Printable View
Hey i only believed that gringo jokes (can i call Americans gringos, because i really don't like that denomination) were bad. But it seems that bad jokes are after all the most powerful force of all, and that ideas can cross Oceans. ~;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Papewaio
What does mutation and natural selection mean to you?Quote:
Originally Posted by Papewaio
The chemical pathways was caused by natural mutation and natural selection, that's it. Whether you call it emergent doesn't matter, because your body follows the chemical pathways. If they don't follow, then they are simply naturally selected out.
All that thinking is just an illusion, you're not going to drive when you are blind or use a headphone if you have no hearing.
You missed the whole point. "Free will" is an illusion because it ain't your primary function, hence betraying the very meaning of "free will".Quote:
Originally Posted by Redleg
It's real alright, but where's your "free will" to use your broken/injured arm? Or does it hurt? ~;)Quote:
Again - if you are hit by a car and your arm is broke is it an illusion? or is it reality?
What does a flat tire have to do with your 'free will"Quote:
If you are looking at a car and you notice that the tire is flat - is it an illusion or is it reality?
Easy as heck. Yes. Sound is just a difference in air-pressure. When a tree falls, it creates a difference in air-pressure, hence propagating soundwaves. Whether that soundwave hits your ear is another story.Quote:
Simple questions - simple answer.
Now the hard one.
If a tree falls in the woods and no-one is there does it make a sound?
I can see the next theory.. in a dream. I see the Intelligent Rain Theory, stating that since God is pushing things down to Earth, there must be an infinite amount of water in the sky.
Not missing your point at all - your discussing a philisophy not science. So the brain does not have a function beyond controlling your bodily functions - now that is funny.Quote:
Originally Posted by Quietus
You claimed everything outside of survive is an illusion - well breaking your arm is a reality - the reason it was broke was outside of the human need to survive. The choice to get it fixed is only in the human condition - animals have no choice to have it repaired unless a human is involved.Quote:
It's real alright, but where's your "free will" to use your broken/injured arm? Or does it hurt? ~;)
Because if the tire is flat you now have a choice to change it or not change it - the essence of free will. Choice.Quote:
What does a flat tire have to do with your 'free will"
That is the science answer - now try the philisophy one.Quote:
Easy as heck. Yes. Sound is just a difference in air-pressure. When a tree falls, it creates a difference in air-pressure, hence propagating soundwaves. Whether that soundwave hits your ear is another story.
Philosophy shouldn´t try to give different answers on the same questions as science. Science always wins.Quote:
That is the science answer - now try the philisophy one.
Ah then you don't understand the nature of the question. Nor the reason behind why it is a philisophy question not a science one. Or is it that you do not care to understand the difference?Quote:
Originally Posted by A.Saturnus
Science explains a lot - but philisophy is what makes us man - if it wasn't for the ability to think and philisophize (SP) then we are nothing.
http://www.spectacle.org/396/scifi/tree.html
An interesting essay on the subject.Quote:
How can we deal with ethical situations if we can't even define our terms?
One of the great dumb philosphy questions is, "If a tree falls in a forest and there's no one there to hear it, does it make a sound?" The obvious answer is: "Of course there is. What a stupid question. Next you're going to ask about that clapping thing." But philosophy isn't about the obvious; philosophy is about the devious. The answer, arrived after much debate (and much drinking) seems to be "no": Sound is only sound if a person hears it, claim the tipsy pundits.
"Free Will" is an illusion because what really matters to your body is to Survive and Reproduce, hereby improving the preserving and improving the mechanism and structure of your offspring in the next generation. That's what you are, that's Evolution.Quote:
Originally Posted by Redleg
The "choice" to fix it was a Survival function, not "free will".Quote:
You claimed everything outside of survive is an illusion - well breaking your arm is a reality - the reason it was broke was outside of the human need to survive. The choice to get it fixed is only in the human condition - animals have no choice to have it repaired unless a human is involved.
You fix the tire so you can go SAFE to your home. Survival function, not "free will"Quote:
Because if the tire is flat you now have a choice to change it or not change it - the essence of free will. Choice.
There's no Philosophy answer.Quote:
That is the science answer - nowa try the philisophy one.
It depends on how you define your terms in the question. If you define "Sound" as an electrochemical interpretation in your brain, then NO, because the soundwave - which is the physical phenomenon - did not reach your ears.
