[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 77 KB, 800x533, slave[1].jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10308168 No.10308168[DELETED]  [Reply] [Original]

How to live a happy life in a world governed by the laws of hard determinism? How to be a happy slave?

>> No.10308195

The universe isn't deterministic. It's probalistic. Has no one heard of quantum physics yet?

>> No.10308198

>>10308168
happy = death
Stop searching for memes man. If you wanna feel less of a slave, give up a bad habbit or something. Read Journey to the End of the Night.

>> No.10308203
File: 106 KB, 645x968, thisisyou.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10308203

>>10308195
>I think quantum physics is a legitimate science

>> No.10308205

>>10308168
You have to take ownership of your arbitrary contingency as if it were your choice. You chose to be who you are outside time and space, justify yourself to yourself

>> No.10308214

>>10308195
>implying quantum physics is relevant on scales larger than handfuls of atoms

>>10308203
>implying quantum physics is illegitimate

>> No.10308224

>>10308214
Butterfly effect.

>> No.10308228
File: 74 KB, 807x802, 1510177955917.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10308228

>>10308214
>>10308203
>>10308195
>Humanitards talking about quantum physics

>> No.10308267

idk but those aren't the questions a person who believes in hard determinism would ask. There's agency baked into your phrasing.

>> No.10308272

>>10308205
Mfw the only correct answer itt goes without any (you)s.

>> No.10308282

Is determinism the most retarded theory ever? I'm reading the wiki article now. What kind of intellectual masturbators come up with these ideas?

>> No.10308287

>>10308282
It's up there with "I don't exist."

>> No.10308390

>>10308282
t. brainlet who still thinks he's responsible for his actions
At least it's not your fault :^)

>> No.10308413

>>10308390
I just decided to punch these letter on the keyboard. There i proved free will exists and you are a mega brainlet

>> No.10308420

>>10308168
epictetus is top tier slave philosophy

stoicism in general is excellent for the cucked existence

>> No.10308423

>>10308195
>on an atomic level there's some sort of randomness so this means I am a magical being with agency and free will checkmate determenestt

pathetic

>> No.10308427

>>10308423
kek maybe i need to read more about it but this is basically all i get when someone makes a post about muh quantum free will

>> No.10308430

>>10308423
And even if it were truly random that still wouldn't mean that we have free will. So that argument doesn't make sense in both cases.

>> No.10308434

>>10308413
>I just decided
lmao

>> No.10308446

>>10308423
>dude the universe is nothing but a clock where every action is 100% predetermined by the initial state
>um actually on the most basic level the universe isn't anything like this
>SHUT UP HURR DURR U STUPID

>> No.10308470

>>10308446
As >>10308430 said, free will is a silly meme either way.

>> No.10308484

>>10308168
>How to live a happy life

you dont, its a Hollywood meme

>> No.10308489

>>10308470
> free will is a silly meme either way.

Only if you accept the predicate that the absence of a choice of desire itself undermines freedom for which I categorically do not.

>> No.10308493

>>10308489
dennett pls go

>> No.10308512

>>10308214
>>implying quantum physics is relevant on scales larger than handfuls of atoms
How many atoms have you seen affect you in any way? Exactly. So let atoms do what they do, and let yourself do what you are going to do. Your choices are what matters, because they are greater than the small laws of physics which only affect small particles.

>> No.10308524

You aren't just material. You have an immaterial soul which possesses free will. Humans are not robots.

>> No.10308643

>>10308282
No, it's obviously true, otherwise the universe wouldn't function, and even then, if it were some probabilistic or "random" aspect, it would still be predictable as something can't come from nothing, and therefor just part of the wider mechanics. Just that it's not comparable to some simple classical mechanics or logic, its complexity is challenging to comprehensively compute even within a single atom (of our simplified and abstracted model, not a true 1:1 of reality). Let alone for a human being to truly grasp and notice it. Free will, to some extent, might as well be true given our limited viewpoint and cognition. Even if you and I were an encompassing, world-superintelligence, long surpassed "life". We would still be in the same, limited position.

>> No.10308750

>>10308643
>if it were some probabilistic or "random" aspect, it would still be predictable

Saying that an event is probable means that you can't predict the event beyond saying that it might happen. Take the location of an electron for example. You can say that it's more probable that at a given time the electron will be in a set of locations than in others, but you can't predict which location it will be in.

The basic building blocks of the universe are probabilistic not deterministic. Quantum mechanics are not Newtonian. The idea of the universe being a giant clock is an illusion.

>> No.10308775

>>10308214
>implying quantum physics is relevant on scales larger than handfuls of atoms
What do you think atoms are?

>> No.10308779

>>10308643
>otherwise the universe wouldn't function, and even then, if it were some probabilistic or "random" aspect, it would still be predictable as something can't come from nothing
Hello Albert. Don't tell God what to do.

>> No.10308977

>>10308750
>The basic building blocks of the universe are probabilistic not deterministic. Quantum mechanics are not Newtonian. The idea of the universe being a giant clock is an illusion.
Yet on a macroscopic scale the universe is deterministic and Newtonian.

>> No.10309000

>>10308977
Which is an illusion.

>> No.10309453

>>10308643
If I have free will even in a limited scope, then doesn't it follow that determinism is not true?