If there is no socio-cultural background, there is no human language; at the same time, the word exists in everyone's head, so language interaction will not occur unless you use words. Individuals do not create languages, they only use what society gives them. In Saeed (2009), the language is a mirror of culture and is determined by the speaker's own language category. Research on the relationship between language and culture, and the relationship between language and thought has a long history and presents a very useful proposal for contemporary linguistics: the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis. Language decision theory The concept of linguistic relativity was proposed by amateur linguist Benjamin Lee Worf in the 1950s, 22 Wolf defended the so-called language determinism and argued that the language decided the basis of thinking. As a result of this category, in language determinism, language formation is very powerful and it is even possible to cover existing recognition and conceptual abilities in the same way infants are disabled 23. Language determinism differs from the language as the language of thinking in that it separates languages ​​from the conceptual system 25, 26. This distinction represents a significant advancement of the previous proposal, but language determinism leads to unpredictable predictions of language, thinking, world relations Language determinism is a kind of assertion claiming languages ​​to determine ideas. In other words, people can not think about things that can not be expressed in their own languages, and can think only by the way their languages ​​allow. Language relativity (called Saphir-Whorf hypothesis) is the actual form of language determinism, which claims that the view of the world and the reality are determined by the structure of the language of the speaker. Reality is an explanation of how things are actually formed and it is not the way they are imagined. But trying to define the reality as another - reality is not reality - upon deciding the "real" state of things, this definition is distorted - this is stupid on its own

Freedom is the human value that has influenced many poets, politicians, spiritual leaders, and philosophers over centuries. For centuries, the poet was freely angry. Politicians suggested an ideal view that a perfect society is a society where all of us are free to live. Freedom and happiness In addition, we let philosophers think that freedom is an indivisible part of our nature, their lives question the concept of freedom and understand it (conversion dialogue, nd). Freedom and Determinism Since the 18th century and the rise of bacon science, philosophers and theologians have questioned: if human thought and behavior is completely determined by physical or biological forces What is the state of liberty? The problems of our time will be rewritten as follows. If human thoughts and actions are completely determined by our genes, what is the state of liberty? The answer to these two questions is that "freedom will not exist". However, behavior genetics teaches that the problem is based on poor science, so the answer is meaningless. There is no explanation about behavior attractive for genes. This way of thinking mirrors the false dichotomy between nature and cultivation. More importantly, even human genetic actions and explanations about the environment can produce imperfect predictive power. Therefore, Freedom and determinism - This question is whether human beings can control their actions and understand the motivation behind them or whether they are determined by the causal relationship of the power whose actions can not be controlled. Behavior is classified according to various theories as unconscious, environmental or biological. Genetics and environment - Personality is thought to depend mainly on genetics and biology, or environment and experience. Modern research shows that most personality traits are based on combined effects of genetics and the environment. One of the pioneers of this stage is C. Robert Cloninger who developed a temperament and personality model. One discourse field of modern science including human freedom is the concept of genetic determinism. Here, the concept of determinism is directly related to genes of human DNA. We already know that certain gene abnormalities can lead to various forms of human and mental illness of humans, so it can be certainly said that the human body is determined by their genes. However, genetic determinists want to further expand this, and we insist that even our actions are determined by our genes. In this way of thinking, we are only victims of our genetic make-up and efforts to change our moral character and behavioral patterns are in vain. This is sometimes called "Determination Theory", which means that we dance on a series of genes.