If you define "Sound" as soundwaves, then YES, because a soundwave is a soundwave whether you hear and interpret it or not.
Free will is what allows you to type on your computer and philsophize your view of evolution and human development. If man's existance was only about survive and reproduce we would not have this type of discussion - because we would be busy finding food and looking for women in cycle to breed with. Concepts of love and life long mates would not be around. Some of the greatest inventions of man would not be around - we would once again only focusing on survivial.Quote:
Originally Posted by Quietus
Again you have gone away from science and into philisophy. Its to bad that you can not recongize it.
You would be incorrect - if a wolf breaks its leg - it can not get it fixed. Man is the only being that can fix our broken parts - fixing parts is something beyond the survival insticts of animals.Quote:
The "choice" to fix it was a Survival function, not "free will".
Again you would be incorrect - you don't need your car to survive - you only need your feet - survival means a specific thing.Quote:
You fix the tire so you can go SAFE to your home. Survival function, not "free will"
Survive - 1 : to remain alive or in existence : live on
2 : to continue to function or prosper
Survival - a : a living or continuing longer than another person or thing b : the continuation of life or existence
Now explain to me in sciencific terms how fixing a flat tire - equates to a survival function - using the correct defination of survival.
You would be incorrect - its an question that is asked all the time in philosophy - or at least in the 1983-1987 time frame - in several philosophy classes I was in.Quote:
There's no Philosophy answer.
Oh I am more then aware of how sound functions - did a couple of soundwave studies about how Artillery Rounds were effecting the civilians around Fort Lewis. Sound can do some very interesting things.Quote:
It depends on how you define your terms in the question. If you define "Sound" as an electrochemical interpretation in your brain, then NO, because the soundwave - which is the physical phenomenon - did not reach your ears.
If you define "Sound" as soundwaves, then YES, because a soundwave is a soundwave whether you hear and interpret it or not.
However once again - if a tree falls in the forest and no one is there - does it make a sound?
Quietus- The answer is no. If there's nobody to hear, it doesn't make sound. Understandable i think. We could go on this discussion for weeks, but you'll loose always, this idea is accepted by phylosophy and applied in science,it has much aplication in social science. The things that exists are those things that one can percive, so the sound don't exists if nobody hears it. Simple.
That's why it's an illusion, because your true function is hidden from you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Redleg
If a wolf breaks its legs, the wolf won't move or use that leg because it 'hurts'. The bone will self repair if it is in place.Quote:
You would be incorrect - if a wolf breaks its leg - it can not get it fixed. Man is the only being that can fix our broken parts - fixing parts is something beyond the survival insticts of animals.
You continue to function as the machine you are.Quote:
Again you would be incorrect - you don't need your car to survive - you only need your feet - survival means a specific thing.
Survive - 1 : to remain alive or in existence : live on
2 : to continue to function or prosper
Survival - a : a living or continuing longer than another person or thing b : the continuation of life or existence
Why are you fixing the flat tire? If you don't fix the flat tire you'll be scared won't make it home safely.Quote:
Now explain to me in sciencific terms how fixing a flat tire - equates to a survival function - using the correct defination of survival.
~:confused: See below....Quote:
You would be incorrect - its an question that is asked all the time in philosophy - or at least in the 1983-1987 time frame - in several philosophy classes I was in.
Equivocation is a logical fallacy. Sound and Soundwaves are two different things.Quote:
Oh I am more then aware of how sound functions - did a couple of soundwave studies about how Artillery Rounds were effecting the civilians around Fort Lewis. Sound can do some very interesting things.
However once again - if a tree falls in the forest and no one is there - does it make a sound?
1) Sound is the conversion and electrochemical interpretation of Soundwaves in your ear and to your brain.
2) Soundwave is a differential in air-pressure.
So, define what is "Sound" first in your question, 1 or 2?
If you answer 1, then NO.
If you answer 2, then YES.
Sound and Soundwaves are two different things. See my above post.Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulforged
That's incorrect both things are the same phenomenum, one is the significate granted to the material one happening on the real world and the other is the perception of it in the ears and it's interpretation by the brain (with this all you're contradicting the very significance of the frase), but that doesn't say anything. The thing is like this: the humans create the reality by perception, and real is what exists. So what exists is what you perceive. If you can't perceive (sense) the things by any means then they aren't there. Anyway you're going far beyond what the refran states (stick to the words). Sound is only sound if you hear it. As a human is a human only if he has other things to perceive and difference himself, and if he has an human to reflect and identify himself. As God is only God is we believe in it (but here i'll be attacked again).Quote:
Originally Posted by Quietus
The basic premise is: the man creates reality by perception, there's no reality without perception.
