317 réponses à ce sujet

[Zyrious]

Ypiret wrote...

Zyrious wrote...

Ypiret wrote...

Zyrious wrote...

Ypiret wrote...

Zyrious wrote...

GracefulChicken wrote...

Actually, it's pretty possible to be deterministic and still believe in free will. The universe being deterministic is still very possible even if individuals have free will...

I wouldn't call myself a determinist, but I do find the evidence that your subconscious makes all your decisions .22 seconds before we come to the same conscious "choice" pretty damning, though.

I think determinism and free will are diametrically opposed. I believe in free will, which is that while we are influenced by our past, by what's around us, and by our parents genetics, ultimately we are the driver of our own car. I'm not in a particular mood to drive that metaphor forward though, but i'm sure you could work with it for a while.

The problem with that is that the fact that you have a brain complex as yours, or even that you're alive right now is %100 based on your DNA. 

It's the code that allowed you to do what you do and be what you are. It's what separates you from an ameba.

So it ultimately is that factor that drive everything you do because it allows it in the first place.

Molecules, atoms, and quantum mechanics are are also the only reason i live, but that doesn't mean they are all that drive me. (Technically, quantum mechanics states determinism is impossible because of random variance). I don't see how just because DNA is the blueprint of our body it is also now the soul of our conciousness. I don't see the connection, and this is the first time i've seen someone try and make it. Even most determinists i've talked to say environment and parental condition can be a bigger factor than genetics.

I never claimed they drive decisions. They're the ultimate cause of your action.
My whole point is cause and effect. Everything that happens has a cause. I don't understand how you can think otherwise.

Also random variation is caused by quantum mechanics.

Quantum mechanics do not follow the laws of physics, are the very base of every partical in the universe, and are unpredictable and random by nature. Perhaps you're thinking of a different definition of random variance?

Also, DNA is the blueprint that constructs my body and allows it to function, i do not believe it is the inherent "cause" of what i choose to do, but perhaps a influencer. However, you still refuse to believe this is a philisophical debate, and i cannot imagine why. It seems almost as if you hate my line of thinking, and i find that, more than all else, offensive.

But I'm not saying DNA causes you to make decisions. DNA causes you to have a brain and a bony; the tool necesarry to make decision.

Like If I give you a sovel, and you go dig a hole. I didn't directly cause you to dig a hole, but your ability to dig the hole and the ultimate reason it now exists is because I gave you the sovel. 

See what I mean?

If you give me a shovel i can dig a hole, hit someone over the head with it, go bury other holes, or shovel snow with it. DNA gives me a body and mind, perhaps with a slant towards a certain way to use said body and mind, but i don't believe if i choose to be an astronaught, my DNA is why, or if i choose to be a bum, it is because of my DNA. It is because of my DNA that i have a body and mind to have domain over, and that i am capable of properly formulating my thoughts. Perhaps my DNA is even why i have free will, or perhaps it's something else. But i still believe in free will.

I don't know if i'm formulating myself clearly, am i making any sense in presenting my view?

[Ypiret]

Zyrious wrote...

Ypiret wrote...

Zyrious wrote...

Ypiret wrote...

I see no personal attack. I see it as a simplistic view of the human conciousness, and that view IS typical of a determinist. I never attacked you, if you see it that way, i'm sorry, but that's just how i see it. Not once did i bring your character or person into question, not until you attacked me atleast.

You didn't bring up my character or person into question?
In those two lines you called me unappreciative and simple mined.

That's you putting words in my mouth. I believed what you were saying was, essentially, an offense to me and was in MY VIEW simplistic and undeserving of humanity. But not once did i make a comment about you. Wether you choose to read more out of it or not is your choice.

What? No I wasn't. I was explaining my take on the AIs-cannot- be-people subject. Then you go "you undermine humanity and evolution and blah blah blah", because I didn't agree with your view. Then I started attacking you.

And you can't say I'm putting words in your mouth for interpreting it the way I did. 
Who wouldn't interpret it that way?

I would say anyone not emotionally invested in this thread (i.e. most of us) would, since at no point did i mention you, your character, or anything else. Do i not like your beliefs?  Yeah, do i think it's a simplistic view of our mind? Yeah, considering i believe we are capable of free will and you dont, but i don't think you are simplistic. Although because of "Two wrongs don't make a right", i don't think you have much of a high ground here, but since my intent was never to attack in the first place, it is you who are drudging ad hominem into this. i have only ever attacked your idea's. Which is part of debate.