Every day in our life, everything we do involves choosing some decision, spiritual or physical choice. From the time we wake up every day to the second sleep, we begin to make choices and decisions. Some of the decisions we make are obvious for us. It is because we need to contemplate our choices before choosing. However, most of the decisions made during the day were not well thought out. We do not know well that we make decisions for customs and preferences. This encyclopedia entry relates to free will / determinism, and more specifically, it is a discussion of the concept that free will is incompatible with determinism. In the modern free-literature literature there are so many concerns related to moral responsibility, so part of the discussion will be a discussion for discussion. Fulfill "free demands" of existence. It is morally responsible for our actions. However, in this article we will focus on whether free will (or act on the basis of free will) is compatible with determinism. According to philosopher J. J. C. Smart, the standard discussion on free will focuses on the influence of determinism on "free will". But he believes that freedom will be denied, regardless of whether determinism is true or not. On the other hand, if the certainty is true, all our actions are predicted, we can not be considered free, but if the determinism is false our actions are random It is considered to be. It is not involved in controlling what happens. Author and neuroscientist Sam Harris also opposed free will in his "moral landscape". He offered crazy scientists representing thinking experiments, determinism. In Harris' example, a crazy scientist uses a machine to control all the desires of a particular human, thereby controlling all actions. In this case, Harris thinks that it is no longer attractive to say that the victim has "free will". Compatibility provides a solution to the free will problem. It involves a controversial mismatch between free will and determinism. Compatibility is an argument that free will is compatible with determinism. Compatibility may be expressed as a discussion of compatibility between moral responsibility and determinism, as free will is often regarded as a necessary condition for moral responsibility. The strict definition of a free will criticism is misleading. Because there is no single concept in the philosophical work of this concept. In most cases, philosophers working on this issue have pursued the characteristics of agents necessary for people to have moral responsibility for their behavior. Different attempts to clarify conditions of moral responsibility will produce different institutional descriptions needed to meet these conditions.

There are several perspectives on robust determinism to consider whether we are free when taking decisions and taking action. One of the ideas is a difficult determinism. J. Mackie explains the difficult determinism as "every action can be interpreted according to the reason, so it is inevitable". (J. Mackie) This is an outline of the basic idea that behavior and decision are not free. This is based on the view that there are several factors that can be taken to ensure that actions are done. 'Our choice, decision, intention, other psychological events, and our behavior Hard determinism (or metaphysical determinism) is a view of free will, determinism is realistic and not compatible with free will, so there is no free will. Hard sentence usually refers to law, but it can also be a position to be taken about other forms of determinism that also needs the whole future. Hard determinism is totally in contrast to soft determinism, which is a form of compatibility in determinism, arguing that there is the possibility of free will despite the existence of determinism. It is also totally in contrast to metaphysical liberalism, the main form of incompatibility, I believe that there is free will and determinism is wrong. Soft determinism is totally in contrast to hard determinism and liberalism, sometimes also called metaphysics. The difficult determinism believes determinism is correct and denies that we have free will. Metaphysical liberalism (not to be confused with the political doctrine of liberalism) determinism is wrong. Because when we act freely, it leads to a specific part of our behavioral process (our desires, our decisions, ours, etc.). Will act) is not intended. The problem faced by soft decision makers is to explain how our actions are determined in advance or whether they are free. Most of them insist on understanding the concept of free or free will in a specific way. They refuse the idea that the free will must include some of the strange metaphysical abilities that each of us has - that is, the ability to initiate events (our will and our behavior, etc.) It is not itself determined by causality.

Are we free? The problem of our freedom is the problem that many people think as a matter of course. But if you think more carefully, it will be questioned. A deterministic argument is that there are causes that affect all events or events. Therefore, for reasons, events must always occur and can not be generated in other ways. But the argument of free will is that as a human being, for some reason, we can take different actions from our behavior or have the will to act. Hard incompatibility does not deny that free will is incompatible with determinism, but that is also wrong, but they further believe that both determinism and non-determinism are correct. Even if they are caused by random events, we believe that our actions are determined by previous events and are free, so that our actions are free (Pereboom, 2009b). The definition of random events has not yet been determined, but they can still determine their effect. Therefore, the behavior of an agent may be the effect of a random process, but you can still determine the action using these random attributes. Discussion of this serious contradiction is based on our scientific knowledge and other aspects that we need to have sufficient agent causal relationships and have free will to enable moral responsibility and self agent concepts It depends on the fact that there is no evidence now. . 327 In other words, I refuse to argue the difficult deterministic argument, because I will not question the premise of incompatibility between free will and determinism nor argue that determinism is wrong I will not try. I do not know whether determinism is true or not, so I think it should avoid making rigorous determinism. Proposal This is not a controversy against difficult determinism but an argument against the rigorous determinism as behavior. This argument about difficult determinism is persuasive. It is certainly effective, and there is no premise that it is obviously wrong. I have found a firm argument to defend the difficult determinism, but most people think it is impossible to accept this argument. Because we make the wrong choice, we accept each other in our lives. - Now it is time I want to see campus changes when I cease isolation of campus Student clubs and organizations are increasingly separated by race and ethnicity as well as the lack of communication and communication between them There is also. A club with an "isolated" race has an effective discussion to provide students with a common identity with the support network. Otherwise, you may feel that it is culturally confined to campus like us.

