“Revolution in Thought: A new look at determinism and free will"

[steve_bank]

'..fantastic human beings ...'


The anthropomorphic view that gets us into trouble. The reality is without bees, worms, and the insect-plant kingdom we do not live.

Hope springs eternal.

Today we are facing a possible global re4cession caused by our Trump enabled by republicans in congress. Republicans who are motivated by self interest and political survival over the good of the country.

Our animal survival instincts.

 

[peacegirl]

'..fantastic human beings ...'


The anthropomorphic view that gets us into trouble. The reality is without bees, worms, and the insect-plant kingdom we do not live.

It's called an ecosystem. It's amazing how everything needs everything else to survive. Did you watch this documentary?

Hope springs eternal.

Today we are facing a possible global re4cession caused by our Trump enabled by republicans in congress. Republicans who are motivated by self interest and political survival over the good of the country.

Our animal survival instincts.

In the new world, everything will be decentralized. There will be no government as we know it, although some forms of government will still be in operation.

It is important to remember that the Bureau of Internal Revenue, which now exists, will be completely displaced as a collection agency since everyone will be given a golden opportunity to cheat all he wants, but it is not displaced as an organization to keep records of taxes paid in and money paid out. Various functions of government do not require that anybody govern; therefore, though they come under the heading of government, they are not a governing body.

 

[steve_bank]

In other words communism. Workers living in a workers paradise?

Yes, ecosystem. New term for you?

All hings in a natural dynamic balance. The problem for us humans is by virtue of the combination of our physical dexterity, brain, and language our science and technology has taken us out of any natural check and balance.

In the end it is looking like the only bound for us humans is consumption of resources and danaging te entire obal ecosystem. Food supplier are already being affected by climate change.

Over consumption of resources and damage to an ecosystem has happened before in history, but not on a global scale.


In your new word who decides how resources globally and locally get ciosuned, what gets prduced and how much of each thing gets produced?

Who decides how much each person gets? Does each person get a car? Does everybody get a house or an apartment?

Who gets to live in North Dakota and who gets to live by the beach in California?

Who decides who does what?

That was the problem with trying to build systems based on Marx. Wheelie communist in nane and ideology, for practical purposes China has a free market economy, with some limitations. Large scale collectivism failed.

So those like the anarchists wantt to tear everything down, but offer no working alternatives. Only slogans.

Restoring wolves in Washington has been controversial.

Bear with us: Grizzly reintroduction to North Cascades stalls

The plan was approved last summer, but some northeast Washington residents say their concerns were not represented in the decision-making process.

www.cascadepbs.org

n November 2023, over 100 Darrington, Wash., residents filled a local high school’s auditorium in a public comment session on a hotly contested plan to reintroduce grizzly bears to the North Cascades. A year and a half later, that plan still hasn’t been implemented – and it could be scrapped under the Trump administration.

Modern urban Americans want the wild kept out of their environment. Coyotes are commonly seen in the area and have gone after kids.

 

[bilby]

'..fantastic human beings ...'


The anthropomorphic view that gets us into trouble. The reality is without bees, worms, and the insect-plant kingdom we do not live.

It's called an ecosystem. It's amazing how everything needs everything else to survive.

Well, not really. Mammals do, because they're johnny-come-lately in evolutionary terms; They evolved in a world full of services that were being provided by other life, from disposal of corpses to synthesis of vitamins.

Bacteria outnumber everything else, and mostly they don't need nothin' from no one. They will still be here when all the eukaryotes are dead and gone - and they will be happy to clean up the dead.

Ecosystems are interesting, even facinating, but they aren't nice. And they go out of balance frequently, and almost everything dies, and then it all starts again with whatever survivors are around - usually something small and versatile, like rats. That's why mammals (including us) are currently dominant. Mammals might survive the next big extinction - but like birds did last time around, they may well find themselves no longer dominant. And the survivors (if any) will be small, versatile and hardy.

Big jobs like Hom. Sap. are not likely to make the cut.

 

[DBT]

In my view determinism and free will are basically the same thing. You cannot have the latter without the former.

That has been debated for centuries. Libertarians disagree, incompatibilists disagree.....who is right? Everyone thinks that they are right.

In the case of instant vision, projection and determinism as a means to world peace, there is no debate, it's just a bad idea.

