Place open for new posts — threads with fresh content will be moved to either Real-life Discussion or ESOC Talk sub-forums, where you can create new topics.
jerom wrote:Death sentence goes against all the morals of the western world. If someone hits you, you dont have the right to hit him back. Thats how I have been raised at the very least.
And, if youd consider the lack of free will, death sentence is absolutely ridiculous ')
Just because they aren''t "responsible" doesn''t mean that death penalty shouldn''t be used. We don''t know the influences that lead to people behaving good or bad so maybe the death sentence might change their behaviour in a way that increases good behaviour. Also if that unresponsible person can''t be healed or isn''t of any use and just wastes the resources of the state, why not kill him?
The argument of determinism and the irresponsibility of these prisoners doesn''t justify why we shouldn''t kill the worst of the worst.
Edit: Thanks Djigit.
Don't let the things you can't change dictate your life.
jerom wrote:Death sentence goes against all the morals of the western world. If someone hits you, you dont have the right to hit him back. Thats how I have been raised at the very least.
And, if youd consider the lack of free will, death sentence is absolutely ridiculous ')
You cant just assert the lack of free will
I think its almost a fact amongst philosofers, although Im not sure.
But really, its just a matter of time before its a fact. Logic made me come to the terrifying conclusion that a thing as a free will cannot exist. I will explain it tomorrow.
jerom wrote:Death sentence goes against all the morals of the western world. If someone hits you, you dont have the right to hit him back. Thats how I have been raised at the very least.
And, if youd consider the lack of free will, death sentence is absolutely ridiculous ')
Just because they arent "responsible" doesnt mean that death penalty shouldnt be used. We dont know the influences that lead to people behaving good or bad so maybe the death sentence might change their behaviour in a way that increases good behaviour. Also if that unresponsible person cant be healed or isnt of any use and just wastes the resources of the state, why not kill him?
The argument of determinism and the irresponsibility of these prisoners doesnt justify why we shouldnt kill the worst of the worst.
Edit: Thanks Djigit.
because of western morals. Because we believe that we dont have the right to take another persons life. Otherwise, we should discuss if murder should be illegal or not.
ovi12 wrote:You cant just assert the lack of free will
I think its almost a fact amongst philosofers, although Im not sure.
But really, its just a matter of time before its a fact. Logic made me come to the terrifying conclusion that a thing as a free will cannot exist. I will explain it tomorrow.
No need to explain it here, it is explained in another off topic thread: free will
Don't let the things you can't change dictate your life.
jerom wrote:I think its almost a fact amongst philosofers, although Im not sure.
But really, its just a matter of time before its a fact. Logic made me come to the terrifying conclusion that a thing as a free will cannot exist. I will explain it tomorrow.
No need to explain it here, it is explained in another off topic thread:?free will
but I never interfered with that thread, and Im not sure if that thread represents my idea about it.
venox wrote:Just because they arent "responsible" doesnt mean that death penalty shouldnt be used. We dont know the influences that lead to people behaving good or bad so maybe the death sentence might change their behaviour in a way that increases good behaviour. Also if that unresponsible person cant be healed or isnt of any use and just wastes the resources of the state, why not kill him?
The argument of determinism and the irresponsibility of these prisoners doesnt justify why we shouldnt kill the worst of the worst.
Edit: Thanks Djigit.
because of western morals. Because we believe that we dont have the right to take another persons life. Otherwise, we should discuss if murder should be illegal or not.
Is it legal to hold somebody captive for the rest of their life? Something being legal or illegal has to do with the laws that surround it, and if the laws say that for killing 100 other human beings you should get the death penalty then yes, its legal. There also is an inner sense of justice and applied "eye for eye" concept' we want these people to feel the same emotional distress that they caused or easier said: Punishment fitting their crimes.
Don't let the things you can't change dictate your life.
jerom wrote:because of western morals. Because we believe that we dont have the right to take another persons life. Otherwise, we should discuss if murder should be illegal or not.
Is it legal to hold somebody captive for the rest of their life? Something being legal or illegal has to do with the laws that surround it, and if the laws say that for killing 100 other human beings you should get the death penalty then yes, its legal. There also is an inner sense of justice and applied "eye for eye" concept' we want these people to feel the same emotional distress that they caused or easier said: Punishment fitting their crimes.
look, I dont really believe in punishment. I believe in taking the dangerous people for society away from society until they have become safe again. Thats just my idea of it though, which is probably pretty controversial.
