The Final Decisions are Ours to make. We should do the best We can with what We get...or got. "Luck" makes Life fun, or discouraging, if One depends on it.

The way things are today is just that you are responsible for your desicions and actions, not your circumstances. The way this video puts things is so abstract and unreal, it's hard to fathom how he came up with these ideas.

@@danieljones9463 The legal system in the west takes circumstances into account and does not overly-punish somebody that steals food to feed his family. Instead we have welfare and punish murderers and antisocial scumbags.

Can you imagine how a world believing that responsibility is a myth would be?

@@justWithRight exactly the same as it is now

@@DallonJyes, belief needs be followed by collective action

You were predetermined to make excuses for being lazy. Making excuses for being lazy ain’t a good thing, but it’s not your fault for making such excuses. You are only a witness to your actions. But you, being an observer, doesn’t really have a say in what your actions will be. You are in the cockpit but you aren’t controlling the plane. The plane has been and will always be on autopliot. Hope I make you feel better.

Yes, exactly. While people don't accept it's the luck of the draw they are unwilling to do that.

Milica You miss the point. If we think those worse of than us deserve their lot then we don't think we should do anything about it or have any desire to do so. This is all too often the attitude people have.

Nope, it's justification for the better off helping those worse off than themselves since it's all the luck of the draw. Nobody deserves to be a failure. We can even up the luck to a certain extent with benefits for all.

Yes, actually.

Yes u r😅

Or is it the other way round? Accepting any new idea just because its newer. Assuming that every new is better you know

I've struggled with this exact concept for a while. Even if we're setting out to intentionally try and create a particular environment that we think will shape us in a desired way, thinking we're in control of the choices we make in sculpting an environment seems to just assume free will. What made us want to create an environment for ourselves in the first place? Were we in control of deciding what characterics we desire to see in this environment? I like the quote by Schopenhauer which paraphrased is this: "we can do what we want, but we can't want what we want."

@@TimBorny Deep👏👏

I agree and I've been thinking at this for a long time. You need some initial conditions that are hard to get. First is a location for this model to start and most stats will be against it either directly or indirectly. Then the initial funding to get the system to be self sustaining ( this will be best obtained with multiple locations that can trade execs or rare materials). Then protecting this locations. And if all goes well we still can't get all the people to agree that this is better. We will always have people that this new model will not be satisfactorily. People with genetically increased need for adrenaline, with higher testosterone or epigenetics activated from a bad upbringing. There is no system that is an utopia for all. One persons haven is another one hell.

Bullshit. You can't develop a single "model" for people, not everyone is the same. Child Psychologists know that. We don't all think, learn or process in the same manner, nor do we all react to situations or conditions the same way. Trying to create a "one size fits all" solution reeks of Totalitarianism, Social Engineering and potential Genocide. Hitler and the Nazi's tried this, or have to ignored History? Maybe you're embracing the Nazi ideal? Either way ... you're an idiot.

Not exactly. Twisting history to make it suit your belief doesnt make it true. Nazi beleived there was a superior race. No one is talking about that anymore, exept the far right, which Nazi was, not left at all. The use of socialism word in national-socialism was a mere trick to get vote. The big difference between our era, and the last century era, is that now, humanity challenge are all communal. So either we all face them together or we ignore them and live with the consequence. That's just evolution. Economic and societal model have evolve through history, and believing that we have reach the holy grail of society development is rather disturbing.

Every argument ends in you are like Hitler/Nazi. Because everything can be compered to them and nothing can. Nazi drank water so if you drink water you are a Nazi. They did a lot of stuff so it is impossible to not do something similar to them or say something similar. But you can't be like the Nazi because nobody is killing or proposing to kill people like they did. The ones that don't remember history are doomed to repeat it. But in the Nazi history case every one remembers them, the problem is every one has different points that they put an accent on , a different spin to it. The problems that we have today need a lot of different solutions some old and some new. As long as this solution is not killing people I don't think it is correct to compare it to Nazi ideology. Doing nothing is not a solution. We must find the best solution for the problems that we face today.

A unified model towards fulfillment doesn't work because your idea of fulfillment and my idea of fulfillment are not necessarily the same.

"no one is a victim unless they want to." Watch again...

No one is encouraging "a victim mentality" here.

A victim mentality ain’t a good thing. Even though you aren’t really at fault for your problems, no one is either. Therefore, you shouldn’t blame others. Personal responsibility is indeed something that should be encouraged.

