crankypot.com

Following article is just for mind and logic exercise purposes.
Debate over if we humans have free will at all is old and debated to a pulp, and trust me it will not get settled here in this article. However, following arguments will show you that the universe with omniscient and omnipotent being, call it God if you like, free will is highly improbable, by any standard of human logic we use in today’s world. I will use omnipotence and omniscience terms strictly taken from dictionary, but for the sake of abbreviation and familiarity I will call it God.
From dictionary:

omniscient all-knowing (possesed of universal or complete knowledge)
omnipotent all-powerful (an agency or force of unlimited power)

Since God is omniscient (all knowing) that would mean that He knows past, present and future. And not only that but He knows everything else, including where every atom, electron, neutron and proton is located in the universe at any time. He is also omnipotent. Which means that He can also create and manipulate all matter and energy at will. (Logicians would probably stop right here and close the book, but lets play along and see what comes out of this.)
With that in mind, lets explore Adolf Hitler for a moment.

In the beginning (no pun intended) God could’ve created a universe in which:

• Adolf Hitler was bad (causing millions of deaths) or
• Adolf Hitler was good (lets say he decided to become a ballerina).

Omnipotent being could create either one of those universes, or a million different ones for that matter. As we know now, God creates a world with bad Adolf Hitler. It looks like Adolf Hitler did not have any choice in his course of actions since God already made universe with bad Hitler in mind. Did Adolf Hitler really have any choice here?
Lets see counter-arguments first.

You might counter this argument with following:

“God did not cause Hitler to become bad, God only knew that Hitler was going to become bad”.

In other words, God knew what Hitler was going to do (since God is omniscient), but He did not cause him to do it, he just let it happen (there goes your all-loving argument too).
Fair enough, but this argument is flawed. Here’s how.
Not only that God KNEW, but He also CREATED the world with evil Hitler. Every action starting from the beginning of creation of the universe leading to Hitler being bad was set in motion and was predetermined by God at the beginning of creation. Remember this. In other words, God had to put things in motion at the beginning with evil Hitler in mind, which eventually led to Hitler becoming evil tyrant. It’s a simple law of cause-and-effect. Hitler did not have any choice whatsoever, because if Hitler did have any choice and lets say chose to be good, that would mean that God’s plan to create evil Hitler failed and therefore God is not omnipotent. God not only knew the future but actually placed things in motion. He caused it. He is the Creator after all. At best He made Hitler make bad choice.
You might try to counter this argument with weak analogies like: “I know that the sun will rise tomorrow, but I did not caused it to rise, nor can I prevent it from rising”.
Fallacies right from the start.
First, you do not have a power to create the sun or stop it from rising for that matter, and you’re not omniscient. Therefore you cannot use yourself in analogy. We’re talking about omniscient and omnipotent being. It’s logical fallacy to argue like that. You cannot use non-omniscient person to prove omniscient theory which contains omniscient entity. It doesn’t make any sense.
And more importantly you DO NOT know for a fact that sun will rise tomorrow (again since you’re not omniscient). It’s highly unlikely that sun will explode, gets swallowed by a black hole or that the earth will get knocked out of its orbit, but you really DO NOT know for a fact that sun will rise tomorrow, so you cannot use that argument.

You can also use my child argument which goes like this: “I’ve created my child, but it was his/hers choice to become a gangster. It was his/hers free will”.
For one, you did not create your child with him/her in mind of becoming a gangster. God DID create universe with bad Hitler in mind.
Secondly, you did not have any power or knowledge to create your child as a gangster ahead of time. God DID have power and knowledge ahead of time. So most of the arguments here are deeply flawed.

Or you can use something more logical like following argument (I’ve seen this one a lot):
“if I put a bowl of ice-cream and a bowl of cauliflower in front of my child, I know for a fact which one is chosen, the ice cream. My knowing it ahead of time does not restrict my child from making a free choice when the time comes. My child is free to make a choice and knowing the choice has no effect upon her when she makes it.”
Lets see if you can spot fallacy here. No?
He is right. Knowing that something is going to happen ahead of time doesn’t make it actually happen, but that does not apply if YOU were the cause of something happening. Like putting ice cream ball in front of your child! Just by putting an ice cream ball in front of your child, YOU caused your child to eat the ice cream. You were the cause. If you weren’t there, then you would not be able to put ice cream in front of her. But again, you’re not omniscient being and you don’t know what will happen in the future so you could not use that argument anyway. If you throw meat and candy in front of the lion, lion will eat meat. There’s no choice. All you did was fed meat to the lion. You did not gave it a choice. You’re the one that caused lion to eat meat.