The threat of punishment has a big impact on whether somebody will commit a crime or not. It also takes impact on the healing aspect, as you said "becoming safe again".
Don't let the things you can't change dictate your life.
venox wrote:The threat of punishment has a big impact on whether somebody will commit a crime or not. It also takes impact on the healing aspect, as you said "becoming safe again".
yes, thats true, unfortunately. I think we shouldnt punish, but punishing is beneficial for society.
Fortunately, my idea of taking away someone from society because he is dangerous for it is also punishment.
In this ideology, there is no room for a death punishment though. Which is exactly why it is an interesting way of thinking about it.
ovi12 wrote:You cant just assert the lack of free will
I think its almost a fact amongst philosofers, although Im not sure.
But really, its just a matter of time before its a fact. Logic made me come to the terrifying conclusion that a thing as a free will cannot exist. I will explain it tomorrow.
I also saw a scientific video which to me proved pretty unambiguously that there is free will, they argued for it somehow using the law of increasing chaos. It wasnt just the old argument of uncertainty in quantum mechanics, it was really good. Ill try to find it, tho unsuccessful so far.
If I had my way we'd have some game of thrones type justice. Someone does some serouisly fucked up shit and someone else whips out a huge sword and cuts their head off
jerom wrote:I think its almost a fact amongst philosofers, although Im not sure.
But really, its just a matter of time before its a fact. Logic made me come to the terrifying conclusion that a thing as a free will cannot exist. I will explain it tomorrow.
I also saw a scientific video which to me proved pretty unambiguously that there is free will, they argued for it somehow using the law of increasing chaos. It wasnt just the old argument of uncertainty in quantum mechanics, it was really good. Ill try to find it, tho unsuccessful so far.
I cannot possibly imagine they could convince me. Its a relatively new idea for me that there is no free will, and its particulary hard to grasp the concept really (our brains are not suited for that level of abstractness, especially since it feels like we do have a free will), but I am slowly understanding it more to the point that I consider it almost undeniable.
Id be interested in the video though. Maybe they, or I, missed something crucial. It sounds like a vSauce topic btw, maybe thats what youre looking for.
ovi12 wrote:I also saw a scientific video which to me proved pretty unambiguously that there is free will, they argued for it somehow using the law of increasing chaos. It wasnt just the old argument of uncertainty in quantum mechanics, it was really good. Ill try to find it, tho unsuccessful so far.
I cannot possibly imagine they could convince me. Its a relatively new idea for me that there is no free will, and its particulary hard to grasp the concept really (our brains are not suited for that level of abstractness, especially since it feels like we do have a free will), but I am slowly understanding it more to the point that I consider it almost undeniable.
Id be interested in the video though. Maybe they, or I, missed something crucial. It sounds like a vSauce topic btw, maybe thats what youre looking for.
Of course free will exists.
When a persons action corresponds to their intention, they are said to have free will. Trying to go any further than that is a needless abstraction.
jerom wrote:I cannot possibly imagine they could convince me. Its a relatively new idea for me that there is no free will, and its particulary hard to grasp the concept really (our brains are not suited for that level of abstractness, especially since it feels like we do have a free will), but I am slowly understanding it more to the point that I consider it almost undeniable.
Id be interested in the video though. Maybe they, or I, missed something crucial. It sounds like a vSauce topic btw, maybe thats what youre looking for.
Of course free will exists.
When a persons action corresponds to their intention, they are said to have free will. Trying to go any further than that is a needless abstraction.
Id disagree. A thing as intentions does not exist in the way free will exists.
Unless you want to tell me that your computer has a free will. And nature.
ovi12 wrote:I also saw a scientific video which to me proved pretty unambiguously that there is free will, they argued for it somehow using the law of increasing chaos. It wasnt just the old argument of uncertainty in quantum mechanics, it was really good. Ill try to find it, tho unsuccessful so far.
I cannot possibly imagine they could convince me. Its a relatively new idea for me that there is no free will, and its particulary hard to grasp the concept really (our brains are not suited for that level of abstractness, especially since it feels like we do have a free will), but I am slowly understanding it more to the point that I consider it almost undeniable.
Id be interested in the video though. Maybe they, or I, missed something crucial. It sounds like a vSauce topic btw, maybe thats what youre looking for.