You misunderstand quantum mechanics. Uncertainty principle is about our inability to measure without interfering, it's not some inherent rule of the universe. The apparent randomness of quantum particles could also be explained by a lack of understanding of those fundamental particles. An argument from ignorance.

your certainty of that position, where experts are uncertain speaks to _your_ ignorance. but take heart, it's a common enough phenomenon; ignorance frequently breeds certainty. www.scientificamerican.com/article/quantum-physics-free-will/

You've assigned me some arbitrary level of certainty to suit your argument. Weak. You just walked back your original assertion that quantum mechanics gives leeway towards a non-deterministic universe. That's my only claim, that there's no evidence one way or the other, and uncertainty about quantum mechanics is very often misconstrued as the last bastion of randomness or free will. Apologies if I assigned that common misconception to you, but I don't think there's an easy answer here. Both conclusions are possible, although non-deterministic causality has an awful lot more questions to answer.

Come, let us make our Father drink wine, so that we may lay with him and preserve seed of our father. Genesis 19:32

You suck and so does Islam, as does Catholicism and so forth...

No not really, this doesn't need hard determinism nor free will.

We have already disposed of the "myth" that everyone deserves the same chances in the UK. As well as the myth that the richest have any social responsibility. In practice if not in theory.

There's massive wealth inequality between the richest people in the world. There's little wealth inequality in the piss poor countries across the world. There's massive wealth inequality in the US where the relative poor are much richer than most of the actual poor across the world. Inequality is not the problem. You speak of social responsibility, but Bill Gates has helped far more people by creating Microsoft than he ever will with his philanthropic work (not that the philanthropic isn't to be admired). Capitalism is the force that helps lift people out of poverty. If you care about the poor you should love capitalism. It's not about winners and losers. It's about win-win trade transactions where both seller and customer benefit. Extreme poverty has halved since 1994 because of the wonderful system that is capitalism.

Laura O C you sound like a religious fanatic...

Haha! Nope! Just an Msc Economics grad with a passion for the economic system that lifts people out of poverty! :D

Oh sure, the market does function, and it does generate wealth, and sometimes that helps people. However, what makes the market work and what benefits people are not the same thing. The market is a tool from which useful benefit can be extracted; it's not the solution.

Sam Harris is a phony

ironic since this is a very roundabout way of saying: you´re wrong because i say so.

I think the narrator literally agreed with you at 1:23, then deferred to the other argument more accurate to the standardized definition of free will. Sure, choice is real, yet you do not have full control of the states to which they are presented to you. A complex argument isn't necessary; including whether or not *possibility* itself is finite or infinite. There are enough conditions to which we cannot full control the outcome. That doesn't remove choice, it removes free will. They are not the same.

Disagreed. Rejecting the illusion of choice isn't the same as rejecting all qualities of life. It simply means our labels are relative. One's *decision* to any of your claims is but another of someone inclined to think in that direction. Clearly, my disagreement is proof that my perception of clarity from this video, however ill conceived it may be, is but a positive response!

Amen, amen, amen

Until you can prove that Qi energy exists, which is so far as I know required for feng shui to work, your premise is faulty. And maybe you might when a Nobel prize in physics for finding this qi energy through reproducible experiments (maybe through a particle accelerator in Switzerland!) But hey, why try and find this Qi energy when you can just move random strangers furniture around at random for money?