You don't have to be emotionally invested in something to take offense to a comment. That doesn't even make sense.

"I hate blue."
"I like blue"
"Red is so much better then blue."
"No no no , blue is better then red"
"People who like blue tend to view colors simplistically. You undermine and don't apriciate color."

It's condesending.

I didn't like freaking cry about it. But I just went  "okay, so you want to play it that way?" and started attacking you. 
Not saying it was smart, but I did.

I'm not claiming to have high ground either. You said I attacked you first, I didn't. It's that simple.

I'm not better then you. I don't, nor will I ever think that.
Just to make it clear.

[Zyrious]

Ypiret wrote...

Zyrious wrote...

Ypiret wrote...

Zyrious wrote...

Ypiret wrote...

I see no personal attack. I see it as a simplistic view of the human conciousness, and that view IS typical of a determinist. I never attacked you, if you see it that way, i'm sorry, but that's just how i see it. Not once did i bring your character or person into question, not until you attacked me atleast.

You didn't bring up my character or person into question?
In those two lines you called me unappreciative and simple mined.

That's you putting words in my mouth. I believed what you were saying was, essentially, an offense to me and was in MY VIEW simplistic and undeserving of humanity. But not once did i make a comment about you. Wether you choose to read more out of it or not is your choice.

What? No I wasn't. I was explaining my take on the AIs-cannot- be-people subject. Then you go "you undermine humanity and evolution and blah blah blah", because I didn't agree with your view. Then I started attacking you.

And you can't say I'm putting words in your mouth for interpreting it the way I did. 
Who wouldn't interpret it that way?

I would say anyone not emotionally invested in this thread (i.e. most of us) would, since at no point did i mention you, your character, or anything else. Do i not like your beliefs?  Yeah, do i think it's a simplistic view of our mind? Yeah, considering i believe we are capable of free will and you dont, but i don't think you are simplistic. Although because of "Two wrongs don't make a right", i don't think you have much of a high ground here, but since my intent was never to attack in the first place, it is you who are drudging ad hominem into this. i have only ever attacked your idea's. Which is part of debate.

You don't have to be emotionally invested in something to take offense to a comment. That doesn't even make sense.

"I hate blue."
"I like blue"
"Red is so much better then blue."
"No no no , blue is better then red"
"People who like blue tend to view colors simplistically. You undermine and don't apriciate color."

It's condesending.

I didn't like freaking cry about it. But I just went  "okay, so you want to play it that way?" and started attacking you. 
Not saying it was smart, but I did.

I'm not claiming to have high ground either. You said I attacked you first, I didn't. It's that simple.

I'm not better then you. I don't, nor will I ever think that.
Just to make it clear.

I think by now i made it clear that i never intended to insult you, hell i even apologized, so i think carrying this side of conversation is unproductive at best and that it's best we end this particular line here. Besides, there's much more interesting conversation happening. But atleast we've proven our capacity to multi-task. That, or we've proven just how bored we really are.

[OdanUrr]

Two words: Hell No!

[tangalin]

Zyrious wrote...

I think by now i made it clear that i never intended to insult you, hell i even apologized, so i think carrying this side of conversation is unproductive at best and that it's best we end this particular line here. Besides, there's much more interesting conversation happening. But atleast we've proven our capacity to multi-task. That, or we've proven just how bored we really are.

Boredom happens when super excited waiting for a new game.

[Zyrious]

OdanUrr wrote...

Two words: Hell No!

sums up my view of it. The galaxy has a right to choose it's own destiny. The geth are sacrificed but it's a lesser of evils, and since the entirety of the geth have either already been wipe dout by you or agree'd to fight along-side you, i think they would see their sacrifice as a necessary evil to stopping the reapers. I'm not sure even they would be too happy with synthesis.

I just dont like how in the audio shepard sounds so undecided about his choices. I hope we get some dialogue choices to make our shepard tell off the gaurdian's proposals, or else my shepard is going to look inconsistent at best. You know, the whole "I wont let fear compromise who i am" deal.

[Heathen Pride]

JC Shepard

[Ypiret]

If you give me a shovel i can dig a hole, hit someone over the head with it, go bury other holes, or shovel snow with it. DNA gives me a body and mind, perhaps with a slant towards a certain way to use said body and mind, but i don't believe if i choose to be an astronaught, my DNA is why, or if i choose to be a bum, it is because of my DNA. It is because of my DNA that i have a body and mind to have domain over, and that i am capable of properly formulating my thoughts. Perhaps my DNA is even why i have free will, or perhaps it's something else. But i still believe in free will.

