quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

No. Actually it is a scientific theory...

So as usual you were just making shit up.

And as usual you are indulging in projection again. Allow me to recommend that you stick with what you know and abandon the pretense that you are equipped to comment on things you so obviously know nothing about. To call it a "scientific theory" does not change the fact that it is an assumption based on an interpretation of the evidence.

Determinism is deeply connected with our understanding of the physical sciences and their explanatory ambitions, on the one hand, and with our views about human free action on the other. In both of these general areas there is no agreement over whether determinism is true (or even whether it can be known true or false), and what the import for human agency would be in either case. ~Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy

So no, I wasn't making anything up, and I would advise you to reflect on The First Law of Holes.

K.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

No. Actually it is a scientific theory...

So as usual you were just making shit up.

And as usual you are indulging in projection again. Allow me to recommend that you stick with what you know and abandon the pretense that you are equipped to comment on things you so obviously know nothing about. To call it a "scientific theory" does not change the fact that it is an assumption based on an interpretation of the evidence.

Determinism is deeply connected with our understanding of the physical sciences and their explanatory ambitions, on the one hand, and with our views about human free action on the other. In both of these general areas there is no agreement over whether determinism is true (or even whether it can be known true or false), and what the import for human agency would be in either case. ~Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy

So no, I wasn't making anything up, and I would advise you to reflect on The First Law of Holes.

K.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

No. Actually it is a scientific theory...

So as usual you were just making shit up.

And as usual you are indulging in projection again. Allow me to recommend that you stick with what you know and abandon the pretense that you are equipped to comment on things you so obviously know nothing about. To call it a "scientific theory" does not change the fact that it is an assumption based on an interpretation of the evidence.

Determinism is deeply connected with our understanding of the physical sciences and their explanatory ambitions, on the one hand, and with our views about human free action on the other. In both of these general areas there is no agreement over whether determinism is true (or even whether it can be known true or false), and what the import for human agency would be in either case. ~Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy

So no, I wasn't making anything up, and I would advise you to reflect on The First Law of Holes.

K.

Is it embarrassing or funny when someone is caught out proclaiming their alleged intellectual authority and is found to be just another pseudo-intellectual on a power trip ?

I can never quite decide, though I see it every now and then, with mediocre intellects parading gigantic egos in public, apparently oblivious to the gap between their assumed and actual knowledge and abilities. A favourite tactic is their insistence that the interpretation/application of a theory or field of knowledge is limited to their specialist field, and therefore they and they alone are in a position to interpret them for the great unwashed masses.

quote:

If Yellowstone explodes it does not cause a random effect on the climate. It has a deterministic effect on climate. A chaotic system but still a system with a result that occurs exactly as the initial conditions dictate.

quote:

ORIGINAL: GotSteel

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
If Yellowstone explodes it does not cause a random effect on the climate. It has a deterministic effect on climate. A chaotic system but still a system with a result that occurs exactly as the initial conditions dictate.

It looks to me as though VincentML's reading of tweak's claim is that the "Yellowstone explodes" is the "random intervening event". This is also not literally correct as it's not at all random. However, applying the principle of charity she could be using it in a figurative sense like how people will refer to dice as random.

quote:

Determinism predicates a clockwork universe, inherently predictable in every detail,

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

I'm not discussing determinism the philosophy. I'm discussing deterministic systems, i.e. systems that are not random. Chaos theory is math, proven math.

When you start talking about the weather, you're not talking about chaos theory or math. Weather is something that happens in the real world. You know, that strange place outside your basement? So spare me your crap about mathematics. I'm not talking about mathematics. I'm talking about this:

Take the weather, for instance, to accurately predict the precise conditions at a specific point at a specific time would require knowledge and understanding of far too many variables to ever happen. That does not make weather random. Weather is deterministic we just cannot accurately model it because of all the small variables.

That statement embodies the philosophical position called "Determinism" (causal determinism, to be precise). It is not a fact that real world systems are deterministic. It is an assumption. And when you start trying to masquerade assumptions as facts, you're just putting on your chasuble and ranting.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

Applying it outside of pure math is of course unprovable but it works extremely effectively in many areas including meteorology. There is nothing philosophical about the application of math to physical systems.

In other words, it's an assumption that appears to work well for the most part. But, that's all. Claiming that real world systems actually are deterministic, as you've been doing, is not an "application of math." It's just a bogus knowledge claim. Assumptions (no matter what you think) are not facts.

K.

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

If Yellowstone explodes it does not cause a random effect on the climate. It has a deterministic effect on climate. A chaotic system but still a system with a result that occurs exactly as the initial conditions dictate.

Crap! I did not say it would cause a random effect on the climate. The volcanic explosion is the random event outside the climate system! Quite amazing how you misread what is written.

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

ORIGINAL: GotSteel

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
If Yellowstone explodes it does not cause a random effect on the climate. It has a deterministic effect on climate. A chaotic system but still a system with a result that occurs exactly as the initial conditions dictate.

It looks to me as though VincentML's reading of tweak's claim is that the "Yellowstone explodes" is the "random intervening event". This is also not literally correct as it's not at all random. However, applying the principle of charity she could be using it in a figurative sense like how people will refer to dice as random.