It doesn't matter who wins the "free will" debate. We are what we are and that is the fact of things. We do what we do and that is the fact of things. Whether or not we do it "freely" is beyond the scope of our existence.
As the song says-- "Yo soy como soy y nada mas, yo vivo mi vida pa' gozar."
DA
edit-- dumb typo
Bueno aunque no estabamos discutiendo la existencia del libre albedrio...sorry. Though we were not discussing the existence of the free will (because everybody seems to take that for certain thing) i've to say that that song sucks. ~DQuote:
Originally Posted by Del Arroyo
Again that is philosophy not science -Quote:
Originally Posted by Quietus
the true function is not hidden; unless of course you believe in a supreme being - which from your attack on religion in your very post post - the assumption is that you are not religious. So regarding a sciencific explanation - your true function is not hidden. By calling it an illusion - you have entered into the area of philosophy no matter how much you attempt to deny it - that is exactly what it is. Does man think - is our ability to have abstract thought an illusion? Or is it what makes us unique of all other life on this planet.
LOL - my guess is that you have no idea what a wild animal will do. But I do have a little experience in trapping and tracking wild animals - they move with broken bones. So will a dog. Wild animals will ignore the pain if its a matter of survival - or they will be killed or die depending on the situation.Quote:
If a wolf breaks its legs, the wolf won't move or use that leg because it 'hurts'. The bone will self repair if it is in place.
Again you would be incorrect - man is not a machine - we are much more then that.Quote:
You continue to function as the machine you are.
Again that constutes more then survivial - notice the enteing of fear into your equation of illusion and survivial. Seems that there are some problems defending your psuedo science here of stating man has survive, reproduction, and illusion as our only functions. It seems not only do you wish to disregard the sciencific methods used to postulate evolution as a viable theory - remember the discussion on Artificial selection and selective breeding, but now we are mixing philosophy and science to support a theory of evolution.Quote:
Why are you fixing the flat tire? If you don't fix the flat tire you'll be scared won't make it home safely.
Not surprised at all that you are confused - you are mixing science and philosophy together. And you attacked religion for doing the same thing. This has really been enjoyable for me.Quote:
~:confused: See below....
Quote:
Equivocation is a logical fallacy. Sound and Soundwaves are two different things.
1) Sound is the conversion and electrochemical interpretation of Soundwaves in your ear and to your brain.
2) Soundwave is a differential in air-pressure.
So, define what is "Sound" first in your question, 1 or 2?
If you answer 1, then NO.
If you answer 2, then YES.
Yes indeed equivocation is a logical fallacy - however you still have not answered the philosophical question of
if a tree falls in the forest and no one is there - does it make a sound?
Here I will give you a clue from the type of question you asked many posts ago.
However since you brought up logical fallacies again - I wonder if you can state how many logical fallacies you have committed in this arguement. Hell I will let you off the hook real easy - just admit that the Onion Article fooled you because of your own baised views against the Christian Faith. And I will ignore your logical fallacies on evolution where you disregrad Darwain's sciencific method of proving natural selection and mutation.Quote:
Originally Posted by Quietus
Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulforged
:no:Quote:
Originally Posted by Redleg
Sound = Electrochemical Conversion + Interpretion of Soundwaves inside your ear and to your brain.
Soundwaves = Differential in air-pressure.
If there is no conversion and interpretation, then there is NO sound, but Soundwaves still exist. It simply means the soundwaves aren't hitting your healthy ears and being converted to signals.
If you are completely deaf, then there will be NO sound in your head, but it doesn't mean the stereo isn't playing. The soundwaves are still there. Two different things.
I already know the definition, and i understand you man ~:cheers: . But you didn't understand me. Stick to the frase, and remember this is phylosophy.Quote:
Originally Posted by Quietus
Other thing if you know so well the definition then don't go around asking for the exact meaning of sound in the frase. That's nonsense. Sound is sound nothing more, you seem to know this pretty well, then why do you ask for the exact meaning in the frase if there's only one. ~:confused:
~:eek: How many times do I have to repeat this.... Sound and Soundwaves are DIFFERENT.Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulforged
Soundwaves are converted inside your ear into electrochemical signals to your brain and that interpretation of that electrochemical signal is called a sound.