Resolving determinism, accepting determinism and refusing libertarian free will have a profound effect on moral responsibility. In the most extreme interpretation, there is a form of moral nihilism. "God does not exist ... now, everything is allowed" [1] That is, there is no free choice if determinism is established and there is no moral responsibility without free choice. By incorporating robust determinism into its logical conclusion and evaluating persistence to theoretical results, this paper showed that moral nihilism is not a necessary consequence of morality in a rigid judgment framework. Philosophers and scientists who believe the universe is deterministic and incompatible with free will are called 'hard' determinists. Since moral responsibility seems to require free will, hard decisionism does not mean that no one is morally responsible for his actions. Although the conclusion is very contrary to intuition, some determinists argue that it is necessary to accept it for the importance of philosophical discussion. There is no choice but to intuitively believe in reforming freedom and moral responsibility. Other decisive determinists acknowledge that such reforms are almost infeasible and emotions and moral sentiments may have social benefits even though emotions are based on fiction. According to these thinkers these benefits are enough for them to quickly grasp the pre-philosophical beliefs about free will and moral responsibility. Deterministic decision-makers (not to be confused with fatal ones) often use freedom in actual moral considerations rather than concepts of free will. Indeed, in the face of the possibility that determinism requires a completely different moral system, some supporters say "Free will is worse!" Clarence Darrow, a well - known counsel attorney, appealed to his clients Leopold and Loeb to quiet by quoting such a strict determinism concept. In the summary, he declared that the Apostle Paul solved the moral responsibility problem in Roman letters as follows: In this way, even if these actions are ultimately completely determined by God, individuals can still be humiliated by his actions. From the point of view of your subject matter, you may seem to misunderstood a difficult determinism. Difficult determinism does not give everyone "permission to do what they want". I can just explain why someone did what I did. It does not include the morality of action - whether any action is "good" or "bad" (in amateur language, it is not that they are "doing good"). This decision (behavior is good or bad) comes from human morality. That is, morality may be influenced later by the belief in rigidity of determinism, but not by the essence of determinism itself. In other words, we believe in how we are promoted, how we grow, and ultimately "correct" and "wrong" (our "moral"). The decision process does not affect our point of view, we will not notice it. As a matter of fact, I feel that we have complete free will.

The free will to write a paper on the influence of determinism on the understanding of free will clearly shows that there is a will to write free will and our decision to neglect it is a decision. After reading this article, the authors decided freely to decide their intention to write a paper. I decided to write an article before I started this course. Therefore, it is unreasonable to say that determinism and free willingly conflict, as is the case with logic. According to philosopher J. J. C. Smart, the standard discussion on free will focuses on the influence of determinism on "free will". But he believes that freedom will be denied, regardless of whether determinism is true or not. On the other hand, if the certainty is true, all our actions are predicted, we can not be considered free, but if the determinism is false our actions are random It is considered to be. It is not involved in controlling what happens. Author and neuroscientist Sam Harris also opposed free will in his "moral landscape". He offered crazy scientists representing thinking experiments, determinism. In Harris' example, a crazy scientist uses a machine to control all the desires of a particular human, thereby controlling all actions. In this case, Harris thinks that it is no longer attractive to say that the victim has "free will". In this article I will explain various aspects of B. F. Skinner's "Walden Two" and its impact on determinism and free will through his portrayal and ideological influence. The discussion in this article presents a dichotomy between free will and determinism and ends with the support of free will. Any ideal definition will be discussed in the paper and the Walden Two's description is a poor imitation of the Republic of Plato which is a concise definition of whether a book is written or free Give free determinism of meaning Specifically, the metaphysical problem that influences free will is determinism - "everything that happens absolutely is to decide what exactly the same thing happens before the causal relationship occurred." It is obviously irrational to make high-risk decisions in life. It is not just the beginning of the rule. The possibility of additional evidence is not considered, but it also means absolutely absolutely. "Sentence of natural life" enables a decision to change a binding life