DBT, you are mixing his discoveries up. Stick with his first discovery, which is why we can be prevented from striking a first blow.

There is no discovery. There is no real time/instant vision, no projection, and how some form of tweaked determinism is supposed to bring about world peace has not, despite numerous requests, been explained.

I am trying, as I said earlier, but this is not the way to discuss a book that has NOT been read. I must have been dreaming when I thought this could work, but there is no way it can. It's not the fault of the discovery, but how it's being delivered. There is no demonstration given in a step-by-step fashion. Look at what Pood is doing? He's doing the very same thing he did at FF. He's trying to yank sentences out of context and make them look ridiculous. I've learned my lesson. When I leave here, I'm not doing this again. Every bit of desire has been drained out of me.

I assume that you have read the book, that you should be familiar with the authors contentions, so it shouldn't be a problem to explain the link between his modified version of determinism and how that relates to world peace....plus how real time seeing relates to this claim.

Maybe give a definition of his modified form of determinism as a start. That would help.

 

[peacegirl]

In my view determinism and free will are basically the same thing. You cannot have the latter without the former.

That has been debated for centuries. Libertarians disagree, incompatibilists disagree.....who is right? Everyone thinks that they are right.

In the case of instant vision, projection and determinism as a means to world peace, there is no debate, it's just a bad idea.

DBT, you are mixing his discoveries up. Stick with his first discovery, which is why we can be prevented from striking a first blow.

There is no discovery. There is no real time/instant vision, no projection, and how some form of tweaked determinism is supposed to bring about world peace has not, despite numerous requests, been explained.

I am trying, as I said earlier, but this is not the way to discuss a book that has NOT been read. I must have been dreaming when I thought this could work, but there is no way it can. It's not the fault of the discovery, but how it's being delivered. There is no demonstration given in a step-by-step fashion. Look at what Pood is doing? He's doing the very same thing he did at FF. He's trying to yank sentences out of context and make them look ridiculous. I've learned my lesson. When I leave here, I'm not doing this again. Every bit of desire has been drained out of me.

I assume that you have read the book, that you should be familiar with the authors contentions, so it shouldn't be a problem to explain the link between his modified version of determinism and how that relates to world peace....plus how real time seeing relates to this claim.

Maybe give a definition of his modified form of determinism as a start. That would help.

I'm curious. Did you read the first three chapters that I posted or not? It begins on post 5473. The modified form of the definition is necessary because determinism, the way it is defined, talks about antecedent events CAUSING a chain of events that are determined without any possibility of it being any different. This is 100% true. But, according to Lessans, the past is nothing more than a memory; it cannot cause... because it doesn't exist. We make choices based on our current knowledge and use what we remember to guide our next decision in the direction that offers us greater satisfaction. The other side of this is that nothing can make us do what we make up our mind not to do. We have absolute control over this. I'm beginning to be concerned that no one understands the core of the discovery that are based on these two principles. Please go back to post 5473 and start reading if you haven't already. I cannot do this all alone. People have to meet me halfway if they are truly interested in following these principles, which will put an end to war. I am not getting into the senses again unless his first discovery is understood.

 

[peacegirl]

In other words communism. Workers living in a workers paradise?

Yes, ecosystem. New term for you?

All hings in a natural dynamic balance. The problem for us humans is by virtue of the combination of our physical dexterity, brain, and language our science and technology has taken us out of any natural check and balance.

In the end it is looking like the only bound for us humans is consumption of resources and danaging te entire obal ecosystem. Food supplier are already being affected by climate change.

Over consumption of resources and damage to an ecosystem has happened before in history, but not on a global scale.


In your new word who decides how resources globally and locally get ciosuned, what gets prduced and how much of each thing gets produced?

Who decides how much each person gets? Does each person get a car? Does everybody get a house or an apartment?

Who gets to live in North Dakota and who gets to live by the beach in California?

Who decides who does what?

That was the problem with trying to build systems based on Marx. Wheelie communist in nane and ideology, for practical purposes China has a free market economy, with some limitations. Large scale collectivism failed.

So those like the anarchists wantt to tear everything down, but offer no working alternatives. Only slogans.

Restoring wolves in Washington has been controversial.

