What makes us humans so special?

I am not sure what your point is here? If you are simply asserting that "Joe Sixpack", backhoe driver, probably (P≈.99) does not know enough to design said backhoe then I will not argue. If you are trying to assert that therefore Joe does not use his will to learn and operate said backhoe in order to move a given mountain then I think your assertion is patently false.

Right. Human civilization has only existed this long because no piece of farm equipment has ever broken.

Yes, the "food problem" is a good concrete problem. Although a whale's circling and burping may be aesteically pleasing to you for whatever reason, that hardly makes it a better solution to the "food problem" than modern agriculture. You are going to be hard-pressed to claim that any animal on the endangered species list is better at "survival level" problem solving than humans are.

If I were you I would have used cockroaches as an example of a species that had solved the food problem better than we have. True, their solution is not particularly aestetically plesant, but it is definitely highly effective. To which I would have responded that they haven't actually solved the food problem, they just have a fairly wide range of things they can eat. We, on the other hand, have much more restrictive dietary demands. In very arid climates they cannot survive even with their non-restrictive demands while we can irrigate and thrive despite our relative dietary handicap.

Hehe. The position of "Devil's Advocate" is well established and perfectly respectable. Anyway, I can hardly fault your contrariness in championing the "human mundane-ness" cause since I was championing the "human special-ness" cause for pretty-much the same reason (all the posters prior to me were in the mundane camp). Besides, if we agreed it would be a boring thread.

-Dale

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

well i havent looked into what you are saying too much
but i do have my opinions on what makes humans so special
basically we have "freedom of choice"
to me basically this means we have the choice to go agaisnt what we feel
all animals survive on instincs, so basiucally doing what they feel
but we as humans have the capability to choose the opposite
and act on the opposite
and thats where self discipline comes in
but its hard to choose
and hard to keep it all in
but this is where we are "special"
if we just do what we feel like doing
or if we just do what we are "supposed ": to do
then we arent making much of a choice are we

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I have had several dogs who did not empty their bladders when they had the "feel" to do so. Thus, I do not follow your logic that being able to do differently than you "feel" makes humans unique or special.

Be that as it may, how do you know that you have the "freedom of choice" and not that you are compelled to make your "choices" by the laws of chemistry and physics?

Every molecule in your nervous system follows these laws, does it not? Is not your nervous system, especially the brain and eyes, that is CONTROLING YOU? (The eyes contain nerves - in fact, pre-natally, the retina was part of the developing brain, but that brain tissue separated from the rest and migrated to what would become "eyes")

If you are controlled by these physical laws, why do you say you have "freedom of choice"? What do you mean by this? Is it only that you do not know the details of neural actions that is actually in control, so you assume that somehow you are making a choice instead of doing exactly what the brain chemistry and physics require you to do (avoiding violating any physics or chemist laws)?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

yea because a dog is trained to do that
a dog is a slave
they still go by fealings because you gave them shit when they didnt do what you wanted them to
so they will remember that fealing
think about it

 

by freedom of choice i can choose even to go against what iw as trained to do such as a dog
i can choose to think before i act
i can choose to do the exact opposite of what i want to do
no animal can do that
they dont wanna piss on the floor because you will give them shit if they do
if you enver trained a dog taht way it would always piss on yoru floor

 

we can choose not to be a slave to what we feel like doing
but if you still disagree thats alright
if you want me to explain myself any further then ask a more specific question and maybe an example of what you mean

 

How do you know you are not simpy obeying an inner subconscious compulsion and have only the illusion of freewill. I don't think you can prove that's not the case.

 

I of course agree with this, but want to ask Jonny if he was not "trained" also like the dog to do "tricks" such as: comb his hair, dress, go to work, shake hands, eat with a fork (or pair of sticks), not steal or make forced sex on another, etc. - many of his acts, like those of the dog, go against his natural nature and "feelings" too.

It is amusing to see how he thinks he is "choosing" but the dog is "trained." The jails are full of people that were not "well trained", but made their anti-social choices. Humans are trained to do many more un-natural tricks than any dog. Should I conclude that dogs make more real choices in their 24 hour day?