Many people want to know what affects their choice, why they do what they do, and why the world functions that way. Since things are determined by nature and cultivation, there are no other factors, so I like to insist that many people make choices. Others think that people have complete control over the choices they make and there are no restrictions. In this article I will prove that determinism is wrong People usually do not decide by nature, but cultivate the behavior of evil they do. The theory of determinism and free will can be seen as a difference between this novel and poetry. You can recognize that Chigurh represents determinism. Because he is realistic and every choice made by everyone is convinced that they will lead them to their own way and bring their own results. "Every moment of life is a turning point, each one is a choice, you make a choice, everything goes on, shapes are drawn, shapes are drawn, you can not erase the line, the shape of your road is first I can see it "(McCarthy 259). Chigurh explained to Carla Jean that all the choices she made were to sit in front of Chigurh and in fact her life was in his hand. On the other hand, in "Lost Paradise", Adam and Eve were given full free will from God as the first human on earth, and they failed if they could not be tried through sin. (Milton 27-32) My friend and I are talking about choice last week. You know the dialogue about free will and fate and the dialogue between progress and karma. Without a single view on this matter, I asked some of his thoughts about his life, his choices, and the past that influenced his choice. When he was fifteen he began working at a coastal luxury resort. Although he is young and diligent, he said he needs to escape from childhood to decide their own life in their own way. He told me about the weekly arrival of young women and their families. A constantly emerging new face wants to escape for a while, if their own choice comes back to their hometown In 2008, scientists compared free-will and programmed brains and decided whether we could choose something. If people think that our actions are determined by previous events and they do not have free will, how will the result affect moral responsibility? Since our actions are an unavoidable consequence of events leading to actions, are we responsible for our actions? Basically, what happens when we think that our choice is predetermined for us and we can not change it? When we believe that our actions are coming from free will and when we believe our actions are beyond our control, our actions are responsible and we are against ourselves I will be responsible. If you think that working hard is meaningless, you rarely try.

Determinism and freedom assume that each event or action has sufficient cause to cause that event. Today, in our scientific era, this seems like a reasonable assumption. After all, you can imagine those who claim seriously no reason for rain, plane crash accident or business success. Of course, human behavior is triggered. It will not happen without a reason. The type of human behavior that people are morally responsible is often considered to be caused by people involved in the act. According to philosopher J. J. C. Smart, the standard discussion on free will focuses on the influence of determinism on "free will". But he believes that freedom will be denied, regardless of whether determinism is true or not. On the other hand, if the certainty is true, all our actions are predicted, we can not be considered free, but if the determinism is false our actions are random It is considered to be. It is not involved in controlling what happens. Author and neuroscientist Sam Harris also opposed free will in his "moral landscape". He offered crazy scientists representing thinking experiments, determinism. In Harris' example, a crazy scientist uses a machine to control all the desires of a particular human, thereby controlling all actions. In this case, Harris thinks that it is no longer attractive to say that the victim has "free will". Compatibility provides a solution to the free will problem. It involves a controversial mismatch between free will and determinism. Compatibility is an argument that free will is compatible with determinism. Compatibility may be expressed as a discussion of compatibility between moral responsibility and determinism, as free will is often regarded as a necessary condition for moral responsibility. The strict definition of a free will criticism is misleading. Because there is no single concept in the philosophical work of this concept. In most cases, philosophers working on this issue have pursued the characteristics of agents necessary for people to have moral responsibility for their behavior. Different attempts to clarify conditions of moral responsibility will produce different institutional descriptions needed to meet these conditions. Many of the philosophical benefits of free will / determinism problems are based on concerns about moral responsibility because it is generally accepted that having free will is a necessary condition for moral responsibility. Therefore, if determinism excludes free will, it also eliminates moral responsibility. However, to distinguish free will from the moral responsibility problem (whether it exists, what it is, compatibility with determinism, compatibility with others) is very It is important. Some people think that there is free will and freedom is compatible with determinism, and I think that there is no other person who is morally responsible for other reasons. Some people think that there is no free will for determinism or other reasons, others oppose the traditional wisdom, others believe that we are morally responsible.

