Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id IAA21234 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Wed, 11 Apr 2001 08:23:33 +0100 From: <joedees@bellsouth.net> To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2001 02:25:57 -0500 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: Quoted-printable Subject: Re: Determinism Message-ID: <3AD3C0B5.17597.BA28BF@localhost> In-reply-to: <3AD1AA06.8AFC4B4D@bioinf.man.ac.uk> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12c) Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
On 9 Apr 2001, at 13:24, Chris Taylor wrote:
> > > > There could exist no such thing as meaning in a superdetermined
> > > > world, nor could there have been any reason for our
> > > > self-conscious awarenesses to have evolved without the ability
> > > > to reflect not conferring someevolutionary advantage, which it
> > > > certainly wouldn't if (and this is the absurd consequence of
> > > > superdeterminism) every motion of all our bodies was indelibly
> > > > written on ths parchment of the universe one nanosecond after
> > > > the Big Bang.
> > >
> > > Many futures for the universe are equally valid looking forward
> > > (to us and anything else but a godlike philosophical construct),
> > > but looking back, you can find reasons. How would you know, before
> > > the fact, that your superdetermined path wasn't randomly
> > > determined rather than inevitable? Therefore why would it make any
> > > difference to us simple folk (or organic evolution)?
> > >
> > I would maintain that evolution acting upon the happenstance
> > genesis of life is EXACTLY why I'm here, and that is why it can't
> > have been big bang superdetermined that I am. Superdeterminism and
> > evolution cannot coexist, for superdeterminism turns the universe
> > into a static object, with past and future all conflated into an
> > unchangeable tralfamadorean present, and suited only for the frozen
> > dead, while evolution is a dynamic and irresistible force, changing
> > everything it touches, and touching everything living.
>
> Apart from recourse to the quantum, how do you know your universe
> doesn't exist in that state (linear, with all other theoretically
> possible variants 'greyed out'). My (absurdly reductio'd) point is
> that although many universes are possible, after the fact, only one
> will have occurred. I can't think of any part of that occurrence which
> could not be explained by a (theoretical) being with perfect knowledge
> of the state of all the matter and energy in that universe.
>
Actually, an omniscient being would lack the omnipotent power to
mandate the universe's condition, as an omnipotent being could not
have omniscient knowledge of it. An omniscient being would be
powerless to change the future, and thus could not be omnipotent;
likewise, an omnipotent being could change the future at any time,
and therefore could not know it. It is the same argument as that of
the irresistible force and the ommoveable object; both cannot
coexist in the same universe (and there is by definition inly one;
that's what the uni- prefix means). But the very idea of an
omniscient being is an impossibility, for such a being would have to
know that it knows that...ad infinitum, not realizeable in a finite
spatiotemporal universe - and ours is finite with respect to its
smallest electron constituent; there is a limit to Big Bang
expansion, before gravity reasserts itself into a Big Crunch which
pattern, therefore information or knowledge, cannot transgress.
>
> > > As for proof - push your coffee cup to the edge of the table,
> > > watch it fall. Cause, effect. I can think of more if you want...
> > >
> > What causes the positron-electron pairs to wink into and out of
> > existence? The question isn't whether or not you can think of more
> > examples of causality, but whather I can think of one
> > counterexample, which puts the lie to universal claims.
>
> So far we have one (on which the jury is apparently still out)...
>
Two: us.
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Chris Taylor (chris@bioinf.man.ac.uk)
> http://bioinf.man.ac.uk/ »people»chris
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> ===============================================================
> This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
> Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
> For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
> see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit
>
>
===============================This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Apr 11 2001 - 08:26:23 BST