The way I remember it is one group got $1 and one got $20 for doing some boring task, like sorting or data entry or something. They had to then tell the next participant that they liked the activity. Then they were questioned about how the felt about lying. The $20 people were like welp I just lied for the money. The others rationalized that they did actually like the activity.

here's a summary, we were both sorta right: http://www.intropsych.com/ch15_socia...issonance.html

people do a lot to assuage cognitive dissonance but i don't think that's where you were trying to go. something like backwards inference

I would basically agree although we have some people in their early 20s here who I think are quite rad.

This woman was pretty mature for her age, but I did start to feel an age difference the more time we spent together. At one point we were exchanging stories about hard break ups, and I told about my ex who I dated for four years. Her longest relationship was like 9 months or something. Not that it's a competition, but I think our relationship experiences were just kind of different and I would probably be better off with someone a little more similar. Funny how now, being socialist polyamarous weed jews seems like surface level stuff

good news is, the other woman I have been seeing is 26. she's doing disaster relief work rn though and won't be back for a few more weeks

I sometimes wonder if everything we do is like this. The universe is deterministic so maybe we just act based on the forces around us and then explain those actions to ourselves later

Well, if the universe is deterministic, then not only our actions, but our feelings about our actions, would be predetermined. And if that's the case, there's no reason why the intermediary cause of our actions couldn't still be the same internal mental states and attitudes that we later ascribe the actions to. So, regardless of whether or not the universe is deterministic, we're left with the same problem.

gaaaaaah I can't right now

I do accept determinism as my lord and saviour

you explained that very well, dk. if everything is deterministic than everything is deterministic, including our discussion of determinism. it should be humbling to realize this. if everything is determined than none of us is really better than anyone else

could there be a degree of determinism?

like, for the outcome to be prescribed and set in stone, but that there are several mildly different ways to get there?

i've been going fucking crazy these past two weeks reading articles about the universe i think i'm gonna lose it

I know a lot of people like the idea of soft determinism because it seems to admit what we know is probably true while holding on to the idea that we can make decisions and have free will

But I think that's just a cop out. Hard determinism it is. The universe is a math equation and iamsixyearsold

Took's mom likes a lil soft determinism.

Chaos theory and random mutation make hard determinism seem impossible.

Not that either of those things affect our capacity for free will.

But is there really some ultimate chain of events stretching back forever where you can trace one thing being the result of a previous thing? It seems as though there have been some interruptions.

nah, the physical universe is absolutely deterministic. there is no real compelling evidence otherwise. the direction the water rolls over laura dern's hand is precisely determined each time by how the car is moving, how the drop lands, the force ian malcom used on the dropper, etc etc. but the output is determined 100% by the input. just because there are too many factors for us to correctly predict where the water will go does not negate the basic laws of the physical universe.

everything that is happening, will happen, or has ever happened is the direct unfolding cause-and-effect chain reaction of the First Cause

I'm probably remembering incorrectly. I remember quantum chaos type events that can't be predicted by prior conditions, which indicated that while at many levels hard determinism holds, ultimately speaking, it does not.

I'm so old there is probably new evidence available since I was at uni, which shows conclusively that hard determinism holds in all situations.

It's true that indeterminism has been observed on the subatomic level. However, it has never been observed above that, so even if it does exist, it ostensibly has no effect on the larger deterministic universe.

I know a lot of physicists think it's more likely that what is happening is a problem with our ability to observe and not actual indeterminism though

i do believe in teh_b0lly's degree of determinism thing. yes things are determined, but not every little thing has to be exactly the same for a determined conclusion to happen. the question then is where is that line. like if subatomic particles don't have to act deterministically and don't interrupt determinism, is it only subatomic particles? aren't we as insignificant as subatomic particles on a certain scale?

I see the appeal of that, but ultimately I can't help but think it's just a way to hold onto the illusion of free will. science suggests a totally deterministic universe

care to source that?

I can look up something later, but I know for certain that indeterminism has never been observed above the subatomic level. So any argument against hard determinism has to assume 1) that observed indeterminism is accurate and not a problem with our ability to detect causes and observe at this level and 2) indeterminism is occurring on a larger level even if it has never been detected

my biggest road block with the wiggle room determinism idea though is that it seems predicated on the concept that some events are "bigger" or "more important" than others. Maybe this is not exactly what you mean, but a lot of people I have discussed this with previously like the idea popularized in movies and tv that big life changing events are set in stone but the series leading up to them can be altered (Final Destination timeline physics with a course-correcting universe is a good example). But the universe and physical laws do not differentiate between an event like your death and a random molecule of your skin blowing away in the wind. these are human divisions

ah but death is not an event, it is comprised of many molecular changes/events. still you have a good point, and i'm sure if we got down to it we could find many events in a molecule of skin blowing away as well. i guess in a way these "bigger" things are triggered once some kind of threshold is reached, for example enough tissue dies in your heart and it stops beating. or enough blood drains out of you that your blood pressure can no longer be sustained at all and then it stops and then your brain stops getting oxygen since it is not getting blood and your brain eventually dies after a few minutes.

although honestly who knows apparently we all live in a hologram projected from a black hole or something

well duh

I mean even if it's predetermined it's still meaningless, so

A friend of mine gave me a bottle of wine
A true friend
respect

me drinking

No wine
no weed
no sex




listening to burzum

:(