Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Ethics & Morality
Free will and determinism
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Simon_Templar" data-source="post: 77651413" data-attributes="member: 75842"><p>Yes, you absolutely can.</p><p></p><p>Not only can you transcend your thoughts, you can transcend yourself, and even the universe.</p><p></p><p>The knowledge of a thing, is not one of that thing's parts. Thus in order to know anything, you must be able to transcend that thing.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>To be clear, you are agreeing with the majority of my first post which stated that your position was tantamount to a denial of the existence of the self in any meaningful way.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>How is this fundamentally different from a computer program?</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Would I even be responsible? Let's say I did this with two people, and one killed themselves and one didn't kill themselves. I am a common factor in what were two different outcomes. How can I be responsible for the outcomes? Isn't it the persons' own programming which is ultimately responsible?</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>If this were true, then we would also have to conclude that actual guilt or innocence were irrelevant, because only the appearance of guilt or innocence would be necessary for such deterrence. As such, punishing the innocent who appear to be guilty would be preferable to not punishing the innocent, you agree?</p><p></p><p></p><p>Also, I wrote this first response that you quoted above in a rush and I went back and rewrote it later, to what I thought was a better version.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Simon_Templar, post: 77651413, member: 75842"] Yes, you absolutely can. Not only can you transcend your thoughts, you can transcend yourself, and even the universe. The knowledge of a thing, is not one of that thing's parts. Thus in order to know anything, you must be able to transcend that thing. To be clear, you are agreeing with the majority of my first post which stated that your position was tantamount to a denial of the existence of the self in any meaningful way. How is this fundamentally different from a computer program? Would I even be responsible? Let's say I did this with two people, and one killed themselves and one didn't kill themselves. I am a common factor in what were two different outcomes. How can I be responsible for the outcomes? Isn't it the persons' own programming which is ultimately responsible? If this were true, then we would also have to conclude that actual guilt or innocence were irrelevant, because only the appearance of guilt or innocence would be necessary for such deterrence. As such, punishing the innocent who appear to be guilty would be preferable to not punishing the innocent, you agree? Also, I wrote this first response that you quoted above in a rush and I went back and rewrote it later, to what I thought was a better version. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Ethics & Morality
Free will and determinism
Top
Bottom