Social Social Thread - Talk About Anything (You Are Allowed to Talk About)!

[The Star King]

Well, AZ is famous for their Melee low tier love. So maybe they realized that low tiers are super-cool in 64 too, and started playing.

 

[ciaza]

It's impossible to prove something that in is unfalsifiable like God, but there is point in debating it. We discover things along the way and improve our view in general. Also fun.

Samus is fun because winning a match using solely spacing rather than combos is amazing. Uphill battles rock.

 

[Battlecow]

Never mind about the whole genesis friendlies thing then Nutz.

Artemis Fowl just met Petra Arkanian.

 

[StretchNutz]

why never mind? And I did not read Artemis Fowl. so that went a bit over my head.

 

[ciaza]

Aretmis Fowl - boy genius. In a nut shell. Outsmarted an entire race that had incredibly advanced technology.

 

[Battlecow]

You play link, so it wouldn't be the epic battle of the milennia I had planned because I'd wipe the floor with you unless you were possessed of a semi-Isaic skill level.

I made a post earlier about how it would be "Artemis Fowl meets Ender Wiggin" AF being the boy genius from AF and EW being the boy genius from "Ender's Game" (Both great books if you want some fairly light reading BTW)

You play link, so it would be as if Artemis met Petra Arkanian- Ender's friend's *****, who's smart but not Artemisianly smart.

 

[StretchNutz]

Aretmis Fowl - boy genius. In a nut shell. Outsmarted an entire new species that had incredibly advanced technology.

so I am a boy genius who has outsmarted battlecow? you did not adequately explain the reference in context.

edit: I main Link in a similar way to how Taj mains Mewtwo... I play Kirby and Mario in the real world. So you can slobber on my big slimy ****.

 

[Battlecow]

Read ma latest post brrrooooooooooooo it explains it.

 

[ciaza]

I never related you to him, I was just pointing out who he was.

Battlecow: Why wouldn't it be epic? Link vs. Captain Falcon on Hyrule can be tough for the Falcon.

 

[JaimeHR]

When you watch the olympics, what country do you go for? You go for your own and think: "Yeah, this guy is from my country, I want him to win!"

I have no faith on my country so I never expect anything big to happen but when it does, the media usually ends up messing up the guy/team who got a gold medal or won 1st place on anything important. Boosting up egos and giving way too much attention, which usually results in subsequent defeats and disappointments .

 

[Battlecow]

so I am a boy genius who has outsmarted battlecow? you did not adequately explain the reference in context.

edit: I main Link in a similar way to how Taj mains Mewtwo... I play Kirby and Mario in the real world. So you can slobber on my big slimy ****.

Why didn't you say so? My two worst matchups! This will be a fight to remember... Train, my son. Train hard.

Also I'm too busy slobbering on your MOM'S big slimy ****

 

[StretchNutz]

Link vs. Captain Falcon on Hyrule can be tough for the Falcon.

this is true. Moreover I have a very large amount of experience in that matchup. but it matters not.

 

[The Star King]

You play link, so it wouldn't be the epic battle of the milennia I had planned because I'd wipe the floor with you unless you were possessed of a semi-Isaic skill level.

Because there would be so much hype for Battlecow vs. Stretchnutz?

Spoiler

Battlecow would win.

 

[StretchNutz]

Also I'm too busy slobbering on your MOM'S big slimy ****

correctly played.
A bit like uair uair uair uair uair uair to up-b against Link. Not overly exhibitory but definitely gets the job done.

 

[Battlecow]

Links of a skill level anywhere near mine have no chance. You'd need a link so much better than me that he played other characters well enough to REALLY **** me up.

I've never met a person whose best choice against me was link and who could beat me.

Gotta go now talk to y'all later I love you all but not as much as I do SN's mom.

 

[ciaza]

Lol Jaime, reminds me of when the Irish beat England in Cricket. They were all: "yeah so we're pretty much the best team in the world right now", even though it was a huge fluke.

Battlecow the Link doesn't need to be good, just knows how to spam projecticles to keep the falcon at bay.

 

[StretchNutz]

A.) I don't claim to be better than anyone on these boards

Spoiler

except 3mmanu3lrc or w/e, I would **** that guy up

B.) there are many reasons why I would not play link when it mattered (primarily, he sucks.)
C.) I don't expect it to be hype, but I don't play smash for the fame. I think it will be a thoroughly enjoyable experience.