Free decision making theory I. determinism All terms must have meaning before appreciating the entire discussion over free will / determinism but give generality before exploring the meaning of each term It must be. Definition determinism is "everything happens happens" (Clifor Williams). Free will and decision theory: Dialogue "Page 3" This is the role of Williams in the dialogue of Daniel's belief and choice of defense. David Hume explains that the determinism is like this, in his article "Survey of Human Understanding of Freedom and Inevitability" in his article a little more deeply. "In all operations, this is generally acceptable. Discussion is often called "free will and determinism", but this is a wrong dichotomy. In other words, if the universe is deterministic, such a rule can exclude free will, and if the universe is not dominated by the determinism of free will, this is not true . This is not a fact. Such lack of certainty opens up "possibilities" for free will. This means that the label of "free will and determinism" is not sufficient for discussion about free will. That is why I have marked myself as a discrepancy not as a solid determinist. Not just determinism Discussion of free will is classified / marked in most cases as a discussion between "free will and determinism". This means that if determinism is incompatible with free will (if it is the case), it just needs to indicate that determinism does not necessarily apply, so that automatic possibilities are automatically opened That was a misunderstanding. In other words, when someone opposes free will, many people return to the idea that the universe may not be deterministic, denying this free will becomes their free will and savior. In the philosophical world, the concept that uncertainty contributes to liberation of free will is called free will of liberals (not to be confused with economic / political standpoint). On the other hand, people who accept determinism but still believe in free will be called compatible, and in most cases do this through a defined shift of the term "free will". Today, the discussion between the certainty of quantum mechanics, non - deterministic, unknown interpretation is still vibrant. The problem is that uncertainty seems to open doors to at least free will if we simply call the framework of free will simply as "free will and determinism." However, as many philosophers today tend to resolve determinism and uncertainty with free will, we recommend marking "free will, determinism / non-determinism". The fact that these terms need to be clarified to this extent means that the discussion framework using these terms disrupts the water in the discussion. Since the discussion has a long history that has been described as "free will and determinism", I think that this will be settled soon, so depending on whether these words exist or not, I will "free will and determinism / Non-determinism ". How are you using it?

The fate of the Greeks and their understanding of these destinies are somewhat similar to the concept of modern soft determinism. For example, although Edeps is destined to be great and exile, every aspect of his life is not predetermined in advance. In a sense, he seems to be in complete control, but in certain circumstances it is not. The handful of destiny is very tight, but it is not a handful of death. There seems to be only a belief in the fate of Greeks so far. Some aspects of their life begin from the moment of birth. King Oedipus was written by C. Sophocles between C.A.496-406 B.C. In this theater, Edepus is a good example of Sophocles' idea that fate affects people's lives no matter how much freedom they have. Although it is a patient decision and perseverance, it is necessary to learn by making fearful prophecies with the ability to conceptualize and control beyond someone. Edipus 'actions were decided before it was born, but Edipus' s behavior is completely certain. Oedipus, at least the main character of "Oedipus King", summoned his misfortune on occasion. Fate is necessarily defined as coming to someone. Sophocles, the author of "The King of Oedipus", wrote a tragic fate when he was born. Destiny means that it can happen, can not be avoided, or does not change. In addition, events that lead to other events may be the result of their own satisfaction with their destiny. "Oedipus the King", Sophocles expressed the essence of fate In Sophocles' s "Oedipus King", the tragic downfall of King Oedipu raised this question. His crime is the cause. Discussion about Edpith 's guilt and innocence can be done for centuries, but there are still no answers about right and wrong. The truth father of the King of Dibius, Leus said that if he marries Jocasta, from God, he will perish by the hands of his son. Avoid tragedy