Bear with us: Grizzly reintroduction to North Cascades stalls

The plan was approved last summer, but some northeast Washington residents say their concerns were not represented in the decision-making process.

www.cascadepbs.org

n November 2023, over 100 Darrington, Wash., residents filled a local high school’s auditorium in a public comment session on a hotly contested plan to reintroduce grizzly bears to the North Cascades. A year and a half later, that plan still hasn’t been implemented – and it could be scrapped under the Trump administration.

Modern urban Americans want the wild kept out of their environment. Coyotes are commonly seen in the area and have gone after kids.

I don't know where to start. You are assuming so many things, it's almost like a trick to make it look like there is no answer. I know you're trying Steve, but when you compare this to Marxism, it paralyzes me. You are jumping the gun. Please give this man a chance or our world will lose.

 

[steve_bank]

Pg

I posted about humans and the ecosystem. You posted about wolves in Yellowstone. I followed up.

You need to look at your 'everybody is against me.' mind set.

No tricks really, people are arising you to explain the basics of the book without posting lengthy sections of the book and saying you figure it out.

My point was that humans are outside of natural checks and balances, there are too many humans..Our problems have nothing to do with free will and determinism.

Here in Seattle pigeons and sea gulls are everywhere. No natural predators. Pigeons eat and crap all over. Sea gulls are nasty flying rats.

War is about space and resources. Too many people. In Africa there are traditional nomads who wander freely grazing cattle. There is violent conflict between nomads and farmers. Resources and space. And lifestyle, culture.

Your new world is an impossible dream.

There are the big stories like Ukraine, Gaza and Iran. There are nay smaller stories of conflict like nomads vs farmers.

Thailand and Cambodia have been fighting over a small strip of birder land. Culture, nationalism, and ethnicity.

Pakistan vs India over Kashmir

 

[steve_bank]

Pg


In your new word who decides how resources globally and locally get consumed, what gets produced and how much of each thing gets produced?

Who decides how much each person gets? Does each person get a car? Does everybody get a house or an apartment?

Who gets to live in North Dakota and who gets to live by the beach in California?

Who decides who does what?

Can you answer how his works in your new world?

Yo0ui say there will be no government as we know it. Ok, how does it work and stay stable?

Is there a democratic voting system of some kind?

 

[peacegirl]

Pg

I posted about humans and the ecosystem. You posted about wolves in Yellowstone. I followed up.

You need to look at your 'everybody is against me.' mind set.

I never said everybody is against me, but there is a problem when no one has shown any understanding of the basic principle, which is central to the rest of this book.

No tricks really, people are arising you to explain the basics of the book without posting lengthy sections of the book and saying you figure it out.

I never said for you figure it out, but if you refuse to read, then how can anything I say make sense? If it's hard for you to read large swathes of text, maybe the next step would be getting this book on audio.

My point was that humans are outside of natural checks and balances, there are too many humans..Our problems have nothing to do with free will and determinism.

It has everything to do with the principles in this book because this part of government will announce that the resources are running thin. They will set up a system where the checks and balances will be constantly checked. The difference between this world and the new is that people will heed what is told to them, knowing that if they don't, the rest of the economy will be hurt, while they are being given protection from any hurt done to them by the guarantee. See, there is no way you'll understand this because I'm not there yet.

Here in Seattle pigeons and sea gulls are everywhere. No natural predators. Pigeons eat and crap all over. Sea gulls are nasty flying rats.

War is about space and resources. Too many people. In Africa there are traditional nomads who wander freely grazing cattle. There is violent conflict between nomads and farmers. Resources and space. And lifestyle, culture.

Yes, there is conflict all over the world. Resources are scarce. Lessans has given a blueprint as to how this can be corrected. I know it seems impossible because you haven't fully understood how the transition to "no blame" changes what was impossible before to what is now possible.
----------------
The economic system I just described is mathematically possible, but only when all people understand what it means that man’s will is not free. These principles are just as undeniable when thoroughly understood as any mathematical equation, and when political leaders of the world recognize that it is now possible to unite all nations in such a harmonious agreement that the causes of war and crime can be entirely eliminated not only without hurting anyone but while benefiting all mankind, this knowledge will spread quickly throughout the earth. Until then, we will be forced to live in our present world as a lesser of two evils.

Your new world is an impossible dream.

There are the big stories like Ukraine, Gaza and Iran. There are nay smaller stories of conflict like nomads vs farmers.

Thailand and Cambodia have been fighting over a small strip of birder land. Culture, nationalism, and ethnicity.

