of the doctoral body of Church teaching is no more solid than mine. I suggest you open yourself up to more correction rather than just take every response given to you and stuff it into your logic-centric vacuum.

Sorry, my goal is to seek the pure and absolute truth which often cannot be known certainly. Uncertain facts are useful but are not my ultimate goal. I would be deceiving myself if I resigned to accepting uncertain facts as certain truth.

 

[davidv]

There are so many assumptions in that CCC quote that I don’t even know if I am on the same ground of understanding of certainty. I think my idea of certainty is different from the Church. So if the Church’s definition of “certainty” is wishy-washy and not logically absolute, then of course I can accept what they say.

Oh really?
What are those assumptions? Why are they wrong?

Why is your idea the correct one?

Frankly this sound like whining. Where your logic?

 

[Lost_Wanderer]

So if the Church’s definition of “certainty” is wishy-washy and not logically absolute, then of course I can accept what they say.

Sure doesn’t sound like you are.

Nope. All I know for certain is that I experience something which seems like your fist. But I cannot jump to say I know for certain that your fist is there.

Yet you dare to call me a psychopath (and insult my hobbies on the side). This is philosophy?

If a lack of certainty is “doubt” to you, then go ahead and think I’m crazy. It won’t matter that much to me because from my perspective, you are not as real as I am.

It’s more than just lack of certainty. It’s how that lack of certainty could’ve very well opened my eyes to real truth.

Then again, I’m talking to someone who would doubt a punch to the face but then mock anime characters as unrealistic while calling fans of them (such as myself) as dangerous psychopaths.

, my goal is to seek the pure and absolute truth which often cannot be known certainly. Uncertain facts are useful but are not my ultimate goal. I would be deceiving myself if I resigned to accepting uncertain facts as certain truth.

Well for someone who claims to seek truth, you seem rather closed off to the truth presented in more basic Church teachings.

Rather odd that a lapsed Catholic like myself, of all people, would be telling you this.