I bet you can't debate his argument

The slave isn't forced to work, he had the choice to work or not work, if he doesn't work however he gets beaten or killed.
Just because there are things out of our control doesn't mean we have no control on how to react to them.

And his main argument anyway was one: humans don't know all things and every possible outcome. In order to have free will they should know everything, because of this they can't make a choice properly but only open a door hoping to find something they want behind it. You wouldn't make a wrong choice if you already knew everything it would be impossible for you to do something wrong.

And every choice is shaped by will and desire, those desires are not chosen.

For example, why the slave desires to do not work instead of working? Why he wants to do not work? What dictates this will? Can he choose to prefer slavery over freedom when his body rejects it?

Ultimately the slave obeys to his survival instincts which are deterministic, making his choices deterministic, because the will to remain alive is too strong even if he doesn't want so

There have been many slaves in the prime years of their lives who have chosen to die rather than be slaves, the survival instincts aren't wrong enough it seems.

Humans grow up with the idea of avoiding pain, the survival instincts are based on this, if the pain eventually grows too strong then they may prefer to die than survive

But what if a human is brought up without the notion of avoiding pain?

He can't, humans grow up with the idea of avoiding pain because they can feel it, they would require a body without pain

Humans can be brought up to believe that the more pain they experience in life the more pleasure they receive in the next life.

What if there are two equal wants and desires for two opposite things? If that is the case you would enter into a state of perpetual inertia like the mule stuck between two bales of hay two equal distances away from him.

It's opium, and most people would stop believe in it as they grow up

Most but not all

If you had free will you could want to do not want something, but since you don't have a free will you can't stop desiring what makes you feel better.

You can only avoid it until you can resist, like you do with nofap, but you can stop masturbating only because the will of masturbating is not as strong as the will of breathing for example.

You are missing the point, if the Mule is hungry and stuck between two equal barrells of hay then if determinism is true he wouldn't move at all, the two choices would be even. Since cosmic sophists argument is that if you do A and not B it's because you want A more than B then if you are face with two equal desires and wants it would be impossible to choose.

You'd need to find the cause of the choice inside the Mule brain and how it is organized

You are doing the question, he has an equal want for both the barrels of hay, hence he can't decide which one to have because his wants are absolutely equivalent.

He wouldn't remain stuck because the will of survive(eating) is greater than the will of having the best choice, his brain would overcome this equivalency by making him choose the first or the second according to the brain logic in that moment

If his brain was built to ignore the survival instinct for the best choice, then yes he would remain stuck

This is why you have noodle arms and a supple belly. Asceticism (from the Greek, training) is based on the very basic idea that actions do change desire. Research on that in Orthodox context and not h*ndu or whatever.
Or stay slaved by cummies, fool.

Attached: 35241503_2231995346818409_7689658852043653120_n.png.jpg (650x431, 15.2K)

I'm sorry but that is the wrong order of casualty, he has already willed that he needs to eat, otherwise he would just walk past the hay, he already has the will to eat more than the will not to.
Now he has the will to eat he has to will which one, and since both barrells give him the same outcome (the best option) he wouldn't be able to choose.

Even if you change desire, without having absolute and full knowledge of everything, you can't know which one you really want.
Would you eat a cake if you knew it would give you cancer?

The will of eating the best thing is inferior to the will of survive(unless you have a Mule programmed to ignore it), the absolute will of the situation is the conservation and survival instinct not the situational choice.

Attached: 872232e0a1c437b78915df6881e8fa1a09690cae11a83af3ff0ab8faab4e0d93.jpg (322x504, 34.61K)

Answer the question below

Neither is the best thing, they are completely equal.
He wouldn't be in this situation at all unless he had already willed the will to survive, and now that he has two equal choices to achieve the same ultimate outcome he can't make a choice at all.

The survival is based on avoiding pain therefore pain has a greater value than survival, eating is based on survival therefore it has a greater value than "the best barrel of hay", when the Mule can't decide which barrel is better because they are equivalent the next dominion takes over for this decision and the logic is inherited

In order for the Mule to remain stuck "the best barrel of hay" should be the actual pain dominion, the first dominion

Attached: img.png (1152x648, 22.24K)

Not him, but i want a cake.
You know, a good old regular cake.
I'm interested in eating a rough approximation of the platonic idea of a cake.
If i eat some chemical filled abomination of an altered cake, that doesn't change what i want.

