In our image

[Seraphis Cain]

One time I was at this party and someone had made oregano *cough* brownies and also pizza with 'mushrooms' that didn't come from the grocery store...and wow, I'll tell you...
Now that was an interesting experience...

I'll bet.....

[Mistral]

I get that hissing sound after a few minutes of silence. I always thought it was a brain misfire, kind of like seeing shapes and colors in pitch black that have no origin in reality - the complete lack of stimulation leads the system to create its own.

I'm really unsure if I should get into the debate on free will or not, since I'm not sure how much I could add that Skinner and Xaenn aren't already hashing out. Therefore, I won't.

EDIT:
Now here's a question that just occurred to me. Was my action predictable, given my past behavior and given data set regarding my potential actions?
...
I just got involved, didn't I?

[Xaenn]

I'm really unsure if I should get into the debate on free will or not, since I'm not sure how much I could add that Skinner and Xaenn aren't already hashing out. Therefore, I won't.

Get in. I'm just waiting on Skinner to keep hashing with me. But I always welcome some input from the great Zephyr.

[Evans]

EDIT:
Now here's a question that just occurred to me. Was my action predictable, given my past behavior and given data set regarding my potential actions?
...
I just got involved, didn't I?

It was a possibility, but not the expected one.

[Xena]

Skinner, if you believe in fate who do you believe decides fate. Or who writes "the book of fate" as it were.

Or does it simply exist?

[KnightofNachos]

I think free will is a clever illusion. Our actions are based purely on previous events and biology. If you were to take quantum mechanics into account, free will would be impossible. We perceive the fourth dimension and act upon it, but time is as alterable as space (although not by our hands, at least not yet). The universe would be severely screwed up if we could actually influence its very core systems. Stephen Hawking once compared our experiences in 4D with that of 2D beings. Imagine 2D squares that are living things. They're boxes, their houses are rectangles, their pets are triangle, etc. To them 3D is something that they are limited in perceiving, they sense only a small fraction, a percentage of its real nature. Beings that are free from the restrictions of 4D would compare our limited view the same way we could see the square people. For all we know they could have already visited us, but we cannot perceive them.

Besides, seeing life as a bunch of calculations is a bit cold hearted for me.

Someone once said it that science is supposed to sound painful. There are two types of people in the world: Those that find comfort in religion and spirituality, and those that find comfort in science. I'm the latter and you're the former.

[Skinner8]

Skinner, if you believe in fate who do you believe decides fate. Or who writes "the book of fate" as it were.

Or does it simply exist?

I generally assume the latter, although I try to keep an open mind since I seriously wouldn't know pretty hard.

Get in. I'm just waiting on Skinner to keep hashing with me. But I always welcome some input from the great Zephyr.

Well. At least between the two of us, there's not really much left to add on the subject. I was pretty much just throwing that in there for others to argue about. Boring of me, I know.

[Dingy]

Anyway...again, not about God really but about what we would do if we 'make life' and how much control we feel we could impose upon it.
Would we let them be 'free' or would we attempt to control...even if they were made...
In our image

We can make life. Different things may give life to someone, philosohically speaking, could be something seemingly inanimate such as music, which may give life to someone, but I understand you seem to be indicating the whole birth aspect of it. I am not sure I've followed the whole topic, but that's the first thing I thought of.

[KnightofNachos]

We can make life. Different things may give life to someone, philosohically speaking, could be something seemingly inanimate such as music, which may give life to someone...

You can't honestly be comparing vibrations to life, can you? Come on, you know metaphors aren't what we're talking about.

[Dingy]

You can't honestly be comparing vibrations to life, can you? Come on, you know metaphors aren't what we're talking about.

I think I was doing quite the opposite. And just trying to clarify as to what the whole life making meant.

[Allea]

Well I was talking more like 'robotic' life than actual birth or inspiration but you (Dingy) just creatively expanded this thread...
Obviously parents kind of 'own' their children...and inspire them with life through all the arts and intellect that each parent has to offer...

This leads me to wonder (down a dark path) such things as when parents are somewhat blamed because their 'adult' child commits a heinous crime...
We argue that the person was over 18 so they get tried as an adult but then the media interviews the parents in a way that holds them to blame for how they raised their child.
Would the creator of a robot that had infinite random intellect possibilities be responsible for the actions that robot took?
(I use the word 'robot' simply to mean artificially created by means other than sexual intercourse)
And no Beavis and Butthead (you two know who you are...) you're not allowed to giggle cause I said 'sexual intercourse'


Edit to add footnote to Seraphis Cain:
Suicide is Painless is a beautiful song...but not sexy, hun...definitely not sexy.

[Xaenn]

We argue that the person was over 18 so they get tried as an adult but then the media interviews the parents in a way that holds them to blame for how they raised their child.

Yes but the media is portraying it inaccurately. One's parents only have a finite influence in one's life. If that one still cannot find his or her own path at that age, then that one must be to blame. It would be no different for a robot, unless you were to consider that it was callous to unleash such a dangerous machine on the world. In that vein you could argue the creator is at fault. But really if it is an autonomous being, then it takes responsibility for its own actions. However, since robots are deterministic I guess ultimately you would be forced to blame the creator.

[Xena]

I generally assume the latter, although I try to keep an open mind since I seriously wouldn't know pretty hard.

Good answer. Thank you for your reply, Skinner8.