Hence, you must define what you mean by "sound". "Sound is" NOT "a sound nothing more", that's the point.
When you say: the speed of sound, that's the speed of Soundwaves.
When you say: the sound of music, that's the conversion and interpretation of Soundwaves, from your ear to the brain.
Two different things. You can't equivocate. Thus, you must define what you mean by "sound" in the question, because the answer depends on it.
Is not my question is the question of Confucious. Like i said i already know the specifical difference, but they're both the same phenomenum, one causes the other, so took together they represent the same phenomenum at the point of sound. But again if they've two different definitions then why ask for an exact definition when you're giving it yourself. Anyway it's sound ok, just sound.Quote:
Originally Posted by Quietus
Let me tell you a similar frase so you can understand the point of this (either you want it to be soundwaves or just sound): "Eyes that not see, heart that not feel" (sorry for the translation, but i think you understand that). So again (without entering the complex system of the brain, wich didn't existed in times of Confucious) if there's nobody (no nothing, but nobody) to hear does anything makes sound?
Analogously:Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulforged
Question: If you sail over the horizon, would you fall off the edge?
Answer: NO. The Earth is "round". Period.
There's no philosophical answer.
You can't say: "Well, two thousand years ago, Philosopher X didn't know the earth is round, so what's your philosophical answer to this?" :dizzy2:
~:cool:
Well you didn't answer my question. That excuse of the author was given only because i was looking from your point of view. You can suppose what you want. But you seem to let the value of science overrule your rationality. Do you've in mind what the phylosophy does? As the text quoted by Redleg said, "it's about the devious not the obvious". You simply can't let your belief in the certainty of the scientific knowledge blind your other senses and your perception and capacity of reflexión. In this example you're confusing everything: is not the same to ask about the things that your senses can easly percieve, that talk about what needs reflexión. In any case, many a social scientist, talks about the significance of this sentence, and i already gave some examples.Quote:
Originally Posted by Quietus
I've already addressed and answered the question many times.Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulforged
Deaf Person + Soundwaves = No electrochemical conversion of soundwaves = No Sound
Water + Soundwaves = No electrochemical conversion of soundwaves = No Sound
Trees + Soundwaves = No electrochemical conversion of soundwaves = No Sound
Rock + Soundwaves = No electrochemical conversion of soundwaves = No Sound
Shoes + Soundwaves = No electrochemical conversion of soundwaves = No Sound
Human + Soundwaves = Electrochemical conversion of soundwaves = Sound.
If the tree falls in the forest, soundwaves will be propagated. The soundwaves will not hit your ear, hence there will be no sound, but it doesn't mean the falling tree doesn't create soundwaves. Sound and Soundwaves are different.
1) Tree falling = Soundwaves.
2) Sound = Human (ear & brain) + Soundwaves.
3) Sound = Human (ear & brain) + Tree Falling.
If you remove the Human (ear & brain) from the third equation, it is no longer Sound. But it doesn't mean there are no Soundwaves. A falling tree doesn't create Sound, it only creates Soundwaves.
4) Sound - Human = Human - Human + Tree Falling.
5) Sound - (Sound - Soundwaves)* = Tree Falling
6) Sound - Sound + Soundwaves = Tree Falling
7) Soundwaves = Tree Falling
8) Tree Falling = Soundwaves.
* = Rearrange equation 2.
Well ok i'm a little tired of this discussion. If you like it that way... ~:cheers:
Now don't take this the wrong way; it's not intended as an insult. I just found the above list rather interesting. If you look at the list as a whole, it would appear that deaf people aren't human. I know that you didn't intend this; but sometimes the unintentional speaks volumes. You might want to revise your list. ~DQuote:
Originally Posted by Quietus
A deaf person is human but with nonfunctional ears. When I said human, it is given that the ears are functional.Quote:
Originally Posted by Aenlic
A deaf person is in a forest. A tree falls and make soundwaves. The deaf person's ear can't conver the soundwaves hence there's no sound. ~:)
Is the world "round" because you liked it? ~;) Do you have a stomach because you liked it? Which came first, 'hunger' or the stomach? Do you have lungs because you liked 'breathing'? It has nothing to do with liking it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulforged
gah! Sound! Gah! Gah!
Hm, I guess it gets alot more radio play where you live. I've only heard it off my CD. I actually like it alot ~:)Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulforged
DA