Thank you. Your reading of what I said was quite correct. The explosion of a volcano is deterministic since it is contingent on the condition of the magma below but the actual time of the explosion is unpredictable and therefore random. Nobody knows when Yellowstone will erupt, if ever. For that reason I consider it a random event. And it is random to the climate since it has little if any continuing effect on climate until it explodes. But you made a good point, GS.

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML
My understanding of Chaos Theory is that the events within a non-linear and dynamic system are deterministic but overall the direction or behavior of the system is unpredictable. For example, the invasion of antigens into a biological system may elicit (determine) the responses of the immune system but the effectiveness of the immune system is unpredictable because it may have been influenced by outside random events like stress.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML
My understanding of Chaos Theory is that the events within a non-linear and dynamic system are deterministic but overall the direction or behavior of the system is unpredictable. For example, the invasion of antigens into a biological system may elicit (determine) the responses of the immune system but the effectiveness of the immune system is unpredictable because it may have been influenced by outside random events like stress.

It depends. In some cases, the classic example is a ball placed at the apex of a hill, a very small change in the initial conditions has a very large effect on the outcome, which side of the hill the ball rolls down. Assuming you can get an accurate measurement of where the ball is placed you can predict the outcome. In other systems the initial conditions may be dependent on so many factors or on such small variations in the initial conditions it is simply not feasible to model the system with precision. However all chaotic systems obey rules, they are not truly random, so all such systems, once enough is known about them, should be amenable to modeling with varying degrees of predictive accuracy.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

ORIGINAL: GotSteel

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
If Yellowstone explodes it does not cause a random effect on the climate. It has a deterministic effect on climate. A chaotic system but still a system with a result that occurs exactly as the initial conditions dictate.

It looks to me as though VincentML's reading of tweak's claim is that the "Yellowstone explodes" is the "random intervening event". This is also not literally correct as it's not at all random. However, applying the principle of charity she could be using it in a figurative sense like how people will refer to dice as random.

Thank you. Your reading of what I said was quite correct. The explosion of a volcano is deterministic since it is contingent on the condition of the magma below but the actual time of the explosion is unpredictable and therefore random. Nobody knows when Yellowstone will erupt, if ever. For that reason I consider it a random event. And it is random to the climate since it has little if any continuing effect on climate until it explodes. But you made a good point, GS.

Unpredictable does not equal random. Not too long ago no one could predict a hurricane until the storm came in sight of land or some ship. That did not make hurricanes random.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

Determinism predicates a clockwork universe, inherently predictable in every detail,

That may be the philosophical school of Determinism but who the hell believes that today?

Well, you do, if you subscribe to the physicalist interpretation of reality that you so often defend when the subject of consciousness arises.

Determinism is deeply connected with our understanding of the physical sciences and their explanatory ambitions

Physical science proceeds on the assumption of causal determinism. Whether or not QM challenges this assumption remains an open question.

Ironically, quantum mechanics is one of the best prospects for a genuinely deterministic theory ~Source

K.

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML
My understanding of Chaos Theory is that the events within a non-linear and dynamic system are deterministic but overall the direction or behavior of the system is unpredictable. For example, the invasion of antigens into a biological system may elicit (determine) the responses of the immune system but the effectiveness of the immune system is unpredictable because it may have been influenced by outside random events like stress.

It depends. In some cases, the classic example is a ball placed at the apex of a hill, a very small change in the initial conditions has a very large effect on the outcome, which side of the hill the ball rolls down. Assuming you can get an accurate measurement of where the ball is placed you can predict the outcome. In other systems the initial conditions may be dependent on so many factors or on such small variations in the initial conditions it is simply not feasible to model the system with precision. However all chaotic systems obey rules, they are not truly random, so all such systems, once enough is known about them, should be amenable to modeling with varying degrees of predictive accuracy.

Neither Tweak nor I ever said chaotic systems are random. Please remove your blinders.

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

ORIGINAL: GotSteel

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
If Yellowstone explodes it does not cause a random effect on the climate. It has a deterministic effect on climate. A chaotic system but still a system with a result that occurs exactly as the initial conditions dictate.

It looks to me as though VincentML's reading of tweak's claim is that the "Yellowstone explodes" is the "random intervening event". This is also not literally correct as it's not at all random. However, applying the principle of charity she could be using it in a figurative sense like how people will refer to dice as random.

Thank you. Your reading of what I said was quite correct. The explosion of a volcano is deterministic since it is contingent on the condition of the magma below but the actual time of the explosion is unpredictable and therefore random. Nobody knows when Yellowstone will erupt, if ever. For that reason I consider it a random event. And it is random to the climate since it has little if any continuing effect on climate until it explodes. But you made a good point, GS.

Unpredictable does not equal random. Not too long ago no one could predict a hurricane until the storm came in sight of land or some ship. That did not make hurricanes random.

But an unseen hurricane is already in existence. An unexploded volcano is only a possibility. There are volcanos along all the earth's active tectonic lines. The eruption of each is random with respect to any frame of observation. There is no pattern.