Leaderboard

Some quotes from SEP https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/freewill Meaning of the term "free will": Pre-determination of human behavior isn't decisively supported by current science: The following goes along with my own thoughts on the matter. Influences are heavily underdetermined, and influences don't make determinants: We often assume probable causes to _be_ causes. We can correlate, but do those correlations make cause? With competing influences, do the purportedly stronger ones necessarily prevail? Doesn't infinite regression assume a mechanistic mind?

Maybe someone can quickly clear up a problem I have with the possibility that gravity is mediated by an elementary particle, the Graviton, that is massless and propagates at the speed of light. As I understand it, it's considered hypothetical at the moment, meaning it's considered as one possibility. I can't see how it's possible. My reasoning is pretty simplistic. Take a black hole at the centre of a galaxy. It's gravity clearly affects the stars and materials that are orbiting it. We can calculate the mass of the black hole by how it's gravity affects everything else. But how can a boson escape a black hole, and affect the surrounding stars? As I understand it, nothing can escape a black hole. Photons are massless bosons, that travel at the speed of light, but they can't exit a black hole, so how could a graviton? Is it immune to the action of other gravitons? Is that theoretically possible? Please don't respond by saying that the existence of the graviton is not accepted theory, I already know that. The question of this OP is, can it's existence be positively discounted, for the reason I've given above? And if not, why not?

I'm definitely planning to reduce my political sausage intake. Too much political sodium nitrite. I think Robert Plant should send Congress some mayflies from his hedgerow. They'll last longer. Or maybe that head of lettuce that was competing with Liz Truss is available?

I sometimes cook for the public. On one occasion we had a couple of French customers(one of whom let us know that she had once cooked for Madonna in Paris -from memory) She decided to go shopping for ingredients in the area and then cook an evening meal to which she she invited the pair of us. It was a bit of uncharted culinary territory as the meal included several large pieces of raw salmon and other fish and we were quite unfamiliar with the concept of actually eating sushi then. I tried my best but my partner left it to one side. Later in the meal I adopted my usual practice of seasoning my plate with some salt and pepper. I was admonished for doing this and ,when I asked why I was told that this was "disrespectful to the chef" (who had presumably already seasoned the meal during the preparation according to her judgement) I assumed this was a joke and attempted to argue my corner but it became apparent that she was serious. People can take food and cooking it very seriously.

I will take some time to answer @Eise and @studiot questions thinking in how could I express myself better.

It shows the distinction between a free and coerced action. I did not look at the video, and I do not understand what you want to say here: that some form of free will still exists? But how are they, or humans, able to 'escape determinism'? And if they don't then they have no free will at all, according your definition of free will.

As I said before the server got down for a week:

So that is like 'unicorn'. the word is in every dictionary (I assume), even the concept exists (there are stories with unicorns in it). But unicorns do not exist! Same with your definition of free will: it might be that such a definition exists, that there are (philosophical) stories woven around it, but that doesn't mean that it reflects some aspect of reality. And so here I am fully with @iNow: If your actions would be 'independent of any previous condition', they would be absurd, having nothing to do with the situation you are in. Here you seem to contradict yourself: I more ore less read: 'sometimes decisions "uncaused by any previous condition" occur, which means they are caused (conditioned) by previous conditions". That makes no sense. So free will is always a "conditioned" free will: conditioned by external circumstances, but also by your own (true) beliefs, values, motivations, reasons, etc. And if you can act according to them, your action is free, so you have free will. Change of personality is not an obstruction of free will. Both Dr Jeckyll and Mr Hyde can be free in their actions. The free will lies in the relation between your personality an your actions. You cannot choose who you are, but you can choose what to do. The decisive criterion is if you recognise your actions really as your actions: they are according your own (true) beliefs, values, motivations, reasons. How these are implemented in your body and causally lead to your actions is not a decisive criterion. Maybe Dr Jeckyll does not recognise Mr Hyde's actions as his, because it really was another person. The point with my definition of free will is that it fits to our experience of free will, has (nearly?) no 'metaphysical ballast', and is not in conflict with determinism (quite the opposite!). It doesn't suffer from the conceptual inconsistency of "uncaused by any previous condition", or 'being able to do otherwise".

In general, the objective is a decent crust, with an inside that is baked but not dry. Smaller things like bread rolls benefit from a hot oven, that will brown off the crust before the inside starts to dry. Bigger loaves want lower temperatures, and longer times, so that the heat has time to penetrate, without burning the crust. You could achieve that by starting from cold, but it's unpredictable, as ovens will vary as how quick they reach full temperature, so what works for the recipe writer might work for your oven. So I would prefer heating the oven up before putting the bread in. That way you can learn from how it goes and adjust the heat settings accordingly. My favourite bake is french baguette mix, rolled in a mix of flax seeds and sesame seeds. I make the dough in the bread machine, and take it out before it starts to bake. Then roll out the sticks, cover and allow to rise. Then heat the oven to 200 deg fan oven, with a tray of boiling water on the floor, and put the sticks in and bake till they are a bit darker than golden. Yummy, but addictive.

Our hearts go out to those who've been intellectually abused by the loss of their favorite forums. Cheese Nips and coffee are over there on the periodic table, please help yourselves. So glad momentum brought y'all here!

Turns out that scientists and doctors have proven that the Mark Gleeson story has been made up. Humans breathe through their mouths if they can't breathe through their nose. Nobody's died from a blocked nose. There's not a single case of it reported on NIH or in medical journals. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9498581/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9498537/