Log in

View Full Version : Anti-Nongooglism


googlismrulez
November 4th, 2010, 11:31 PM
I just hate people who are against Googlism :arrgh: . If you agree, post here explaining why you hate Nongooglism.

Will.
November 5th, 2010, 04:30 PM
I just hate,

Saicho
November 6th, 2010, 02:03 PM
1. Because they worship Yahoo, Altavista, or some other search engine
2. Because they support censorship
3. Because they hate math
4. Because they hate electronics
5. Because they use Google anyway despite saying they're anti-googlists

Maybe I'll give more reasons later if I feel like it

googlismrulez
November 6th, 2010, 09:29 PM
1. Because they worship Yahoo, Altavista, or some other search engine
2. Because they support censorship
3. Because they hate math
4. Because they hate electronics
5. Because they use Google anyway despite saying they're anti-googlists

Maybe I'll give more reasons later if I feel like it
Exactly my point.

sam the moderately wize
November 8th, 2010, 01:13 PM
I just hate people who are against Googlism :arrgh: . If you agree, post here explaining why you hate Nongooglism.

I endeavour never to hate, especially people that I haven't met.
Forgive them, Google, for they know not what they do.

googlismrulez
November 8th, 2010, 10:12 PM
I endeavour never to hate, especially people that I haven't met.
Forgive them, Google, for they know not what they do.
I can't forgive people who come to this forum just to talk trash about us.

sam the moderately wize
November 10th, 2010, 11:24 AM
I can't forgive people who come to this forum just to talk trash about us.

I endeavour to. We should not reply to hate with more hate.

Being a hard determinist, I believe that nobody can be blamed or praised for their own actions and inactions, their exellencies and failings. Such things derive merely from the action of chance and the forces that underwrite the development of the universe. It is not the idiot's fault that they are an idiot, just as it is not the fault of a blonde person that they have fair hair. It is simply how things are.

Sister Faith
November 11th, 2010, 08:53 PM
It is not the idiot's fault that they are an idiot, It is simply how things are.

What an interesting philosophy! Can you expand on this?

I believe that no one can help how they are born. But they can help how they turn out as an adult. If you are born an idiot and have the capacity to change that even a little bit but don't, how does that absolve you of fault? :shrug:

googlismrulez
November 13th, 2010, 12:07 AM
I guess that's true. Once an idiot, always an idiot.

sam the moderately wize
November 14th, 2010, 12:45 PM
What an interesting philosophy! Can you expand on this?

I believe that no one can help how they are born. But they can help how they turn out as an adult. If you are born an idiot and have the capacity to change that even a little bit but don't, how does that absolve you of fault? :shrug:

I'm a hard determinist, so I believe that there is no such thing as free will, and that if there is no free will, there can be no moral responsibility.

If I were to deliberately pick a child that had an inborn capacity for being an idiot and then to control their environment in such a way that they could not help but be an idiot, right up until they are an adult, by which time they are so entrenched in their idiocy that they cannot escape it, it would not be their fault that they were an idiot. In the same way, it is not the fault of an idiot that they have become (and remain) an idiot, as they have an inborn capacity for it and/or suffer from an environment that amplifies this capacity, and that reduces their ability to help themselves.

I would also like to draw a distinction between my determinism and full-on fatalism. Although I don't think that the idiots we already have should be blamed for their condition, I think that society should do its best to create an environment and an education system that tries to prevent its people becoming idiots.

googlismrulez
November 14th, 2010, 11:38 PM
You know you're being a little too technical about this.

Will.
November 15th, 2010, 03:13 PM
I'm a hard determinist, so I believe that there is no such thing as free Will. Also that if there is no free Will. There can be no moral responsibility.

If I were to deliberately pick a child that had an inborn capacity for being an idiot and then to control their environment in such a way that they could not help but be an idiot, right up until they are an adult, by which time they are so entrenched in their idiocy that they cannot escape it, it would not be their fault that they were an idiot. In the same way, it is not the fault of an idiot that they have become (and remain) an idiot, as they have an inborn capacity for it and/or suffer from an environment that amplifies this capacity, and that reduces their ability to help themselves.

I would also like to draw a distinction between my determinism and full-on fatalism. Although I don't think that the idiots we already have should be blamed for their condition, I think that society should do its best to create an environment and an education system that tries to prevent its people becoming idiots.