Pakistan vs India over Kashmir

You are looking at this from the vantage point of the world we live in. You cannot do that because so many changes are going to take place that the very things that gave rise to these conflicts will not occur. I understand your concerns. All of these conflicts look like separate problems that have to be dealt with, but they all have one root cause. It's sort of like experiencing different symptoms in your health that don't look related, but in reality, they all stem from one root cause.

 

[peacegirl]

Pg


In your new word who decides how resources globally and locally get consumed, what gets produced and how much of each thing gets produced?

Who decides how much each person gets? Does each person get a car? Does everybody get a house or an apartment?

Who gets to live in North Dakota and who gets to live by the beach in California?

Who decides who does what?

This is not socialism. No one decides who gets what. People get to choose where they want to live, but there is a caveat to this. You will see how this transition will take place without hurting a single soul.

Can you answer how his works in your new world?

I can only post certain excerpts that will give you some idea. I cannot post the whole book and explaining this in my own words will only cause confusion, and I'm not willing to do that.

Yo0ui say there will be no government as we know it. Ok, how does it work and stay stable?

Is there a democratic voting system of some kind?

There will be no political system, but there will be people whose job is to do the hard work of research and development. People will want to do what is best for their country because there will be nothing to stop them from hurting their country if they want to. But how can they want to when they are given complete freedom to do whatever they want (IOW, no one Big Brother will be watching), and at the same time, they will be protected from falling below their standard of living if they cannot meet their expenses. This is all explained in much more depth, but remember, this is only a blueprint of this new world. It would take thousands of pages to enumerate all of the changes that will occur in one book. This is why scientists will need to take over where Lessans left off.

 

[pood]

Here in Seattle pigeons and sea gulls are everywhere. No natural predators. Pigeons eat and crap all over. Sea gulls are nasty flying rats.

Seagulls, really just gulls, are not nasty flying rats. They are beautiful creatures. I believe it was Dawkins who stated that they are so well designed for flight that it could almost make him believe in a designer.

Gulls, who eat worms, are so smart that they have figured out how do a collective dance on sunny days that sounds like the patter of rain. This makes the worms come out, whom they then eat.

Pigeons are beautiful. They have five cones so they see tens of millions of colors that humans don’t. They are very intelligent, and recognize individual humans. Several years ago, I had a pigeon friend, Brownie, with whom I shared roast chicken on a park bench. He let me pet him and so have other pigeons.

Pigeons and gulls in cities absolutely do have predators: falcons, hawks, owls, racoons, cats, among others. I have seen a falcon in a park grab a pigeon and fly away with it.

 

[pood]

And, for that matter, rats are not nasty, either. They are very intelligent and I think it at least plausible that when humans vanish they could evolve to human-level intelligence.

 

[peacegirl]

Here in Seattle pigeons and sea gulls are everywhere. No natural predators. Pigeons eat and crap all over. Sea gulls are nasty flying rats.

Seagulls, really just gulls, are not nasty flying rats. They are beautiful creatures. I believe it was Dawkins who stated that they are so well designed for flight that it could almost make him believe in a designer.

Gulls, who eat worms, are so smart that they have figured out how do a collective dance on sunny days that sounds like the patter of rain. This makes the worms come out, whom they then eat.

Pigeons are beautiful. They have five cones so they see tens of millions of colors that humans don’t. They are very intelligent, and recognize individual humans. Several years ago, I had a pigeon friend, Brownie, with whom I shared roast chicken on a park bench. He let me pet him and so have other pigeons.

Pigeons and gulls in cities absolutely do have predators: falcons, hawks, owls, racoons, cats, among others. I have seen a falcon in a park grab a pigeon and fly away with it.

Pigeons can recognize human faces without any other cues? I've got to see this one. You make a claim, but you have nothing to show for it.

 

[pood]

Here in Seattle pigeons and sea gulls are everywhere. No natural predators. Pigeons eat and crap all over. Sea gulls are nasty flying rats.

Seagulls, really just gulls, are not nasty flying rats. They are beautiful creatures. I believe it was Dawkins who stated that they are so well designed for flight that it could almost make him believe in a designer.

Gulls, who eat worms, are so smart that they have figured out how do a collective dance on sunny days that sounds like the patter of rain. This makes the worms come out, whom they then eat.

