|
|
Post by King Bálor (CM)™ on Apr 21, 2014 18:30:35 GMT -5
If I understand you correctly, wouldnt flipping a coin be acting without reason? The general purpose of flipping a coin, would be to allow the side on which the coin landed to determine which choice the flipper will go with. They are relieving themselves of the responsibility of making their own decisions. This follows a line of reasoning, be it illogical in truth or only valid under a distorted form of reasoning. But the choice is made before the coin flip and if you were not allowed to choose, but someone else assigned you a side of the coin...there would be no reasoning on your part. Right? |
|
|
|
Post by Colter on Apr 21, 2014 18:33:19 GMT -5
This thread makes my brain hurt. Like a bad case of brain freeze.
|
|
|
|
Post by ~ Cymru ~ on Apr 21, 2014 18:39:56 GMT -5
Yeah I think so. where I live is quite rough my parents always told me if im walking home late to put my house key between my fingers if anyone trys anything, im protected. I walked across the bridge a few times and I always get this urge to throw my key I to the river. It would be physically impossible to retrieve it. And id be locked out all night until my dad came home from work at 8am. I've never done it but the urge is there. Sometimes I do stupid crap for no reason just becuase I like the idea that I dont know what could happen even if the consequences are bad and I know they're likely to be bad. I'm not sure if its a psychological issue or something but also when in a high place I like to get really close to the edge its an amazing feeling to be so close to death just one step a slip and that's it. Nothing makes me feel more alive than being close to mortal danger. Michael from VSAUCE discusses that psychological phenomenon in one of his videos. It's the same feeling people get when they feel the compulsion to jump off of a bridge, or push their friend off a clip. You don't do it, but your brain reacts in an odd way to the knowledge that you posses such ability to do that. This is why I asked if the brain can work outside of a distorted reasoning. Psychological Phenomenon, & Instinctual Behavior constitutes distorted reasoning. interesting, I've learned something today  |
|
|
|
Post by Turnbuckle Zealot(Phil) on Apr 21, 2014 22:33:36 GMT -5
The general purpose of flipping a coin, would be to allow the side on which the coin landed to determine which choice the flipper will go with. They are relieving themselves of the responsibility of making their own decisions. This follows a line of reasoning, be it illogical in truth or only valid under a distorted form of reasoning. But the choice is made before the coin flip and if you were not allowed to choose, but someone else assigned you a side of the coin...there would be no reasoning on your part. Right? If someone assigned you a side, you have the option to choose whether or not you wish to continue. Let's use a Football coin toss for example. The players agree to it as it is a harmless formality of the game. The reasoning is simple. They have choose to agree to e toss, as they wish to play the game, get paid, & potentially win as they love their sport. This is an act of valid reasoning based on the goal of the individual being determined as greater than the risk of the coin flip's outcome. I hate to be pedantic with that last sentence, as it's almost redundant, but I needed to be direct. |
|
|
|
Post by Turnbuckle Zealot(Phil) on Apr 21, 2014 22:36:45 GMT -5
This thread makes my brain hurt. Like a bad case of brain freeze. After training, your muscles are sore in a way from you'll benefit in your improved musculature/athleticism. The brain can experience similar sensations when challenged. Nothing worth doing is easy. Especially pondering valuable questions. |
|
|
|
Post by King Bálor (CM)™ on Apr 21, 2014 22:48:39 GMT -5
But the choice is made before the coin flip and if you were not allowed to choose, but someone else assigned you a side of the coin...there would be no reasoning on your part. Right? If someone assigned you a side, you have the option to choose whether or not you wish to continue. Let's use a Football coin toss for example. The players agree to it as it is a harmless formality of the game. The reasoning is simple. They have choose to agree to e toss, as they wish to play the game, get paid, & potentially win as they love their sport. This is an act of valid reasoning based on the goal of the individual being determined as greater than the risk of the coin flip's outcome. I hate to be pedantic with that last sentence, as it's almost redundant, but I needed to be direct. Then perhaps I'm not quite understanding the question. If the coin toss is to decide something and you are told that a coin toss will decide it, how exactly is that you using reasoning? Whether you choose to participate or choose not to, this decision is gonna be made with or without you. Do you see what I mean? By your definition the act of not participating would still involve reasoning. |
|
|
|
Post by Turnbuckle Zealot(Phil) on Apr 22, 2014 0:45:52 GMT -5
If someone assigned you a side, you have the option to choose whether or not you wish to continue. Let's use a Football coin toss for example. The players agree to it as it is a harmless formality of the game. The reasoning is simple. They have choose to agree to e toss, as they wish to play the game, get paid, & potentially win as they love their sport. This is an act of valid reasoning based on the goal of the individual being determined as greater than the risk of the coin flip's outcome. I hate to be pedantic with that last sentence, as it's almost redundant, but I needed to be direct. Then perhaps I'm not quite understanding the question. If the coin toss is to decide something and you are told that a coin toss will decide it, how exactly is that you using reasoning? Whether you choose to participate or choose not to, this decision is gonna be made with or without you. Do you see what I mean? By your definition the act of not participating would still involve reasoning. The original question was determining our capacity to think, in a manner where our brain isn't attempting to use a form of reasoning. By form of reasoning, I'm referring to reasoning that is only valid under certain premises being true, but these premises aren't true in reality. They are best described as distorted or hypothetical reasoning. There's still reasoning involved in your choice to not participate in the toss. The responsibility of making a decision was already relieved from the participants of the coin toss, when the choice to flip a coin was made. The reasoning lies with the person in question. They can choose to adhere to the choice attached to the potential outcome, or they can choose to forget about letting a coin make the choice, & simply take responsibility for their own decisions. There is some form of reasoning be it valid or invalid, being used by the individuals involved the entire time. |
|
|
|
Post by Turnbuckle Zealot(Phil) on Apr 22, 2014 0:46:54 GMT -5
I'm immensely proud to be a WFIGS member, after reading all the compelling responses in this thread.
We're making progress gentlemen!
|
|