@@infernobeetle709 until the first legal case in 1987 was created DNA evidence was not used. Science does not, nor can measure all. And you argument that because something is not yet measurable there for does not exist is arrogant, narrow minded, and pure ignorance. Carl Sagan brilliantly stated ...just because there is no evidence... does not mean ebidence does not exist (paraphrased). The argument of science vs spirit has been around since the industrial revolution. In fact it was the great splitt of the industrial revolution. What is more valid...industry and science or philosophy, spirituality,and religion. SCIENCE is innacurate and over time this is proven because it has to change to accommodate or correct it's previous incomplete or innacurate beliefs, assumptions or theories. Therefore it evolves forming new theorems accommodating new information. Science is in many ways fluid and changing. You challenge that because something is not measurable, quantifiable, or duplicatable it does not exist or is valid. Yet your own principals of Choas theory dispute this. Feng Shui is rooted in the principals of sacred geometry of India. And while there are many different schools of Feng Shui as there are schools of medicine, science, mathematics, and other paradigms it is better illustrated as "earth wisdom" and EVERY indigenous culture practiced values of being in alignment with the earth for survival including but not limited to crops, harvesting, health, and other ecologically sound principals. The evolution of man kind has raped the earth of resources and then polluted it and not cared for the sacred crucible that sustains our existence. Mother earth. The type of Fend Shui I practice as one of the few cross trained practitioners is congruent with ecological systems. As an example...when the sun rises it awakens nature. Sap rises in the trees, and the earth cycles with this powerful force that is undeniable (even in your scientific paradigm of biology). Putting onez head of the bed in the east is physically beneficial in a variety of ways not simply "moving furniture around" as an aesthetic principal. My MA is in psychology and I graduated with honors. I also have graduate studies in Traditional Chinese medicine training as an OMD. I have studied the sciences and yes I have been trained in the mystical. I have also traveled the world 3 times and have experience with diverse cultures and belief systems. I Am no charlatan.... For me Feng Shui is a practice of eco green principals, psychology, medicine, and mysticism. It deals with seen and unseen forces...as does science and medicine. Various forms of QI are measurable. There is EMF (electro magnetic fields), magnetic fields, sunlight, and measurable frequencies for human electrical conductivity such as heart rate(EKG) created via saltatory conduction, and many many duplicatable measurable types of QI in the world. Perhaps you may want to do your due diligence and explore with curiosity what science has been able to finally create. Science, and scientific theory has taken hundreds of years to develop machines and methods to quantify what had been present and obvious for centuries and is still striving to understand, measure, quantify, harness, and duplicate. That would be QI in all its various forms. Human, animal, natural, and other. Feng Shui is more than moving furniture...it is about earth wisdom and how to harness all forms of energy seen and unseen, quantifiable and unquantifiable for benevolence, health, and prosperity, and protection. Some seek its use for malevolence and I have been approached and hired by many seeking both services. You are entitled to your opinion however mistaken it may be. Science can and does measure some forms of QI and has not yet developed tools to measure and duplicate all forms of QI. The lack of science does not diminish my practice. Nor does the ability to measure energy such as emf, pet scans, mghz, or other modern tools legitimize it. Earth wisdom, Geometry, Feng Shui, has been practiced successfully for thousands of years in a variety of ways by various cultures. Feng Shui is based in five elements theory of Traditional Chinese Medicine. It has been found effective for many. Even those who are critically minded have achieved positive lasting changes. As with medicine I believe that the practitioner and practice have alott to do with the outcomes and just as some doctors are more effective and more skilled than others...the same is for Feng Shui. I guess the same could be said for Buisness, law, politics and other paradigms. As I said,earlier you are entitled to your opinion no matter how mistaken or ignorant it may be. And as Carl Sagan brilliantly and logically reveals ....just because their is no evidence, does not mean the evidence does not exhist. Be well

Timothy What he actually says is if we don't create our own brains then we can't be responsible for the choices that follow from it. It's entirely out of our hands which brain we've got and therefore which option we select as a result. This is indubitably true. People just don't want to accept it unfortunately.

@@stephenlawrence4821 Well that all depends on what you mean by 'responsible'. Usually it refers to the entity making a choice being the primary 'chooser' of that choice and thus holding that entity 'responsible' usually for social reasons eg to discourage more undesirable choices or encourage more desirable choices in the future, or to plan for possible future choices that entity might make. None of this really changes from the argument above. The very fact that we undoubtably CAN be influenced by other peoples opinions means that we can and should be held responsible for our actions.

@@TimothyWhiteheadzm I think we know that what people believe is we can deserve the consequences of our choices. But if we are fated to select the option we select we cannot. Yes, as you say we need rules with penalties. But it does not mean those who pay them deserve it. They are just unlucky to be predetermined to break the rules. We should take that into account.

@@stephenlawrence4821 I think you are confused about the meaning of the word 'deserve'. You 'deserve' something if society deems it the best way to change your behavior. That is what it means. It has nothing to do with some determinism concept. And no, people are NOT predetermined to break the rules. We have the concept of 'deserve' precisely because our actions towards others changes their behavior.

@@TimothyWhiteheadzm Nope. I know what deserve means. It does not fit with being predetermined to break the rules because then it's totally out of my hands whether I'm predetermined to break them or not. The idea deserved suffering has anything to do with whether it will change my behaviour is laughable. "You deserve this suffering because it will change your behaviour". It's laughable and mostly punishment doesn't do that at all. So then why do we do it? Then we have the case of belief in deserved death penalty, what's that about then. Yes determinism does mean we are predetermined to behave as we do. It's one physically possible future we can get to from the past as it was. We are fated to select the option we do.

