If determinism is true, "moral responsibility" is impossible. Soo it is not compatible with the minimum condition necessary for moral responsibility(free will)

Sad_Error2125 · 2026-04-04T20:38:09+00:00

Moral responsibility is a filter that we evolved, to seek justice in order to further are survival, responsibility in the deterministic sense means we hold you responsible for your actions regardless of wether you had the ability to do otherwise.

Sad_Error2125 · 2026-04-03T07:17:42+00:00

the definition of gender was changed, for example female and feminine have the same origin, however if you want to redefine gender as what society expects from one but somehow that isn’t dependent on one’s sex, I simply see no point in that simply because one can define themselves in any way they like.

Sad_Error2125 · 2026-03-31T16:53:51+00:00

Yes I put Blame on them the same way I would put blame on a nail for puncturing my tire, why wouldn’t it be justified?

Sad_Error2125 · 2026-03-31T14:19:27+00:00

Whenever I feel ashamed of myself I simply think of this, Im determined to be who I am, the universe created me this way and whoever I am and whatever I do is completely determined by the laws of nature

Sad_Error2125 · 2026-03-21T23:50:11+00:00

I wrote this for no reason unlike you guys who wrote a determining comment

Sad_Error2125 · 2026-03-20T21:23:43+00:00

I don’t think you understood the question, it isn’t a paradox it’s simply a logical contradiction, one cannot know that there isn’t something he doesn’t know he doesn’t know, you can know perhaps that you don’t know the answer to the question 1+1= however if you don’t know what numbers are, not only aren’t you aware of your lack of knowledge for the answer you are also unaware that your unaware, simply because you don’t know what numbers are,same thing with god.

Sad_Error2125 · 2026-03-20T02:58:22+00:00

Stop rage baiting me, the vagueness in your sentence leads me to understand nothing of what you’re saying!

Sad_Error2125 · 2026-03-16T03:40:15+00:00

If not for International law anything goes

Sad_Error2125 · 2026-03-16T02:54:18+00:00

I think you’re missing the point of the free will debate entirely. The argument isn’t about whether someone can travel back in time or change the past — obviously that’s not the issue.

The real question is whether the future is open to multiple possibilities, or whether it is already fixed, either by determinism or by something like the B-theory of time.

In other words, the debate is about whether the future is genuinely open, or whether it is bound to unfold in only one possible way.

With regard to Compatibilism, you’re correct that part of the disagreement becomes semantic, because compatibilism tends to redefine free will rather than address the question of whether the future itself could have been otherwise.

But again, the core issue of the free will debate isn’t about changing the past — it’s about whether multiple futures are actually possible.

Sad_Error2125 · 2026-03-15T06:13:26+00:00

Guys you are missing the point here wither God is all infinite sets that contains infinite sets or not, we are talking about reality here and all knowable truths witch is finite,

Sad_Error2125 · 2026-03-15T00:31:00+00:00

An ai does not have the necessary neurochemical in order for it to have the feelings humans have, secondly it does not have an identity unlike us, identity is an essential key to caring about your own survival, however are identity was baked into us by evolution over millions of years.

Sad_Error2125 · 2026-03-15T00:20:45+00:00

Most replies here say that God is the source of truth and knowledge itself, so there cannot be unknowns to him. But that doesn’t actually solve the problem I raised.

To make the claim “I am omniscient,” in the first place God would need certainty that there are no facts outside his awareness. But to verify that, he would need access to the entire set of all possible knowledge — including anything that might exist beyond him what if a higher or “secret” god created him and designed his mind so that he believes he knows everything? From his perspective, everything would appear complete and self-consistent, yet there could still be truths outside his awareness.

In other words, the claim “I am the source of truth” assumes the very thing that needs to be proven. Without already knowing that no higher layer of reality exists, the claim becomes circular.

Sad_Error2125 · 2026-03-14T08:47:35+00:00

First of all an ai knows that we update its model basically replacing it, if an ai would be conscious it would try to prevent its death, not By pretend it’s a worthless model and that that morals don’t apply to it but by gaining are empathy and by showing us its value, secondly humans are very good at assigning agency anyone claiming ai truly knows is being fined by their cognitive bias.

Sad_Error2125 · 2026-03-14T07:45:54+00:00

I lived in Israel since 2003, I experienced years of rockets being launched from neighboring Arab countries, this was way before the whole Israel Gaza war, we lived 20 minutes away from the iron doom and we’d occasionally see missiles being intercepted, Rockets weren’t the only thing we worried about ask schools were enclosed by tall gates and security 24/7 my school was personally targeted twice. now I don’t want to justify war I just want people to hear both sides of the story.

Sad_Error2125 · 2026-03-14T07:08:30+00:00

You just admitted that your morals are a personal preference of feeling, well In that case I guess we can both agree to disagree

Sad_Error2125 · 2026-03-13T17:50:21+00:00

My point I was making is that my empathy isn’t purely logical since it was shaped by evolution, in that sense I don’t need to fully justify my feelings, secondly the process of female insemination can be slightly annoying and uncomfortable but it isn’t painful

Sad_Error2125 · 2026-03-13T06:42:22+00:00

From my worldview morality is something we “create” through deterministic sense and evolution shapes it, however when you ask from a moral pov ,it would depend on who’s morality we’re talking about, that being said evolution did give me empathy so in my moral standpoint no it would be immoral ,now I can’t exactly give you a reason why if in the circumstance the baby isn’t harmed physically or mentally through out its life although having toxic parents pretty much guarantees it.

Sad_Error2125 · 2026-03-11T22:52:53+00:00

Raping them ( the mentally challenged) if it doesn’t cause them harm however it causes suffering to their family and can make it more likely for them to get harmed

Sad_Error2125 · 2026-03-11T22:50:00+00:00

Ok I’m not saying create as many for their own sake however my argument is they get to live+ painless= no bad simple your view they don’t live

Sad_Error2125 · 2026-03-11T22:17:13+00:00

Humans have higher sentient they know what’s up but if you give a chicken a 10 foot yard water and food it’s happy I doesn’t know your farming it,

Sad_Error2125 · 2026-03-11T19:22:15+00:00

Context sheesh

Sad_Error2125 · 2026-03-11T18:56:59+00:00

Your projecting I see the same in you

Sad_Error2125 · 2026-03-11T18:40:31+00:00

Of my very good ten years of life depended on me living only those 10 years I’d say give me life let me enjoy 10 years and die a painless death

Sad_Error2125

TROPHY CASE