Better, totally off topic, but I'm not Free.

googlismrulez
November 15th, 2010, 11:34 PM
I'm a hard determinist, so I believe that there is no such thing as free will, and that if there is no free will, there can be no moral responsibility.

If I were to deliberately pick a child that had an inborn capacity for being an idiot and then to control their environment in such a way that they could not help but be an idiot, right up until they are an adult, by which time they are so entrenched in their idiocy that they cannot escape it, it would not be their fault that they were an idiot. In the same way, it is not the fault of an idiot that they have become (and remain) an idiot, as they have an inborn capacity for it and/or suffer from an environment that amplifies this capacity, and that reduces their ability to help themselves.

I would also like to draw a distinction between my determinism and full-on fatalism. Although I don't think that the idiots we already have should be blamed for their condition, I think that society should do its best to create an environment and an education system that tries to prevent its people becoming idiots.
You're kind of forgetting the topic of this thread.

Sister Faith
November 16th, 2010, 07:56 PM
I believe that there is no such thing as free will

No free will? Please explain why you believe this. :shrug:

that reduces their ability to help themselves.

It only reduces their ability, it does not eradicate it. Unless you are an adult locked in your parent's basement for your entire life, there comes a time when you leave the nest and their total influence and control over you. You then have a choice to open your mind to other/new ideas and ways of thinking. If you refuse to open your mind, that is a) a choice you have made out of free will and b) does not make you blameless for your continued stupidity.

I think that society should do its best to create an environment and an education system that tries to prevent its people becoming idiots.

Amen! :icon_lol::icon_lol:

Sister Faith
November 16th, 2010, 08:16 PM
but I'm not Free.

:icon_lol:
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_hoK2I1N7jAg/THnsZs_8XMI/AAAAAAAABfw/_K6ShgYBAKM/S1600-R/PIX2.png

tagnostic
November 18th, 2010, 03:46 PM
Free Will!!
or at least
Parole!!!!!!

Will.
November 18th, 2010, 04:06 PM
I swear your honor, I didn't know she was 17.

tagnostic
November 18th, 2010, 07:00 PM
plead the fifth!
if you drank it
it ought to be
good for more
than a hangover

sam the moderately wize
November 22nd, 2010, 02:05 PM
You know you're being a little too technical about this.

Sorry, philosophy student.
Determinism = no free will
Soft Determinism = no free will, but we can still punish people for doing wrong
Hard Determinism = no free will, and so no moral responsibility

You're kind of forgetting the topic of this thread.

Someone asks a question, I'll give an answer. If anyone is that bothered by this derailment, I'll be happy to open a new free will vs. determinism thread.

No free will? Please explain why you believe this. :shrug:


In the words of Voltaire:

"It would be very singular indeed that all nature, all the planets, should obey eternal laws, and that there should be a little animal, five feet high, who, in contempt of these laws, could act as he pleased, solely according to his caprice."

Or Russell:

"That Man is the product of causes which had no prevision of the end they were achieving; that his origin, his growth, his hopes and fears, his loves and beliefs, are but the outcome of accidental collocations of atoms; … —all these things, if not quite beyond dispute, are yet so nearly certain, that no philosophy that rejects them can hope to stand."

Barring interference from quantum-mechanical effects, if we knew every detail of the workings of a natural system, its current state, and the laws that govern it, we would be able to predict its future states with perfect accuracy: and there is no reason to assume that humans are any different.

It only reduces their ability, it does not eradicate it. Unless you are an adult locked in your parent's basement for your entire life, there comes a time when you leave the nest and their total influence and control over you. You then have a choice to open your mind to other/new ideas and ways of thinking. If you refuse to open your mind, that is a) a choice you have made out of free will and b) does not make you blameless for your continued stupidity.

For this discussion to progress usefully, I think we may first of all need to establish some common ground:
1) If there is no free will, then there can be no moral responsibility, as a person is not making free decisions.
2) If there is no free will, then a person is not a self-contained agent, but rather an expression of an ongoing process that started at the big bang and will continue long after their death.

Yes/No?

If no, we will need to argue these points first in order to have some solid ground to duel over.

I absolutely agree that if there is free will, even a tiny measure of it, then idiots should be blamed for failing to open their minds to the ideas that the world offers, and that it would be acceptable to hate someone who was otherwise intelligent but held irrational and dangerous beliefs. If there is no free will, then these people cannot help what they are, and should be treated as victims rather than enemies.

tagnostic
November 23rd, 2010, 05:10 PM
determinism is a copout
its an excuse for being
an A**hole

free will is taking responsibility
for your own actions

anything that requires a diety
is a way to blame someone else

life is simple
don't kick dogs
don't throw rocks at cats
don't harm women or children
go to work
earn your pay
pay your bills
other than that its all speculation and doesn't really matter

googlismrulez
November 27th, 2010, 02:13 AM
:arrgh: Everyone's missing the concept of this topic!

