Like that, but not.
That's what I was thinking of...thanks.
That talk goes down a religious path, which I am willing to do but sometimes this board is not best built for that. Some people are really hostile to that talk.
I’m also a definite no. I think the human mind is an organism that can never be replaced with AI unless we allow it to be. I’ve read more and more about how going through decision-making processes is vital for brain health and development . We see more and more situations where we relieve people of the burdens of decisions and decision making. AI and implants are examples.
Your third paragraph sends me down a path I had not considered. You freely give away your will and therefore were free to make that choice. Would that mean that you are therefore responsible for everything else that you do as a result of that choice?
Sweet, I was looking for someone to pick up the opposite side.
It's an interesting conversation, Crazy. The there appear to be three basic arguments against it:
Good thoughts, could it also possibly be an age thing? I believe that the ages we have represented on this board are mainly Boomers down to older millenials, is it possible we view free will differently than younger generations will?
I don’t believe happiness is an objective commodity. We all have periods of downers, but those are temporary for the mentally healthy. Those who are on a quest for an increasing level of happiness will never be fulfilled, no matter how much tech is applied.
The concept of ownership has changed, but I don’t think in material terms. What has changed is owning what you see in a mirror. Youngsters are being taught that what they see is a product of external forces, not a product of what is inside of them.
Fair enough, but if you extrapolate that concept out, would that not play into the type of generation that would trade "free will" for something that is more akin to paternal protection and contentedness?
I think to a large extent that happiness is a choice. About all of us have a LOT to be thankful for yet a lot of people dwell on the negative parts of life. When a person thinks things are so bad they should go to Riley's hospital and see all the little kids.
Yes, I agree. Those who believe their unhappiness is not their responsibility will seek happiness from things like pills, tech, or even government.
One of my favorite lines from that movie
Is it though? Something like clinical depression which could be viewed as the opposite of happiness is not something I thin people choose to be. I think you can make a conscious choice to be positive in life but emotions are harder to pin down in that manner.
Expectation vs Reality
Great question. I'm torn, for many reasons. Some random thoughts:
I don't know of anybody who seeks serfdom.
Of course nobody seeks feudal serfdom. But I see evidence of 21st century serfdom all over. By that I mean those who are not comfortable making their own decisions and choices but constantly seek direction from others. This came through loud and clear during the pandemic. "Follow the science" achieved the status of a biblical commandment not only by us rubes, but by POTUS (Biden) himself. Science, like many other considerations informs our decision-making, it doesn't compel it. Even without Covid, I saw clear trends in business, government, and personal lives where people avoided decision making and instead sought out the comfort of group-think and conformity. To compound the issue, many in positions of authority impose that authority through group think and conformity to willing "serfs".
Says the guy who backs a party beholden to a candidate who wants to make serfs of all of us.
I think I have a much different sense of generational differences than you do, Crazy. For example, I find them more broadly to be road people than destination ones in comparison with older generations. I'm extremely bullish about our future because of what I see in younger generations.
I agree with you. I don't think it would be worth giving up free will or some semblance of "freedom" that we label in that manner, but I could see that becoming an option down the road.
We are putting our value judgment on the question of free will though. Same as with ownership type of society. Not all of us feel this way obviously but how accepting are you of the idea of premium content locked behind a pay wall on your car that you have to subscribe to?
I'm just recognizing that it's a serious question. Let's say you can have, on the one hand, freedom plus X standard of living, or despotism plus X+1 standard of living. What reason is there to pick option one? Is freedom actually worth anything? Or is freedom only a means to an end, because we've figured out that freedom is the best way to maximize that X standard of living? If it's the latter, then we are forced to consider X+1 if the opportunity arises.
If there is a point here, I missed it. The most one can say about this is that its a piss poor ad hominem.
Who gets to decide this in your world?
So what? The point is that surrendering personal decision-making to an expert, public official, candidate, or to group think is 21st century serfdom.
Good thoughts and you represent the other side of the argument I was looking for.
Freedom is basic to being a human being. If we give up freedom for the +1 standard of living, we are stepping away from being human. We will become animals in a zoo.
Your 'needs' will be defined by others.
1) would that make you happy?
I'll give you credit . . . you're persistently consistent on this. Never mind that you make arguments that you're also guilty of . . . you've got your patented Teflon response handy. But whatever . . . .
Not you . . . or is that a piss poor ad hominem too?
So what? You'd like to make that the issue because it suits your anti-Biden agenda. But the real issue is whether following the science wherever it leads us or marching in the GOP's lockstep is the path to freedom. Personally, I prefer to follow the science . . . the GOP lockstep sounds to much like Arbeit macht frei to me.