I don't know if i'm formulating myself clearly, am i making any sense in presenting my view?

No, I don't understand. I feel like half the time we are arguing about completely different things.

I feel like we've derailed this thread pretty hard and we should stop.

I'll end with this though. You're intelligent and you really made me question myself for the past three (holy ****) hours.While you may have made me mad, I take back what I said earlier- this was actually kind of fun.

I'll also remember to look more up about quantum mechanics later.

Oh damn, guess you ninja'd me.

Modifié par Ypiret, 04 mars 2012 - 01:18 .

[Zyrious]

Ypiret wrote...

If you give me a shovel i can dig a hole, hit someone over the head with it, go bury other holes, or shovel snow with it. DNA gives me a body and mind, perhaps with a slant towards a certain way to use said body and mind, but i don't believe if i choose to be an astronaught, my DNA is why, or if i choose to be a bum, it is because of my DNA. It is because of my DNA that i have a body and mind to have domain over, and that i am capable of properly formulating my thoughts. Perhaps my DNA is even why i have free will, or perhaps it's something else. But i still believe in free will.

I don't know if i'm formulating myself clearly, am i making any sense in presenting my view?

No, I don't understand. I feel like half the time we are arguing about completely different things.

I feel like we've derailed this thread pretty hard and we should stop.

I'll end with this though. You're intelligent and you really made me question myself for the past three (holy ****) hours.While you may have made me mad, I take back what I said earlier- this was actually kind of fun.

I'll also remember to look more up about quantum mechanics later.

Oh damn, guess you ninja'd me.

It was a fierce debate for sure, and i am sorry if i came off rude, i didn't intend that and i'm really sorry, Certainly an interesting debate. Didnt change my view on free will but it did get me thinking about AI. IF we do have free will, which i believe we do, wether god-given or natural, there is probably a process that allows that. Wether it's a process in how the neurons in our brain interact with quantum and regular physics or is a complex biology we are as of yet unaware, perhaps a complex enough program with the ability to automatically write new code or eventually get the synthetic good enough that actual "Code" is not needed and the mechanical mind is operated on a synthetic brain using simulated neurons, and electricty and hardware processes to simulate functions of the human brain, then perhaps, they too could achieve said sapient free will.

Just tossing ideas out there. Although the reapers cheat and just steal it from their victims so we KNOW they are alive . Doesn legion use reaper tech to give the Geth "True AI"? As for our conciousness, there's also theories that the bulk of our actual conciousness is formed through the electrical processes caused by the electrical activity in the brain as a result of biological processess, and thus why our decision making is somewhat seperated from our biology even if it is an influence (and the sub-concious is all biology as far as i know). These are all just theories though, but if conciousness is mainly electrical, than an advanced enough hardware could achieve it, and so even a code-based AI might gain the ability to control how their programs function, what code they decide to write, et cetera.

But i'm not a determinist and most certainly believe in free will. But perhaps it is something we could one day impart on machines? But modern AI? hell no. lol. Still, i think the geth are willing to take one for the team, and synthesis is just...offensive to me

PS: You'll find quantum physics interesting, it follows nobody's rules (which makes it really confusing sometimes). It's said if you wait in a vacuum for all of eternity, you could see anything and everything, including, say, a unicorn flying by with mark hamill with a lightsaber riding it. It can destroy universes, it can create them, it is the only constant in existence. The physics of the universe weren't determined until 6 seconds after the big bang. they could've been radically different. Infact the very elements that make up our universe could've been different because how atoms even work was determined at the big bang. That's how crazy quantum physics are. Quantum Particles play by their own rules, pretty much.

Modifié par Zyrious, 04 mars 2012 - 01:35 .

[DXLelouch15]

im sure people will complain about waking up one morning and being part synthetic but who they gonna complain to Shepards dead trollollol

Modifié par DXLelouch15, 04 mars 2012 - 01:35 .

[tangalin]

@ Ypiret and Zyrious

You guys realize you're on the internet right? Stop being nice and argue!

[Ypiret]

Zyrious wrote...

Ypiret wrote...