IMHO, elementary school teachers should spend more time/effort trying to make learning, especially sciences, exciting and fun instead of on PC training. (Things like getting children to say "repairperson" instead of "repairman."* - "PC training" related to computers is useful but "training" none-the-less.) US would better off - not be in as deep an economic problem as it is, with less PC attitude training.** - in many cases, if people were not trained as much but made more rational choices, except I guess "training" not to wet the bed is as useful as "training" the dog not to wet the floor, etc..

Oh, excuses me, I'm sorry Johnny:
That should be "choosing" not to wet the bed is as useful as "training" the dog not to wet the floor.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

You seem to think external presure on humans results in "choosing" but the same applied to a dog does not as it is only "training."
Have you never said "yes, I will do that next time." to the boss when really you were thinking "That will never work you stupid SOB."? No "training" here, of course, only a human "choosing," which the dog does not do, when holding his urine in his bladder because "humans are special" - only they can chose.
------------------------------------------
*My computer's "spell checker" is even trying to PC train me! (But like an old dog, I don't train well for these new tricks. Hell, I even keep my milk in the ice box!)

**It is of course natural to want control things (Concept of "ownership" was invented because of this.) But without instilling / training the desire to "Keep up with the Jones" or to "have the latest fashon clothes" etc, the level of economic activity would be lower, however, buying thngs you really do not need and even cause trouble (Summer Sundays spent mowing that big "Jones impressing" lawn etc.) must be called some from of "training" or "social conditioning," certainly not a "choice" if the dog is not also making a "choice" when it restains the natural urge to empty its bladder inside the house.

 

The potential of humans is very great. Suppose we colonise space (I'll bet that cat of yours can't colonise space - not without you anyway) and take some of our animals with us? It's very early in human history yet, and we have the potential to do a lot of good. Having said that we have to be cautious not to drive other animals into extention unnessisarily and should be cautious to make smart decisions for the future of our own species as well. The short answer to the question of what makes us so special is that we have the ability to do many more things then the other species on the planet, we have the capacity for compassion that few other species on this planet have, and we have the capacity to do a lot of good. That is what makes us different or special. And Oh ya, I don't know any other creatures on this planet that can do long division.

 

because i can take the time to think about it
and honestly going against what i "want" to do i dont think would be a subconcious slavery type thing
maybe so i can't prove it
but either way
doing what i feel like doing is the easy way
it's called discipline
going against what i feel like doing etc just for the sake of doing it
you can argue all you want just because of the fact i can't prove it
but i'm not intending to do so

the fact that you give into trying to trigger me and prove me wrong just proves the point that you live in slavery to your own emotions
thats all i know

 

yea you choose the simplest things to have an argument
thsoe things you dont think about
but you know what
thats fine
i've taken the time to think this way
and it takes discipline
so just the fact that i have to discipline myself so hard to do this shows myself my point
i dont care man
i know who you are so keep your problems with me to yourself

 

we have a thumb, and our brains have larger proportion dedicated to 'learning' than other primates and apes.

 

Hi johny

Personally I am a big fan of free will. However, by arguing humans are special because of free will you are falling into the same logical and rhetorical trap as the "human mundane-ness" camp. Specifically, you are relying on an intangible and unmeasurable criteria.

The problem with doing so is that as soon as someone like BillyT disagrees with your assessment you cannot back it up, even if you are correct. He can either assert that "there is no free will" or he can assert that "animals have free will too". Either way neither of you has any real evidence that can support your claims (since the claim is about intangibles) and so all three potential claims are on equal rhetorical footing.

I highly recommend sticking with observables and measurables whenever you can. In this case the "human specialness" argument does not require intangibles to win, so it is best to avoid them. Otherwise you will always get shot down unless everyone you are talking to already agrees.

-Dale

 

Me too, but Johnny may find that hard to believe. Your advice to him was very good. His position is at best just an opinion by one obviously not very versed in the ancient and complex subject of "free will."