You would have better argument if you said that you’ve placed a ball of ice cream of vanilla flavor and chocolate flavor in front of your child, and child picked vanilla based on her free will. But there’s no way of knowing what instrument (instinct, appetite, intuition, free will) child was using in picking vanilla over chocolate so you cannot use this argument to prove anything. I also cannot use it to disprove free will, and I am not. Remember what I said at the beginning: “following arguments will show you that the universe with omniscient and omnipotent being, call it God if you like, free will is highly improbable” Argument with ice cream does not assume there’s omniscient and omnipotent being present.
Another argument you might have is that God can know all your actions but chooses not to. If that’s the case then God is not omniscient since there’s something He doesn’t know.

Beside, no one chooses to be bad or evil. Just think of the absurdity in logic here. If I gave you two choices:

1. Be good and spend entire eternity in paradise or
2. Be bad and burn in Hell for eternity.

If you really think there’s choice here, you’re need to see a shrink. What do you think would be a percentage of people that chose number 2? Maybe few schizophrenics and some masochist, but it would be minimal. That’s certainly not the case when we see choices people make in everyday lives. It actually looks like they don’t have any choices. Otherwise we would see huge percentage of people choosing the right path. This of course is all assuming that omnipotent and omniscient being actually exists.

Yet another argument is: “God sees all the potential possibilities we could take, and we get to choose which path“. So essentially, God gives you lots of options and it’s up to you to choose whichever you want.
This is also flawed since God already started the universe He wanted (see evil Hitler argument) and all your choices are predetermined and known ahead of time. God does not only sees potential possibilities, He acts upon one of those possibilities by creating the world we live in right now.

Conclusion

Just looking at it logically, there cannot be all-knowing and all-powerful being in our universe with us humans having a free will at the same time. Not only that, but claiming that all-knowing and all-powerful entity is not being responsible for any of our actions would be logical contradiction of enormous proportions.
That would be the same as if I would to create faulty circuit which I know for sure would cause fire but created it anyway, and circuit indeed caused fire. And then later on blamed that circuit for the problem by invoking a free will. No logic in that at all. Circuit did not have any choice here.
Think of it in simpler terms: All-powerful God creates world knowing that there will be suffering and all other bad stuff but he does it anyway, and then blames objects of His creations (us) for something He started and had previous knowledge of what was going to happen.
Knowing His own future actions, as well as every future occurrence in His own creation, and then actually putting all that into motion effectively eliminates the existence of free will. Therefore you cannot have both: free will and all-knowing and all-powerful entity at the same time.
There’s really no way around this problem. The only way for free will to exists is if God is omnipotent but not omniscient or vica-versa. But then again problem of omniscient and omnipotent being itself is logical fallacy. Logic simply breaks down. At least logic in the world we occupy. Logic we as humans learned. But what other worlds or logic you going to use? This is all we know so we have to debate the issue with what we know and understand.
There are so many contradictions and logical fallacies in theories like these that it’s going to make your head spin, but if you do have a valid argument I would love to hear it. Before you do, please read the article one more time so you don’t present same arguments but in a different skin.
Question still remains. Do humans (or any other animals for that matter) have a true free will (not predetermined by anything internal like your genetics and external like God) or we’re all just driven by cause-and-effect i.e. our instincts, appetites, desires, ability to anticipate, genetics and external causes?

Seventy five percent of Americans are God-fearing Christians.
Seventy five percent of prisoners are God-fearing Christians.

Ten percent of Americans are atheists
0.2% of prisoners are atheists

Something is truly wrong here. And I don’t mean numbers.

“A fire-breathing dragon lives in my garage”

Suppose (I’m following a group therapy approach by the psychologist Richard Franklin) I seriously make such an assertion to you. Surely you’d want to check it out, see for yourself. There have been innumerable stories of dragons over the centuries, but no real evidence. What an opportunity!

“Show me,” you say. I lead you to my garage. You look inside and see a ladder, empty paint cans, an old tricycle — but no dragon.