If you give me a shovel i can dig a hole, hit someone over the head with it, go bury other holes, or shovel snow with it. DNA gives me a body and mind, perhaps with a slant towards a certain way to use said body and mind, but i don't believe if i choose to be an astronaught, my DNA is why, or if i choose to be a bum, it is because of my DNA. It is because of my DNA that i have a body and mind to have domain over, and that i am capable of properly formulating my thoughts. Perhaps my DNA is even why i have free will, or perhaps it's something else. But i still believe in free will.

I don't know if i'm formulating myself clearly, am i making any sense in presenting my view?

No, I don't understand. I feel like half the time we are arguing about completely different things.

I feel like we've derailed this thread pretty hard and we should stop.

I'll end with this though. You're intelligent and you really made me question myself for the past three (holy ****) hours.While you may have made me mad, I take back what I said earlier- this was actually kind of fun.

I'll also remember to look more up about quantum mechanics later.

Oh damn, guess you ninja'd me.

It was a fierce debate for sure, and i am sorry if i came off rude, i didn't intend that and i'm really sorry, Certainly an interesting debate. Didnt change my view on free will but it did get me thinking about AI. IF we do have free will, which i believe we do, wether god-given or natural, there is probably a process that allows that. Wether it's a process in how the neurons in our brain interact with quantum and regular physics or is a complex biology we are as of yet unaware, perhaps a complex enough program with the ability to automatically write new code or eventually get the synthetic good enough that actual "Code" is not needed and the mechanical mind is operated on a synthetic brain using simulated neurons, and electricty and hardware processes to simulate functions of the human brain, then perhaps, they too could achieve said sapient free will.

Just tossing ideas out there. Although the reapers cheat and just steal it from their victims so we KNOW they are alive . Doesn legion use reaper tech to give the Geth "True AI"? As for our conciousness, there's also theories that the bulk of our actual conciousness is formed through the electrical processes caused by the electrical activity in the brain as a result of biological processess, and thus why our decision making is somewhat seperated from our biology even if it is an influence (and the sub-concious is all biology as far as i know). These are all just theories though, but if conciousness is mainly electrical, than an advanced enough hardware could achieve it, and so even a code-based AI might gain the ability to control how their programs function, what code they decide to write, et cetera.

But i'm not a determinist and most certainly believe in free will. But perhaps it is something we could one day impart on machines? But modern AI? hell no. lol. Still, i think the geth are willing to take one for the team, and synthesis is just...offensive to me

PS: You'll find quantum physics interesting, it follows nobody's rules (which makes it really confusing sometimes). It's said if you wait in a vacuum for all of eternity, you could see anything and everything, including, say, a unicorn flying by with mark hamill with a lightsaber riding it. It can destroy universes, it can create them, it is the only constant in existence. The physics of the universe weren't determined until 6 seconds after the big bang. they could've been radically different. Infact the very elements that make up our universe could've been different because how atoms even work was determined at the big bang. That's how crazy quantum physics are. Quantum Particles play by their own rules, pretty much.

I wrote a big post, but the accidentally pressed back.
So I'll sum it up as this. Despite the whole free-will-or-not thing. I agree with everything you said and I wish It had been the point I tried to make in the first place, rather then picking at the part specifically about "will" .

And quantom mechanics sounds seriously interesting. I'll have to ask my professor if she can set me up with some books on the subject.

@tangalin

His post about me claiming to seek knowledge but claiming to already know really hit me. I realized that I was dismissing his claims withou knowing much about some of the things he was talking about. For all I know, it could be written clear and logical as day why determinism can't be true in a paper about quantom physics somewhere, and boy, wouldn't I look like an ass then? 

I should learn about his ideas first. And not just think mine are right and his are wrong because mine are mine and his are his.

And then prove them wrong.

[Jynthor]

I haven't read to much about the endings, but based on what I've heard, Control is the best one.
Shepard "dies" which doesn't really matter in the end, the Reapers are stopped, and the Mass Relays should still be intact, so the galaxy won't be doomed.

At least I assume the Mass Relays stay intact, can someone elaborate?

[tangalin]

Ypiret wrote...


@tangalin

His post about me claiming to seek knowledge but claiming to already know really hit me. I realized that I was dismissing his claims withou knowing much about some of the things he was talking about. For all I know, it could be written clear and logical as day why determinism can't be true in a paper about quantom physics somewhere, and boy, wouldn't I look like an ass then? 

I should learn about his ideas first. And not just think mine are right and his are wrong because mine are mine and his are his.

And then prove them wrong.

