elected4ever
New member
That is called being programmed into the heard Ferdinand. Maybe it is not smoking but eating the loco weed.:cow:
ARCHIVE: Open Theism part 2
- Thread starter Nathon Detroit
- Start date
- Status
Mystery
New member
:thumb:
I suppose I should have elaborated a bit, so let me add:
Robots don't have emotion. Robots cannot desire anything without emotion. They may indeed have a light that blinks to tell it's tech that it needs oil or whatever, but that certainly does not equate to a desire.
I'll second that emoticon :thumb:
themuzicman
Well-known member
Absolutely.
If (AppleColor==Green) {
DontEatApple()
ThrowItAway()
}
Else if (AppleColor == Red)
{
EatIt()
}
I've programmed this robot to WANT the RED apple and NOT the GREEN one.
If all we're doing is responding to that which pushes the right buttons, then wants and desires are nothing more that a complex set of conditionals evident in almost every programming language.
Muz
No you didn't
elected4ever
New member
Isn't it strange that we have the same human desires that other cultures have and are continuously programmed by the cultures around us.:wazzup:
themuzicman
Well-known member
Sure I have. When it discovers an apple, its processing tells it to eat the red one and toss the green one. It's simplistic, but without free well, this is all that "want" means.
Muz
There is not a causal relationship between want/desire/will (? compatibilistic). I can desire and want many things and not act on these desires in a deterministic way. I want to be rich, but I am not rich. I desire to be better looking or more fit, but I may or may not do something about it. I desire to not work today, but I am. I can respond to or reject my desires. Mind and will are related, but can also be somewhat independent. Just because I think something does not mean I actualize it with my will into reality. A practical application is that temptation is not a sin, but yielding to it is. Jesus was tempted, yet without sin.
Mystery
New member
What do you think it means when the bible says that Jesus was tempted?
No Muz, you're describing something without a will, not something without a "free" will.
elected4ever
New member
That is only partially true. I think we all act on our desires and wants in all cases to some degree. Just because we have not acted upon a desire or want is no sure sign that we will not. The opportunity to act on a want or desire may not have presented itself or a more desirable want or need may have replaced the old to produce a more perceived favorable outcome. A person acts on what is perceived to be his own self best interest at all times. That is independence and not freedom.
themuzicman
Well-known member
It has a will. It acts completely on its own. I don't stand there and make decisions for it. It makes them.
Muz
elected4ever
New member
Oh, please, lets not go there. He does not believe Jesus was the Son of God because he thinks Jesus could have sinned. If Jesus could have sinned then He was not the Son of God.
Mystery
New member
That's what I suspected.
Philetus
New member
Hey why don't we just call it "Cheep" will? How about 'irresistible' will.
We could then differentiate between nickel will and dime will. Maybe there is even a 'her' will and a 'him' will.
Just don't like the word free, do you, E? How would an independent will not be free? What would it be 'independent' of?
Having a will requires emotion, feelings. Robots do not have feelings.
themuzicman
Well-known member
Again, the confusion between unlimited ability and free will. Free will only refers to the ability to choose between the options available, not the ability to DO anything.
Muz
Muz
themuzicman
Well-known member
- Status