“Where’s the dragon?” you ask.

“Oh, she’s right here,” I reply, waving vaguely. “I neglected to mention that she’s an invisible dragon.”

You propose spreading flour on the floor of the garage to capture the dragon’s footprints.

“Good idea,” I say, “but this dragon floats in the air.”

Then you’ll use an infrared sensor to detect the invisible fire.

“Good idea, but the invisible fire is also heatless.”

You’ll spray-paint the dragon and make her visible.

“Good idea, but she’s an incorporeal dragon and the paint won’t stick.” And so on. I counter every physical test you propose with a special explanation of why it won’t work.

Now, what’s the difference between an invisible, incorporeal, floating dragon who spits heatless fire and no dragon at all? If there’s no way to disprove my contention, no conceivable experiment that would count against it, what does it mean to say that my dragon exists? Your inability to invalidate my hypothesis is not at all the same thing as proving it true. Claims that cannot be tested, assertions immune to disproof are veridically worthless, whatever value they may have in inspiring us or in exciting our sense of wonder. What I’m asking you to do comes down to believing, in the absence of evidence, on my say-so. The only thing you’ve really learned from my insistence that there’s a dragon in my garage is that something funny is going on inside my head. You’d wonder, if no physical tests apply, what convinced me. The possibility that it was a dream or a hallucination would certainly enter your mind. But then, why am I taking it so seriously? Maybe I need help. At the least, maybe I’ve seriously underestimated human fallibility. Imagine that, despite none of the tests being successful, you wish to be scrupulously open-minded. So you don’t outright reject the notion that there’s a fire-breathing dragon in my garage. You merely put it on hold. Present evidence is strongly against it, but if a new body of data emerge you’re prepared to examine it and see if it convinces you. Surely it’s unfair of me to be offended at not being believed; or to criticize you for being stodgy and unimaginative — merely because you rendered the Scottish verdict of “not proved.”

Imagine that things had gone otherwise. The dragon is invisible, all right, but footprints are being made in the flour as you watch. Your infrared detector reads off-scale. The spray paint reveals a jagged crest bobbing in the air before you. No matter how skeptical you might have been about the existence of dragons — to say nothing about invisible ones — you must now acknowledge that there’s something here, and that in a preliminary way it’s consistent with an invisible, fire-breathing dragon.

Now another scenario: Suppose it’s not just me. Suppose that several people of your acquaintance, including people who you’re pretty sure don’t know each other, all tell you that they have dragons in their garages — but in every case the evidence is maddeningly elusive. All of us admit we’re disturbed at being gripped by so odd a conviction so ill-supported by the physical evidence. None of us is a lunatic. We speculate about what it would mean if invisible dragons were really hiding out in garages all over the world, with us humans just catching on. I’d rather it not be true, I tell you. But maybe all those ancient European and Chinese myths about dragons weren’t myths at all.

Gratifyingly, some dragon-size footprints in the flour are now reported. But they’re never made when a skeptic is looking. An alternative explanation presents itself. On close examination it seems clear that the footprints could have been faked. Another dragon enthusiast shows up with a burnt finger and attributes it to a rare physical manifestation of the dragon’s fiery breath. But again, other possibilities exist. We understand that there are other ways to burn fingers besides the breath of invisible dragons. Such “evidence” — no matter how important the dragon advocates consider it — is far from compelling. Once again, the only sensible approach is tentatively to reject the dragon hypothesis, to be open to future physical data, and to wonder what the cause might be that so many apparently sane and sober people share the same strange delusion.

Calculate you GDI. This will show you if you’re a normal human being or a basket case. Highly entertaining though.
Mine GDI is 15.

Good luck

I was just wondering if we allow people like this to procreate.

HAYDEN, Idaho — A man who believed he bore the “mark of the beast” used a circular saw to cut off one hand, then he cooked it in the microwave and called 911, authorities said.

The man, in his mid-20s, was calm when Kootenai County sheriff’s deputies arrived Saturday in this northern Idaho town. He was in protective custody in the mental health unit of Kootenai Medical Center.

“It had been somewhat cooked by the time the deputy arrived,” sheriff’s Capt. Ben Wolfinger said. “He put a tourniquet on his arm before, so he didn’t bleed to death. That kind of mental illness is just sad.”