Yeah, but as a card carrying internet denizen I was forced to make fun of you guys suddenly being nice. For my part, I believe a sufficiently advanced AI would have just as much "free will" as any human. It's just difficult to wrap our heads around how such a thing would come to be or work, because we quite simply aren't that technologically advanced yet. That said, even now people are writing rudimentary AI that are capable of learning. For instance on group of people wrote an AI and provided it with a copy of Civ 5 and its game manual, with no additional instruction or programming on how to play Civ5, or even what Civ 5 was. It was basically taught how to understand written English, as well as how to interact with itself as a human might (key presses and mouse clicks). It took it a while, but it did actually learn how to play Civ 5, and in fact end up beating human players most of the time. Admittedl, this AI wouldn't qualify as alive, but like any human might, it made decisions that were not in its programming, remembered the results, and used that as a basis for future decisions (did it work, or not, okay, maybe I shouldnt do that next time, etc). It's not hard to see how, when ramped up, you might be able to have an AI who had no specific programming on a situation, but it still able to react and make decisions just like any other being. Of course it would tend toward more strictly logical decisions, but thats because it would most likely not have any sort of emotional response (at least until it learned that that was what should happen). Much like how EDI is initially a very cold, logical AI, but eventually falls in love with Joker.

[Ypiret]

tangalin wrote...

Ypiret wrote...


@tangalin

His post about me claiming to seek knowledge but claiming to already know really hit me. I realized that I was dismissing his claims withou knowing much about some of the things he was talking about. For all I know, it could be written clear and logical as day why determinism can't be true in a paper about quantom physics somewhere, and boy, wouldn't I look like an ass then? 

I should learn about his ideas first. And not just think mine are right and his are wrong because mine are mine and his are his.

And then prove them wrong.

Yeah, but as a card carrying internet denizen I was forced to make fun of you guys suddenly being nice. For my part, I believe a sufficiently advanced AI would have just as much "free will" as any human. It's just difficult to wrap our heads around how such a thing would come to be or work, because we quite simply aren't that technologically advanced yet. That said, even now people are writing rudimentary AI that are capable of learning. For instance on group of people wrote an AI and provided it with a copy of Civ 5 and its game manual, with no additional instruction or programming on how to play Civ5, or even what Civ 5 was. It was basically taught how to understand written English, as well as how to interact with itself as a human might (key presses and mouse clicks). It took it a while, but it did actually learn how to play Civ 5, and in fact end up beating human players most of the time. Admittedl, this AI wouldn't qualify as alive, but like any human might, it made decisions that were not in its programming, remembered the results, and used that as a basis for future decisions (did it work, or not, okay, maybe I shouldnt do that next time, etc). It's not hard to see how, when ramped up, you might be able to have an AI who had no specific programming on a situation, but it still able to react and make decisions just like any other being. Of course it would tend toward more strictly logical decisions, but thats because it would most likely not have any sort of emotional response (at least until it learned that that was what should happen). Much like how EDI is initially a very cold, logical AI, but eventually falls in love with Joker.

Yes.
Yes.
Yeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeees.

God, I really suck at explaining myself.

But yes, even though the geth and EDI might not be "living", what they have is still something amazing and special. Which is why I'm totally against the destroy option. 

[KefkaGestahl]

I can't read through this entire thread, but I'm going to go with the destroy ending on my paragon and the control ending on my pro-cerberus save. I know destroy isn't a happy ending, but it is the ending that places the most faith in humanity and other sentient life.

[4ut0b4hn5child27]

For me, i don't really like Synergy ending because I don't like metal piece on my flesh, It itchy and i have a bad habit for scratching anything that looks weird or alien in my body.

Even my old wound i scratch it until blood soaked out really.......

Metal Piece is worst, but i don't hate synthetic, i love robot, just dont implant it on my body please.

if that happeneed to me i cannot eat my lovely spaghetti, rendang or sushi.....

Modifié par 4ut0b4hn5child27, 04 mars 2012 - 06:24 .

[Eclipse_9990]

4ut0b4hn5child27 wrote...

For me, i don't really like Synergy ending because I don't like metal piece on my flesh, It itchy and i have a bad habit for scratching anything that looks weird or alien in my body.

Even my old wound i scratch it until blood soaked out really.......

Metal Piece is worst, but i don't hate synthetic, i love robot, just dont implant it on my body please.

if that happeneed to me i cannot eat my lovely spaghetti, rendang or sushi.....

You do know Shepard is part synthetic right?