Pigeons are beautiful. They have five cones so they see tens of millions of colors that humans don’t. They are very intelligent, and recognize individual humans. Several years ago, I had a pigeon friend, Brownie, with whom I shared roast chicken on a park bench. He let me pet him and so have other pigeons.

Pigeons and gulls in cities absolutely do have predators: falcons, hawks, owls, racoons, cats, among others. I have seen a falcon in a park grab a pigeon and fly away with it.

Pigeons can recognize human faces without any other cues? I've got to see this one. You make a claim, but you have nothing to show for it.

You can look it up. It is well-established science. But then you hate science, don’t understand it, and in general are totally clueless.

 

[peacegirl]

Here in Seattle pigeons and sea gulls are everywhere. No natural predators. Pigeons eat and crap all over. Sea gulls are nasty flying rats.

Seagulls, really just gulls, are not nasty flying rats. They are beautiful creatures. I believe it was Dawkins who stated that they are so well designed for flight that it could almost make him believe in a designer.

Gulls, who eat worms, are so smart that they have figured out how do a collective dance on sunny days that sounds like the patter of rain. This makes the worms come out, whom they then eat.

Pigeons are beautiful. They have five cones so they see tens of millions of colors that humans don’t. They are very intelligent, and recognize individual humans. Several years ago, I had a pigeon friend, Brownie, with whom I shared roast chicken on a park bench. He let me pet him and so have other pigeons.

Pigeons and gulls in cities absolutely do have predators: falcons, hawks, owls, racoons, cats, among others. I have seen a falcon in a park grab a pigeon and fly away with it.

Pigeons can recognize human faces without any other cues? I've got to see this one. You make a claim, but you have nothing to show for it.

You can look it up. It is well-established science. But then you hate science, don’t understand it, and in general are totally clueless.

You made the claim, so it's your burden to prove. Where is this well-established science? It shouldn't be hard for you to find.

 

[pood]

Pigeons never fail to recognize human faces.

Poor peacegirl. So wholly ignorant of reality. So indoctrinated by a bullshit book written by her clueless father.

My pigeon friends recognize me right off.

 

[peacegirl]

Pigeons never fail to recognize human faces.

Poor peacegirl. So wholly ignorant of reality. So indoctrinated by a bullshit book written by her clueless father.

My pigeon friends recognize me right off.

That's because they anticipate the time you sit on the bench, and they get excited knowing they're going to get a treat. They know the routine. I'm sure they like you, but this has nothing to do with them recognizing your face. WTF! Why can't you provide any documentation that people can see for themselves? You just spout off any old thing.

 

[steve_bank]

Pg


In your new word who decides how resources globally and locally get consumed, what gets produced and how much of each thing gets produced?

Who decides how much each person gets? Does each person get a car? Does everybody get a house or an apartment?

Who gets to live in North Dakota and who gets to live by the beach in California?

Who decides who does what?

This is not socialism. No one decides who gets what. People get to choose where they want to live, but there is a caveat to this. You will see how this transition will take place without hurting a single soul.

Can you answer how his works in your new world?

I can only post certain excerpts that will give you some idea. I cannot post the whole book and explaining this in my own words will only cause confusion, and I'm not willing to do that.

Yo0ui say there will be no government as we know it. Ok, how does it work and stay stable?

Is there a democratic voting system of some kind?

There will be no political system, but there will be people whose job is to do the hard work of research and development. People will want to do what is best for their country because there will be nothing to stop them from hurting their country if they want to. But how can they want to when they are given complete freedom to do whatever they want (IOW, no one Big Brother will be watching), and at the same time, they will be protected from falling below their standard of living if they cannot meet their expenses. This is all explained in much more depth, but remember, this is only a blueprint of this new world. It would take thousands of pages to enumerate all of the changes that will occur in one book. This is why scientists will need to take over where Lessans left off.

Like I said all you and others like you offer are slogans and cliches.

 

[pood]

You made the claim, so it's your burden to prove. Where is this well-established science? It shouldn't be hard for you to find.

You made the claim that we see in real time, so it is your burden to prove it.

The evidence that many birds, including crows, ravens and pigeons, and perhaps all birds, recognize individual humans, is overwhelming.

Bees recognize individual humans, too.

Of course dogs recognize individual humans by sight alone too. Sorry if that challenges your precious (and idiotic) world view.