It was not immediately clear whether the man has a history of mental illness. Hospital spokeswoman Lisa Johnson would not say whether an attempt was made to reattach the hand, citing patient confidentiality.

The Book of Revelation in the New Testament contains a passage in which an angel is quoted as saying: “If anyone worships the beast and his image and receives his mark on the forehead or on the hand, he, too, will drink the wine of God’s fury.”

The book of Matthew also contains the passage: “And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for you whole body to do into hell.”

Mostar, Bosnia and Herzegovina 2007

My brother is in Bosnia and Herzegovina currently doing research for his dissertation. He lives in our native city of Mostar. There is no war or fighting since 1995 and city fell into what I call “post war coma”. Meaning, nobody cares about anything. Everyone minds its own business. No one rushes to do anything. If you are tourist or a stranger, you would not notice any national tensions. Or would you? Story below is a testament that city is still psychologically divided between Muslims and Catholics and my brother experienced it first hand.
Last week he got caught up in the middle of hooligan fight between soccer fans, and this is a short story of his experience in his own words.
Just click on the link to read the story.

Read the rest of this entry »

For all of you who think that Islam or Christianity is peaceful religion here are some excerpts from the Quran and Bible.
These are the verces that you will not hear in the church or masque. Just to show you how all religions are absurd.

Lets start with Quran:

Quran brutality

-Then he ordered for [sic] nails which were heated and [the tribesmen] were branded with those nails, their eyes, and they were left in the Harra (i.e. rocky land in Al-Madina). And when they asked for water, no water was given them till they died . . . . (Bukhari, Book of Jihad, no. 3018; cf. online source)

-When the Apostle of Allah . . . cut off (the hands and feet of) those who had stolen his camels and he had their eyes put out by fire (heated nails), Allah reprimanded him on that (action), and Allah, the Exalted, revealed: “The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His Apostle and strive with might and main for mischief through the land is execution or crucifixion.” (Abu Dawud, no. 4357)

-The Quran in Sura 7:124 says through the mouth of Pharaoh: “Be sure I will cut off your hands and your feet on apposite sides, and I will cause you all to die on the cross.” (Yusuf Ali)

-Here is the torture that Muhammad permitted: When he [Muhammad] asked him about the rest, he refused to produce it, so the apostle gave orders . . . “Torture him until you extract what he has,” so [the torturer] kindled a fire with flint and steel on his chest until he was nearly dead. Read the rest of this entry »

I am going to post 11 short (5-10 min each) videos and call them “Cure from Delusion – 11 Steps to rational thinking”
Why I am calling it like that? When you watch them you will know. I am agnostic and I was never a believer in Biblical God or God of any other faith, and I go by the code: Militant Agnostic – I don’t know and neither do you.
Purpose of these videos is to help you reach a “normal” state of mind and cure you from delusions and illusions, and help you use your brain for what it is maid for: “Critical Thinking” and “Common Sense”.
If you believe in biblical God you probably have lot of questions and I know lot of you are having doubts about the whole thing but you are afraid to admit it, and if you live in United States or Middle East, I don’t blame you. These videos are guaranteed to answer lot of them and after watching these videos you still have doubts then I am afraid you only have two choices:
1. Watch additional videos that are provided in this post
2. Or seek professional help. They might have pills to help cure you from delusion.

Here you go:

All videos can be found at the following site.
whywontgodhealamputees.com

If you still delusional after watching all 11 videos please watch following videos:

George Carlin on religion

George Carlin on 10 Commandments

Richard Dawkings Q&A’s from The God Delusion book discussion

Richard Dawkins: The God Delusion BBC Interview

Sam Harris on belief at Idea City 05

Pen and Teller about Bible

Michael Shermer – Why People Believe Weird Things

Johnatan Miller – Interview with Philosopher Colin Mcginn (Really awsome)

Johnathan Miller – Interview with Steven Weinberg

And of course to top all of this pick up the Richard Dawkins excellent book “The God Delusion”. Every question you have about God or faith pretty much can be found in the book and answered with logic and common sense only Dawkins knows how to deliver.
There are many many more but these should do and remember: I don’t know and neither do you.
Give your neurons run for their money and start the process of the critical thinking or at least common sense. If you don’t like any of the videos above BITE ME!!!