But if you knew a specific cake would give you cancer, would you eat it?

no.
i'm not getting what you are going at.

Knowledge alters every choice to a deterministic outcome.

...

Exactly, but not "a cigar" a specific cigar, like you can smoke another without getting cancer.

In order to do so you should have your brain programmed in a way to ignore your survival and pain, but humans are not programmed to do so they are bounded.

...

If determinism is true then you cannot even say that that is correct because you have been determined to say it, there is no objective you to say that it's true because everything and been determined by prior causes.

Self harm has been proved to be a way of the brain to vent about physiological pain, suicide is when the pain dominion takes over the survival dominion, indeed pain rules above your whole body and will actually make you choose death if confronted.

In a way I've been determined yes, but there is no first cause.

You're making more of this than you need to, the slave was aping his master in being "philosophical" and still gets beaten, that's the joke. Only someone who fancies themselves intellectual will ignore the feeling of free will in favour of the abstract notion of determinism. I'm entitled to ignore all deterministic claims because they change nothing.

By saying that the pain dominion has overtaken the survival dominion then your refutation at is rubbish because in this instance the mules Dominion of picking the best barrell of hay has then overtaken his eating and surging dominions.

It's the eating dominion that will make the mule choose A or B for first, but eating is a sub-dominion of survival

It's the same concept of inheritance in programming, if class A extends class B, you can say class A is also class B

Indeed according to buddhism for example, everything is suffering meaning everything is bounded to the first dominion of pain and avoiding it. I would say this is correct and survival built delusions to keep it far away from you

you're retarded, just because someone's actions are predictable, doesn't mean there is no free will, it just means that people aren't complete idiots.

No, I'm fasting right now. Otherwise I'd take a look at it and probably eat it if it seemed fine.
I don't care if it's not the autistically "better and perfect" (what you actually mean is the one that would bring you the most pleasure since you deny Absolute Morality by consequence).

But I think, like many modern young men, it boils down to your insecurity. You've never been punched in the face and neither are you familiar with unpleasentness or with the concept that feelings are not Morality.
Everyone decides things as though they are sure. If you didn't know for sure that clicking send would make a reply why did you do it? We all have expectations and make them based on sucess rate.
Stop making excuses to not get out of your comfort zone. You certainly don't make them prior to jacking off to some twisted shit in the internet to get your daily high, you don't know for sure that stroking your dick up and down will make you feel good in the future, yet you do it. Because you only make excuses to not do things that aren't pleasurable or have a perceived risk, slave.
You are pic related.

Attached: 1527727185271.jpg (650x718, 215.07K)

Except this isn't programming, if there is a property in A but not in B but A extends B then you cannot say A is Better because A has a property that Being lacks.

If you knew how to alter your soul or chemicals in order to make every possible choice the best choice for you, wouldn't you do it?

The point of choosing exists only when there are consequences to avoid like pain else every choice becomes equivalent

*You cannot say A is B

Yeah, no shit. We make choices to the best of our abilities. If we had more/better abilities some of those choices would change. How the winnie the pooh does this prove there is no free will?

Because you would be bounded to make the best choices if you knew the consequences. Like no man would "sin" if hell was real.

Perhaps that's not civilization?

So this is how it feels to be enlightened…

Not to mention that you're using a hypothetical scenario to make your case. Even IN your hypothetical scenario though it doesn't prove anything. Just because you can imagine a word where everyone makes the right choices, doesn't mean that they aren't making those choices.

it depends on what you believe to be "civil"

People were dead certain of hell's existence for thousands of years, and guess what? They still sinned.

Attached: Consider.jpg (569x428, 23.34K)

What makes addiction not the best choice? You are addicted to oxygen and food by the way, for the very survival
When you want something but not enough to overcome your main will, a sub-will which may grow

If that's true, which is not, then they were simply ignorant about the nature of sin like when the church killed people then asked sorry centuries later

...