Kokoba
December 1st, 2010, 03:52 AM
Is that like antidisestablishmentarianism?

googlismrulez
December 2nd, 2010, 12:34 AM
Like what?

Sister Faith
December 4th, 2010, 11:46 PM
Sorry, philosophy student.
Determinism = no free will
Soft Determinism = no free will, but we can still punish people for doing wrong
Hard Determinism = no free will, and so no moral responsibility

If I understand you correctly, what you are saying is that because the universe is governed by natural laws and because humans are a part of that universe, we also must follow those laws, therefore no free will.

I agree with this to a point. I believe that we govern ourselves on a daily basis by consciously or sub-consciously obeying certain base instincts. ie: It is a base instinct to ensure our personal survival. That is why most people don't play in traffic. But how would you explain the people who exersise their free will not to obey that basic instinct and go ahead and play chicken with oncoming traffic?

Poor analogy, I know, but I think you know what I mean. We may not get a choice in following some big laws of nature (we can't defy gravity on our own) but I think we can exercise choice in the many small ones of everyday life.

Dr-Shade
December 6th, 2010, 08:19 PM
If I understand you correctly, what you are saying is that because the universe is governed by natural laws and because humans are a part of that universe, we also must follow those laws, therefore no free will.

I agree with this to a point. I believe that we govern ourselves on a daily basis by consciously or sub-consciously obeying certain base instincts. ie: It is a base instinct to ensure our personal survival. That is why most people don't play in traffic. But how would you explain the people who exersise their free will not to obey that basic instinct and go ahead and play chicken with oncoming traffic?

Poor analogy, I know, but I think you know what I mean. We may not get a choice in following some big laws of nature (we can't defy gravity on our own) but I think we can exercise choice in the many small ones of everyday life.

Maybe not though... i mean, who's to say that those few who do play chicken with traffic, were not simply born with a genetic defect which has reduced their basic survival instinct ??

And if that is possible one instinct, then it would also be possible with all the other instincts which could be driving our lives...

OfficerFriendly
December 11th, 2010, 11:09 PM
I don't care if they like google or not

sam the moderately wize
December 13th, 2010, 11:50 AM
I agree with this to a point. I believe that we govern ourselves on a daily basis by consciously or sub-consciously obeying certain base instincts. ie: It is a base instinct to ensure our personal survival. That is why most people don't play in traffic. But how would you explain the people who exersise their free will not to obey that basic instinct and go ahead and play chicken with oncoming traffic?

I'm not arguing that, and I think that adding a biological level into the debate just complicates things needlessly. For me, there is no need to talk about instinct and evolution in this matter - either we must obey the laws of physics (in which case, no free will), or we can arbitrarily defy them.

Poor analogy, I know, but I think you know what I mean. We may not get a choice in following some big laws of nature (we can't defy gravity on our own) but I think we can exercise choice in the many small ones of everyday life.

If you believe that we can arbitrarily violate the laws of physics on a daily basis, then I think we migh need another thread.

Sister Faith
December 14th, 2010, 07:21 PM
If you believe that we can arbitrarily violate the laws of physics on a daily basis, then I think we migh need another thread.

We may not be able to violate the laws of physics, but we certainly do defy them on a daily basis. Every time a plane takes off, for instance.

Sister Faith
December 14th, 2010, 07:39 PM
I just hate people who are against Googlism :arrgh:

I don't hate anti-googlists, I pity them. :icon_cry:

They will never have their prayers answered and they are diddling themselves out of the best education they are likely to get in their sorry lives and it won't cost them more than an internet connection to get it. :icon_rolleyes:

(Sorry for the double post :icon_redface:)

sam the moderately wize
December 22nd, 2010, 08:10 PM
We may not be able to violate the laws of physics, but we certainly do defy them on a daily basis. Every time a plane takes off, for instance.

We can take advantage of one set of physical laws in order to defy another, yes. What laws are we tapping into to work against physical determinism?

OfficerFriendly
December 26th, 2010, 03:54 PM
I like to think we are harnessing the law of physics and the results of that is an airplne in flight