Nope. I stand by what I said.

The last minute of the video is exactly about how advancements are made.

Their circumstances weren't the same. Next.

That's a load of bunk. Siblings with identical circumstances don't all become criminals if one becomes a criminal.

It's literally impossible for their circumstances to be identical.

Even in cases of identical twins, if one commits a violent crime like murder, the other one is more likely to commit a crime than average, but it is still very unlikely to also be a murderer. So what different circumstances are we talking about here, different fingerprints?

All their life experiences are different. They diverge as soon as their cells split in the womb.

Wow such good critique, you should add the nuances you miss to actually make a point.

no really, what nuances do you miss? no use spouting an opinion if you're not willing to defend it.

I thought it may run along the lines of Schopenhauer's "you can do what you will, but you cannot will what you will." Instead, it's like you said... nice animation with nothing but contentious opinions.

if you want the nuances then read his book Creating Freedom. There you will likely find all the nuances and answers you seek.

It's only "defeatist" to the people who are in positions of unjust power and privilege. For all the unlucky people who end up in poverty and bondage, this way of thinking is a path to liberty.

How is this liberating?

It is liberating because it enables you to tackle systemic forces as well as personal problems (which are more often than not caused by systemic forces, there are feedback loops you see).

Sorry, I don't understand. What exactly is "systemic forces"? Maybe I should tell you about my story to help you understand why I'm asking these questions. I'm a drop-out. Until 7 years ago I was dependent on welfare (for about 2-3 years). One day I stopped receiving welfare and had to start working. Since then I got out of poverty with work (not even hard work), discipline (not even much discipline), as well as consistency and a solid dose of opportunism. I've been living with no financial worries since 6 years and things are looking better each year. I'm starting to work harder and more efficiently and I'm feeling better and better about life. Prior to my financial climb I was on the verge of losing grip on life, coincidentally that was during the time when I was fully dependent on the state. It was only when "the saystem failed me" when I was forced to take things into my own hands. That was the point when my life got better. I was making my life better, nobody else was doing it for me. "The system" didn't help me. It was when "the system" failed me that I finally got myself together. So, I'll ask again. How is UBI liberating?

Wow, your anecdote is sure statistical!

if you only do things when they are your responsibility than that says more about you than about this take on free will. You can't change anything because its either decided by randomness or determinism. a computer complies by those rules too, yet that can change, that can learn, without user input. feedback loops are a powerfull mechanism of this world.

How did you see the same video I did and determine that it said "nobody is responsible for anything"? That is not what it said. It said that we are not entirely responsible for our actions. We're partly responsible, and other factors are partly responsible. It's black and white thinking that is the problem here. As usual, reality is somewhere in the fuzzy grey of the middle.

It's different for everyone but a common theme among those who use drugs tends to be trauma. According to people (experts if you will) like Gabor Mate, childhood trauma in particular plays a massive role. Research in places like the Vancouver's Downtown Eastside seem to support his theory. I once listened to a speech by a woman who used to do drugs but is now in recovery. The way she put it, drugs literally saved her life. Her childhood life (note, childhood is not something we have much control over) was so traumatic that the only way for her to forget what happened to her was to either do drugs and alcohol or commit suicide. She chose drugs and after half a lifetime of being an addict, she received the support and made the decision to stop using. This is where the lack of free will thing comes in. It is impossible to separate the decision (choice if you will) to use drugs from the life that she led (with many aspects of her life being outside of her control, eg. her childhood). Similarly, the choice to stop using drugs cannot be separated from her environment (friends, family, social support, health care resources made available, etc.). So that's one way to develop an addiction. There many more ways... for one, our brains are wired to replicate behaviours that make us feel good. Drugs make us feel good so let's do them! Another possible reason is a consistent bias known as illusion of control. We think we can stop using at any point, but we underestimate the biological symptoms of withdrawal and overestimate our own abilities to resist the pain of withdrawal. The result is inability to stop using.

Aiyvas kzfaq.info/get/bejne/brCDhbuf0LzUiKM.html

Yeah, stopped watching when the cartoon girl took off her 'depression' hat. I guess "writer, artist and award-winning filmmaker" might not be the hallmark of genius society makes it out to be.

Appreciate the suggestion but it is the ability to just take it off at all that I was reacting to. Not how permanent that change would be.

Aiyvas If you actually made some arguments as to why you think that, I might give some resemblance of credit to what you say.

Your ignorance is reality