Quote:
Originally Posted by Guado
Well I think you just proved natural selection wrong. Or rather you will if you are allowed to reproduce. Never have I seen so much inane nonsensical logical fallacies in a single post. It was meaningless incoherent ramblings based on nothing remotely provable in the slightest.
|
Here ya go kiddo! Since I doubt you actually read the first post I made I will make this clear as I can.
Also, I said people who have committed sexual offense are more likely to repeat than someone who never has. I did not say victims of it had a chance to do something. I have no idea where you got that idea from.
Ok Guado here it is. Behavior spelled out for ya, and let's see where free will fits.
Of all the factors of behavior, it has been boiled down into three parts.
Firstly, genetics- this defines your senses capabilities and your body's potential. Some people grow up to be very tall, very short, double jointed and have red hair! There are some chemical factors involved that can alter our growth, so genetics is simply our potential. Also, many personality traits have been researched and concluded to be heritable (not all of course).
Second, history- This is everything we have experienced and learned. This is our habits and our conditioning. Some people would say this is all of our skills. Well the second something is absorbed through our senses and stored in our memory, it becomes our history. History of events, and history of environments. Such as understanding the world you live in now based on your view of it in the past. And the past is anywhere between 1 second ago to 1 million years ago.
Third, environment- This is the last factor that impacts behavior. The air pressure in the room, the amount of lighting, how hungry you are, how much caffeine is in your system, how much sleep you've had, the social forces at work, and so on. Clearly your history with the world helps inform you how to interpret each environment. And clearly your genetics help give you the information through your senses.
So my genetics give me the information through my senses, my history tells me how to interpret the data, and my environment normally tells me what I want and where I am(such as what urges am I under the impression of right now).
If the unit of analysis is behavior, the person really isn't that important. It is simply where the behavior is taking place. Oh no, I probably pissed someone off by saying that! So as a scientist we try to understand what combinations of genetics/history/environment will yield replications of results. Seems reasonable, but people hate the idea of no free will and take to attacking me personally. Yes, a good defense is calling me a loon!
Anyways, I think the absolute best example I can leave you with is this.
What happens when we take someone with no long term memory and test them in the same situation multiple times? Interesting direction to take this, I know. The reason this is so important is that it gives the researcher a new level of control over the subject. History will never change for this person. They will not add more data to their history, so that is controlled for. Also, genetics never change from day to day (well im sure somehow they could...) so they will be considered controlled for. So if we test someone with no long term memory function again and again the only thing we do not have direct control over is the environment. The environment is internal and external. We can control the room they are in, the temperature, the humidity, the lighting, but we cannot readily control their level of stress fatigue, amount of sleep they got that day, how frustrated they are, etc. One would assume if you made them conform to a pattern they would be easier to deal with, but that would be simply unethical. In light of that, I predict that if one tests a person with no longer term memory multiple times in the same situation, they will yield identical results. <------ that is a prediction. I am putting it all on the line. I haven't seen a creationist do that. I haven't seen someone defending free will do that. That is an enormous difference.
The famous saying is, you cannot step in the same river twice. Controlling every aspect of an environment is practically impossible. If nothing else, the subject will continue to grow older day by day. I am unsure how that would impact anything.
Also, I think I put a lot more into this thought process than you gave me credit for. A good theory offers a more fruitful explanation. Free will is just a cop out. "why did that person do that, because he chose to!" Failing to want to dissect and analysis the causes of behavior is rather hilarious. It's like saying, "why is the sky blue, because god wanted it to be!"
In closing, psychology has a long way to go. Their correlations are pretty weak most of the time, and it's hard to see the effects of what they do. However, each and every day we find out that people are in less control of themselves than they believe. It's just like as science finds out more about the world, less and less is attributed to god. "Why are their mountains, because of god!" Well we know that to be wrong, as we learned more about the world. This is why I do not hold it against you that you basically called me an idiot, you just didn't have control of yourself. Though, failure to recognize that this direction has a lot to offer is a bit... odd to me at least.