 

[ballin4life]

Yo I already said that the argument's over because it's impossible for either side to prove their point.

Ballin' I don't get your 1+1 proof 'cause I'm not a NERD but my thinking was something along the lines of "if we don't know that a=a (and that can't be proved, only assumed) we can't prove anything mathematically."

I agree that neither side can prove their point. But I'm the only one who presented actual arguments as to why my side should be believed.

Anyway, the 1+1 proof comes down to definitions. You can't prove anything if you don't have definitions. The definition of 2 (that I am using in this case) is "the successor of 1" and the definition of addition by 1 is "apply the successor function". So 1+1=2.

Asserting a=a is a definition of the equal sign.

And yes, math is based on axioms which are taken as given rather than proven. But there is still objective truth in the statement that:

(the Axioms of mathematics) imply (the Theorems of mathematics).

I'm very very tired of this argument. If you go back and read everything I have written non-judgmentally you will discover that I am right (that goes for everyone but battlecow and star king, who clearly "get it.").

I could say the exact same thing to you ... but that would be pointless, wouldn't it?

or not and then ur dum

Strong argument

Let's recap:

ballin4life: I think there is more evidence for free will than determinism
Everyone else: LOLZ DETERMINISM IS RIGHT
ballin4life: Here are my reasons
Everyone else: your reasons are wrong, determinism is right
ballin4life: well do you have any reasons for believing determinism?
Everyone else: ...
ballin4life: also here are some reasons why I disagree with determinism
Star King: LOL if you assume determinism is true then it's true!
asianaussie: stop making assumptions! just assume determinism is true!
battlecow: well, you can't prove 1+1=2! so you can't prove determinism is wrong!
StretchNutz: You don't believe in science! You're like someone from the 15th century
ballin4life: actually science is based on metaphysical assumptions
StretchNutz: if you re read everything you'll see I am right. You're dum

ballin is assuming he is in the right, and therefore if we say determinism cannot be proven, free will exists and is definitive

you cannot prove either, posting arguments would be futile because they would both make enough assumptions to make stretchnutz kill the nearest family

You can't prove the universe exists. I never said I could prove free will, just that I think there is more reason to believe in free will than determinism.

 

[StretchNutz]

I could say the exact same thing to you ... but that would be pointless, wouldn't it?

it would indeed be pointless because it is simply not true.

 

[ciaza]

Nice!

I can't see ballin' having a comeback for that one.

 

[StretchNutz]

this discussion got me so fired up I'm bout to go play some melee.
Ballin: <3, your fox is mad ****, I hope we can disagree but remain agreeable.

 

[ballin4life]

uh thanks!

I'm trying to visit a friend at UofA sometime ... if I do maybe we could play some ssb64

 

[Battlecow]

Yo bro you didn't win that one it was like at BEST a tie for you. Here's how it actually went:

Ballin: I believe in Free will because you can't predict what I'm gonna do next.
Battlecow: No.
Stretchnutz: No, no, no.
Star King: NO!
AA: um... No?
Ballin': And by that I mean that you can't prove determinism.
Battlecow: Ah, I see. Yes, I suppose it's all technically a wash, although truly random behavior still seems unlikely to me.
Stretchnutz: *Smartness*
AA: *Smartness*
SK: NO!

Ballin': Hey, why's everyone picking on me?

And yeah your axums imply ur theerums but how do u know that your definitions and **** are true HA CAN'T PROVE ANYTHING CAN YA BUDDY?

 

[DMoogle]

The universe is probably deterministic, but (1) it's virtually unprovable and (2) for all practical purposes, it doesn't matter. It has absolutely no effect on how we do or should live our lives.

 

[Battlecow]

A$ stepping in with (kinda) support for Stretchcow Battlenutz. Get at us ballin'.

 

[ballin4life]

Yo bro you didn't win that one it was like at BEST a tie for you. Here's how it actually went:

Ballin: I believe in Free will because you can't predict what I'm gonna do next.
Battlecow: No.
Stretchnutz: No, no, no.
Star King: NO!
AA: um... No?
Ballin': And by that I mean that you can't prove determinism.
Battlecow: Ah, I see. Yes, I suppose it's all technically a wash, although truly random behavior still seems unlikely to me.
Stretchnutz: *Smartness*
AA: *Smartness*
SK: NO!

Ballin': Hey, why's everyone picking on me?