I coudlve sworn it was veritasium + vsauce but I looked trough all the videos and couldnt find it. Do you know any other channels which make similar videos?
ovi12 wrote:I also saw a scientific video which to me proved pretty unambiguously that there is free will, they argued for it somehow using the law of increasing chaos. It wasnt just the old argument of uncertainty in quantum mechanics, it was really good. Ill try to find it, tho unsuccessful so far.
I cannot possibly imagine they could convince me. Its a relatively new idea for me that there is no free will, and its particulary hard to grasp the concept really (our brains are not suited for that level of abstractness, especially since it feels like we do have a free will), but I am slowly understanding it more to the point that I consider it almost undeniable.
Id be interested in the video though. Maybe they, or I, missed something crucial. It sounds like a vSauce topic btw, maybe thats what youre looking for.
jerom wrote:I cannot possibly imagine they could convince me. Its a relatively new idea for me that there is no free will, and its particulary hard to grasp the concept really (our brains are not suited for that level of abstractness, especially since it feels like we do have a free will), but I am slowly understanding it more to the point that I consider it almost undeniable.
Id be interested in the video though. Maybe they, or I, missed something crucial. It sounds like a vSauce topic btw, maybe thats what youre looking for.
Please watch it carefully, the point is not made until past halfway.
I havent watched but read the first comment of the guy himself. It adresses not free will, but determinism it seems. And I think there is no determinism, because the core laws of physics have randomness in them, but I do not think that makes free will exist. I actually dont think free will and determinism are related.
For free will to exist, there should be a mechanism to affect the randomness inherent to nature. This would have to be something that defies physics, since this randomness is non causal. So either we are divine beings with the ability to defy physics (something you could call the soul) or we dont have a free will. Since I dont believe in divinity, I dont believe in free will.
Please watch it carefully, the point is not made until past halfway.
I havent watched but read the first comment of the guy himself. It adresses not free will, but determinism it seems. And I think there is no determinism, because the core laws of physics have randomness in them, but I do not think that makes free will exist. I actually dont think free will and determinism are related.
For free will to exist, there should be a mechanism to affect the randomness inherent to nature. This would have to be something that defies physics, since this randomness is non causal. So either we are divine beings with the ability to defy physics (something you could call the soul) or we dont have a free will. Since I dont believe in divinity, I dont believe in free will.
Ok I understand what youre saying, and I agree that with our current understanding no free will seems more likely, but its also so likely that a lot of our current understanding of quantum mechanics is wrong. Think of how many wrong things were believed or discovered only 80 years after chemistry was invented. To me, our current understanding is so likely to be flawed that I dont think we should draw absolute conclusions about abstract things like that.
Let's put every personal belief aside and let me ask you this (under the assumption that free will doesn't exist): What matters more' that in reality free will doesn't exist or that we all are under the illusion that we have our own free will? If in the future we would be able to prove that free will is an illusion, what would we do from that point on? Would we behave differently? Would we change the way we live? What is the value of that information? Same goes for free will, if it exists.
If we can't figure out the value of that information and the consequences that could possibly follow I don't see a point in discussing whether free will exists or not.
Don't let the things you can't change dictate your life.
venox wrote:Let''s put every personal belief aside and let me ask you this (under the assumption that free will doesn''t exist): What matters more' that in reality free will doesn''t exist or that we all are under the illusion that we have our own free will? If in the future we would be able to prove that free will is an illusion, what would we do from that point on? Would we behave differently? Would we change the way we live? What is the value of that information? Same goes for free will, if it exists.
If we can''t figure out the value of that information and the consequences that could possibly follow I don''t see a point in discussing whether free will exists or not.
Reading your post gave me an existential crisis. Thanks.
somppukunkku wrote:Yes. Why shouldn''t realiably identified Serial Killers or ISIS leaders be sentenced to death penalty? If they are ready to take hundreds of innocent human souls down, it''s justice to take theirs.
Lifetime imprisonment is just waste of society resources and as bad as death penalty to sentenced person.
It is actually proven that Death Penalties cost a lot more than regular imprisonment.
1. Costly trials this includes more money spent on investigation "The trial costs for death cases were about 16 times greater than for non-death cases ($508,000 for death case' $32,000 for non-death case)" http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/costs-d ... Washington Study
2. Most of the time there is a long time that people have to wait in prison before the get killed
3. These cases are more costly because there are procedural safeguards in place to ensure the sentence is just and free from error