I was aware of the problem of fitting free will into a "web of knowledge" that includes considerable knowledge of physics and neuro-physiology, probably before Johnny was born. I had basically given up, but my studies of vision unexpected open a possible means to make physics and Free Will compatible. I posted a summary of how “genuine free will” can be consistent with physics and neuro-physiology some time back. See third post from last in thread:

http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=51693

I.e. Truthseaker's post was last of now dead thread, then a short one by MetaKron is just prior to it is my long one. Jump down about half a displayed page to the bold text:

Genuine Free Will is Possible

where my essay begins (Be warned it is long. It takes full 6 pages to print.)

 

Johny, you seem to have some anger management issues. In what way have I tried to trigger you? I asked you a genuine question, one which is decidely unoriginal. Many philosphers and psychologists have asked the same question. "How can we know that what we take to be free will is not an illusion?"

I am not trying to prove you wrong, nor am I trying to prove you right. I was trying to point our that this issue is not clear cut. Perhaps we have free will, perhaps we don't. Perhaps it is constrained, functioning in some circumstances and not in others. We may 'think' we are making our decisions freely, but how do we 'know' they are not the response to some instinctive or causative compulsion?

I was suggesting that this uncertainty over free will exists. You seem to have taken that as an attack on your own person. That would account for your decidedly reactionary attack on me. Did you know you could have chosen to be nice instead?

 

yea i appologize
at the time i had a couple other people jumping down my throat so everythingi hear i assumed was that as well
don't let that change your advice towards me ussually i am willing to accept advice and be open minded
just wasn't in the mood and because of this really i was contradicting myself in a way by acting the way i was
well more so just pointing my finger at myself of how not to use my free will anyways
the way i see it that is

but my view of what "Free will" is, is somewhat hard for me to explain
i was trying above
but basically i don't want to waste my time trying to explain it to anyone that isn't going to be open minded about my opinion
if they are then i am happy to do so
nothing wrong with an argument
i just dont like peolpe jumping down my throat rigth off the bat without thinking about what i had to say open minded]

ya know waste of time and energy

 

We may 'think' we are making our decisions freely, but how do we 'know' they are not the response to some instinctive or causative compulsion?

and this is basically how i would define free will,
to me free will is is going against my instincts and compulsive behavior
which is what i meant when i said doing the opposite of what i "feel" like doing
and for me persionally that is something very hard for me to do
i have the choice to do what i really do not want to do and will not be rewarded for in any way
anything else in my opinion basically is not making a choice, because i wouldnt consider it the free will
i don't know if you understand what i am trying to say
if i am not being very clear with what i mean then tell me

 

that's why i beleive it's different for everyone and where your at
for me i have gone from side to side with what i would be "choosing" to do.
in the first place i would be choosing to discipline myself. but then after i have been to that stage i would be in the position to "choose" to throw it all away purposefully, when of course me personally i would be the type of person to try to push anything to the limit
but this is an example
not that i do this all the time
or hardly ever.
i am just trying to give an example of how it would be different for everyone.
everyone is trained differently and everyone reacts to things differently.
we can't really control our thoughts or emotions, at least i cant...but i can control my actions and learn to keep my mouth shut, which i am not doing right now. right now i would definately not be going along with what i would say "free will" is, because i feel the need to explain myself and i am doing it.
i could choose not to explain myself though, for me with teh position i am in that would be making a choice.

 

Just a philosophical question: If you can choose to go against your insticts/feelings why can't you choose to go with them?

In other words, you have expressed that you "feel the need to explain" yourself and therefore that if you chose to not explain that would be exercising free will. If that is the case then I don't see why making the opposite choice would not be exercising free will also.

-Dale

"If you choose not to decide you still have made a choice" - Rush

 

My apartment dwelling dog agrees with you. He is exercising his free will by not barking at the across the hall neighbor (at least whenever he comes home late and bangs the door). His instincts tell him: bark bark bark.

Yesterday, when I got home later than normal to let him out, I found no puddle on the floor - amazing display of free will (power) by my dog - just like a human, but how can that be? I thought free will is what makes humans uniquely special.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!