Except the whole part where I, you know, gave REASONS and you all just said LOL DETERMINISM IS TRUE with no reasoning. And the thing is, there are reasons to believe determinism, but none of you brought them up.

Ironically, if we accept your summary as an accurate recounting, I would win the debate, since I actually made an argument, and as you said, all the responses were just "LOL NO" (my summary fleshed out the actual responses a bit).

And yeah your axums imply ur theerums but how do u know that your definitions and **** are true HA CAN'T PROVE ANYTHING CAN YA BUDDY?

As I said, I can prove Axioms => Theorems, in the same way that it's proven that the following is true:

Men are mortal
Socrates is a man
Therefore Socrates is mortal.

It's all tautology.

The universe is probably deterministic, but (1) it's virtually unprovable and (2) for all practical purposes, it doesn't matter. It has absolutely no effect on how we do or should live our lives.

This seems contradictory to me.

A$ stepping in with (kinda) support for Stretchcow Battlenutz. Get at us ballin'.

Nice support ... another person saying LOL DETERMINISM IS RIGHT with no reasoning (yes A$ I know that's not exactly what you said)

Do you keep using the phrase "get at me" because I said I hate that phrase?

 

[StretchNutz]

**** that. I gave so many reasons. you just can't read.

 

[asianaussie]

Free will is not observable. All you will ever see are actions, which may or may not be a result of free will, whereas observing actions and controlling variables can lead you to the conclusion that there is a cause for each action. Say you take some correlated experimental data. Is it better to assume that the correlation was due to the change in experimental variable, or because free will dictated each individual to act in such a way? Experimental data wlil never be failproof, but I see no reason to assume free will in the study of behaviour when you have controlled variables acceptably well.

Give us the 'acceptable' evidence for determinism, and give us your evidence for free will, succinctly. I have no doubt they'll either be 'they're my observations' or assume far too much to ever be taken seriously. Is your stance fully incompatibilist (ie ignoring and denouncing the validity of determinism), or do you acknowledge that there are causes for human phenomena?

 

[ballin4life]

Free will is not observable. All you will ever see are actions, which may or may not be a result of free will, whereas observing actions and controlling variables can lead you to the conclusion that there is a cause for each action. Say you take some correlated experimental data. Is it better to assume that the correlation was due to the change in experimental variable, or because free will dictated each individual to act in such a way? Experimental data wlil never be failproof, but I see no reason to assume free will in the study of behaviour when you have controlled variables acceptably well.

What experimental data gives evidence for determinism when it comes to humans? I don't see that at all. Humans are notoriously unpredictable.

Let's take an essay, for example. In response to the stimuli of certain patterns of ink appearing on paper, students will move their muscles in very fine movements to produce other patterns of ink on other pages of paper, and exactly which movements and ink patterns they will make is impossible to predict.

I know you will say that "Oh if we were like totally omniscient then we could predict it", but there is really no evidence for that claim.

Give us the 'acceptable' evidence for determinism, and give us your evidence for free will, succinctly. I have no doubt they'll either be 'they're my observations' or assume far too much to ever be taken seriously. Is your stance fully incompatibilist (ie ignoring and denouncing the validity of determinism), or do you acknowledge that there are causes for human phenomena?

My evidence for free will is that it explains my observations. I see that when thoughts come through my mind they can turn into actions of my body. There are also some thoughts and actions that do not have an obvious sufficient cause (nearly all of them, to be honest). This is very different from inanimate objects, where we can identify sufficient causes pretty well.

I don't know what you are talking about with regards to me making too many assumptions. I am not making assumptions; I am asking what fits my observations best.

What do you mean by "causes for human phenomena"? I think that physical factors can impact free will (drugs are an example), and I think that humans can take actions that are not dictated by free will (like sneezing).

 

[SSBPete]

according to chaos theory, no natural system can be measured and accurately predicted over long periods of time due to chaotic fluxuations in behavior.
take the weather for example: only approximations can be made about tomorrows weather and the day after and the day after and so on, because any slight movement, anywhere in the universe could potentially disturb the weather pattern over a very long course of time making it unpredictable.
therefore nothing can be determined before it happens.
therefore there must be some form of free will in humans.

 

[The Star King]

Lol @ Battlecow's and especially ballin's portrayal of me in the argument. I guess everyone missed this:

@Ballin Just to clear something up, I'm not necessarily arguing for determinism existing, although I do think it's probably more likely. I only didn't like some of the things you said in your argument. That's why I posted against it.

