I wonder what kind of colors animals with better eyes can see. It's awesome because due to our eyes we can only see so many colors, so we can't imagine what colors that doesn't exist within our chromatic range would look like, i'd still like to know.
There isn´t any scientific evidence, theory or hypothesis of an afterlife, is it? So how do anyone know if it´s real? So what about this one, maybe the color red I see is the blue that you see but we agree to see the same color.
"The best thing about life is not knowing what will happen, what we do shows who we are" -иохчх Pabst:"Aww, you're no fun Noxux. A Fight in a Flash
It's an interesting question about perspective noxux, given that we have no way to describe color except by being self-refeneratial (i.e. I can only describe the color blue as being the color blue). There's not much evidence to suggest we see anything substantially different though. Colorblind people will have colors blur together more (and it blurs along the visible electromagnetic spectrum), but they won't be seeing white where we see black.
I seriously doubt people actually see colors in a fundamentally different way short of hallucinating, but it's definitely an interesting topic to bring up how everyone may be seeing the same thing completely differently. It can be a useful thought exercise in understanding perspective and how reality may not be objective.
Here's a comic about the mantis shrimp, an animal that can see many more colors than humans can.
"Suddenly Frodo noticed that a strange-looking weather-beaten man, sitting in the shadows near the wall, was also listening intently to the hobbit-talk. He had a tall tankard in front of him, and was smoking a long-stemmed pipe curiously carved. His legs were stretched out before him, showing high boots of supple leather that fitted him well, but had seen much wear and were now caked with mud. A travel-stained cloak of heavy dark-green cloth was drawn close about him, and in spite of the heat of the room he wore a hood that overshadowed his face; but the gleam of his eyes could be seen as he watched the hobbits."
Its a mixture between common sense and religion. I don't really know if its a good idea to go all the way into with this thread. It just makes sense to me that you are free to do what you want to do (laws of nature withstanding of course). To believe that all of your actions have been predetermined or that you are guided through life by fate seem like an excuse to get out of things, imho.
In a rational sense I don't believe free will exists. I have the free will to kill myself or commit a criminal act but I choose not to. One because there's no justifiable reason, and the other because of laws. But with the freedom of choice, I can choose to permit myself to do both of these things, thus enabling me to have my free will. But with the freedom of choice, again, I choose not to do those things, thus, I don't have free will.
While there are logical limits, our emotions may also break them, such as when you're in an emotional disarray in times of depression or anxiety. If it gets out of hand, you may enable yourself free will illogically and attempt to kill yourself in various way. I think the same can be done in order to commit certain criminal acts as well, like drinking too much when you're depressed and then driving drunk and getting arrested while being out of control...of course chances are you could die so free will is enabled at this point, but the freedom of choice even allows you to die willingly at this point too.
This is a crude understanding of free will and freedom of choice to be honest, so it shouldn't be right at all. The second paragraph was also somewhat of a psychological interpretation. I don't want to think too hard about it.
Free will doesn't exist but that fact doesn't really matter. We still all feel a sense of agency regardless. People are just products of genetics and circumstance, but knowing that is ultimately irrelevant for daily living.
Let's say a person uses his lack of free will as an excuse for some criminal action. As a judge I find that to be a poor excuse. I say that if what he says is true, I too have no free will to stop thinking that his excuse is poor, and that I have no free will to stop my sending him to prison, so by his own logic he should accept that my excuse is just as valid as his and that's why I have to send him to prison, because it is literally the only thing I can do.
Basically the criminal is hoping to convince me to change my actions, but if free will does not exist, it was either inevitable that I let him go or inevitable that I send him to jail. So in a way a person who uses that excuse might believe in free will on some level, since they hope to influence my choice.
If the human race somehow obtains omniscience that allows them to predict every single event in the universe, then the lack of free will might matter, but currently it matters little.
I'm sorry everyone, but I feel like this thread is getting nowhere. I thought it was great we have a philosophy thread but based on what I've been reading in the thread, I feel like there's more Science and Religion than there is Philosophy. For instance, the first question: "Do computers have feelings?" Let me quote BL:
Blood Lord wrote:You got most of the forum being atheists and agnostics, a few semi-religious people, ever fewer religious people, and a hardcore Mormon. not exactly a subject that everyone wants to jump on and tackle.
There is too much Science going on in this thread that I am not sure if we are able to move on with a question that can come close to fitting the conundrums of philosophy. I wish I could propose topics myself here for discussion although I would need a copy of Philosophy for Dummies to refresh my memory on subjects I have forgotten myself. I will do my best to see if I can propose a question however, so don't hold your breath. I'm just tired of the Science vs. Religion thing; for instance, regarding the after life some of you are wondering if there is scientific evidence. As for the Religious people, all I ever get is some verse from the Bible that backs their argument, and to me, a book and a set of words doesn't help at all, it just makes their language more superior and that's it.
What I did expect from the thread was discussions about Life and Death, Morals and Ethics, Life Experiences (especially Near-Death Experiences), Language, Mind, Logic, Western and Eastern Philosophical Thought, Art, Language, Political Philosophy, Mythology, and many other topic's I've forgotten. So far I don't see that. Anyways, now that I've specified these I hope you guys can get some ideas out from them.
Speaking of which, let's do something different. If I'm not mistaken, I did mention this before, but I'd like to bring this up once more or the sake of discussion. Starting at 12:40 to 18:32 of this video, YouTube User TJOmega brings up a topic regarding Eastern and Western outlooks of Superheroes. Here, Voice Actor Crispin Freeman talks about how Religion affects the way we see Superheroes in the West and Giant Robots in the East based on Abrahamic Tradition and Shinto.
So once you guys are done listening to Crispin I would like to know more about your reaction to some of the things he said in that segment of the video.