I even directed it at you, ballin :/

Spoiler

My signature is actually starting to annoy me.

 

[ballin4life]

I saw it ...

 

[HellxBound]

LOL DETERMINISM IS TRUE
I'm stretching Battlecows nuts, or something like that, but don't blame me I have no choice in the matter.

 

[Ocean]

this thread is silly.
almost as silly as the idea of determinism.

 

[HellxBound]

Ballin I am genuinely curious as to your reasoning behind "quantum physics supports free will", explain please.

 

[DMoogle]

This seems contradictory to me.

Comes back to one simple concept: what matters in life? I believe that what matters most is the maximization of happiness (how to go about doing this is difficult to determine).

My point is that the illusion of choice is so strong that whether or not our actions are technically predictable has no effect on the amount of happiness we gain from making choices. Stated differently, whether our choices are predetermined (although I don't like using that word... it may suggest that something other than physics affects fate) or not should have no effect on the decisions we make.

Hmmm, I'm not sure if I explained that very well.

 

[Battlecow]

Ballin' you make no sense here d00derin0. You're all "I haz evidence" but u dun has evidence, you just say things are complex and then you're like "well they're so complex that we can't accurately predict them so SUCK IT that's evidence for free will"

Get at me.

ON ANOTHER NOTE There's this melee tournament in Champaign and I was like "sweet let's play in it and do a console 64 side event Firo+buddies" and then I realized it was on the same day as PROM dammit. Normally, I'd choose smash over wimmin every time, but since I already paid like $250 for this **** I figure I should probably forgo the tourney and get laid instead. *sigh*

 

[ballin4life]

Ballin I am genuinely curious as to your reasoning behind "quantum physics supports free will", explain please.

I never said that. I said that quantum physics is nondeterministic, so it's evidence against strict determinism.

Given that one of the main arguments for determinism is "Our experiments in physics show that there appears to be determinism for inanimate objects" (which no one really brought up in this thread, strangely), I was preempting that by stating that quantum mechanics in physics has nondeterministic elements.

Now, truth be told, I haven't read much on the philosophy of quantum mechanics and the impact on determinism, and a brief glance at Wikipedia shows that there is some way to view quantum mechanics in a deterministic sense, but I don't know what the philosophical implications of that are, and I'm not sure that everyone agrees with that interpretation.

Comes back to one simple concept: what matters in life? I believe that what matters most is the maximization of happiness (how to go about doing this is difficult to determine).

My point is that the illusion of choice is so strong that whether or not our actions are technically predictable has no effect on the amount of happiness we gain from making choices. Stated differently, whether our choices are predetermined (although I don't like using that word... it may suggest that something other than physics affects fate) or not should have no effect on the decisions we make.

Hmmm, I'm not sure if I explained that very well.

Ok, it sounds like you agree with free will if you think we can make choices to maximize happiness. If the very idea of free will vs determinism can impact our actions, then free will already exists.

So it sounds to me like you're saying "if determinism is true, then we can't do anything about it, but if free will is true, we are better off if we assume that we have free will", which I suppose makes sense.

Ballin' you make no sense here d00derin0. You're all "I haz evidence" but u dun has evidence, you just say things are complex and then you're like "well they're so complex that we can't accurately predict them so SUCK IT that's evidence for free will"

When you are faced with two explanations which both explain events, you usually go with the simpler one, right?

ON ANOTHER NOTE There's this melee tournament in Champaign and I was like "sweet let's play in it and do a console 64 side event Firo+buddies" and then I realized it was on the same day as PROM dammit. Normally, I'd choose smash over wimmin every time, but since I already paid like $250 for this **** I figure I should probably forgo the tourney and get laid instead. *sigh*

lol

"I'm gonna get laid rather than play video games ... *sigh*"

 

[sharksquail]

sneaky ballin editing, but not wrong.

 

[DMoogle]

If the very idea of free will vs determinism can impact our actions, then free will already exists.

No, it doesn't. Think about it. If new information is gained, then the logical process just starts all over again. Free will doesn't have to come into play at all. DUCY?

So it sounds to me like you're saying "if determinism is true, then we can't do anything about it, but if free will is true, we are better off if we assume that we have free will", which I suppose makes sense.

Kind of a weird way to put it, but I guess that works.

Spoiler

In b4 The Star King posts about having to look up "DUCY."