As Richard Taylor discusses Metaphysical Metaphysics of Richard Taylor, freedom and determinism can be defined as a clear thinking effort. To think about metaphysical problems, we need data (people generally believe it). If there is inconsistency in these data, metaphysical problems will arise. To solve this problem, it is necessary to establish a theory to eliminate conflicts by (a) adjusting the collision data, or (b) by proveing ​​that the series of data is false. Metaphysical ideas have influenced many theories trying to solve deterministic and free conflict data. In the 1960 's, Richard Taylor published a metaphysical theory of free will that departed from the traditional controversy between determinist and uncertainty theorist and claimed new choice, self - determinism in academia. He called this new psychological model "agent theory" and according to it, insisted that "people - perhaps others - sometimes, but not always, but self-determining existence". In other words, he acknowledges that, in stark contrast to the incompetent role seen in incompatible philosophy, there are also people who sometimes cause their own actions. The problem of human metaphysics is very important in philosophy, but they are not the focus of this article. However, as causal interpretation plays an important role in these two doctrines, there are some important similarities between psychological determinism and genetic determinism. In addition, as shown below, concerns about genetic determinism may strengthen concerns about psychological determinism. Because the concept of causality plays a central role in various forms of determinism in philosophy and science, causality is further explained. Although there is no room to provide a detailed analysis of causality in this paper, we present several points related to genetic determinism (for further discussion of causality, see Salmon, 1997; Tooley, 2000) When discussing freedom, philosophers often quote indirect and metaphysical freedoms. Freedom of the environment is freedom to complete action without interference. Metaphysical freedom is the power to make choices among opportunities. Determinism, compatibility, and liberalism all take different positions for freedom. He insists that humans may have indirect freedom, but he does not have the freedom of metaphysics. In other words, although we stand up and sit down free, we are not really free to choose the way of life. For this purpose, we are at the mercy of the body and the environment. Using a fairly simple example, a determinist may tell me that I do not really choose to receive education. Instead, I was born in a family of educated people. Therefore, I think that this is an option, but in reality it is consistent with the event that occurred. Likewise, I always choose salty food instead of sweets. For me, this is an option. However, as my body needs more sodium than most people, the determinist may tell me I just reached for salt.

The aim of this paper is to prove that liberalism is the most consistent reliability and reason among three free will and deterministic views. That means the fact that the free will of man is genuine, not decisive and hence morally responsible. In response to the quote from this article, I opposed Wolf. With the help of authors such as C.A., this article will be further strengthened. Camper, R. Taylor and R. M. Chisholm. They advocated a similar argument, which proves another argument that basically one can be done. Incompatible people like Inwagen suffer from determinism, or at least in the context of free will. Determinism argues that past events produce a prescribed future according to the laws of nature (Van Inwagen, 1983). A common example of determinism is the default paradox of time travel. What you do in the past will affect what will happen in the future, but unfortunately the future will not change regardless of what you want to do, so the future will not change. When you apply determinism to something like intentional behavior, it means that what you are doing may be predetermined for what has happened in the past. In the context of free will argument, fellows agree with the concept of determinism. This philosophical view is usually presented in discussions on free will. Philosophers have discussed the truth of determinism and the truth of free will. This will create 4 possible locations on the diagram. Compatibility refers to the idea that free will is compatible with determinism in a sense. On the other hand, three incompatible positions deny this possibility. For firm incompatibility, determinism and freedom do not exist as determinism and freedom do not exist.

I can choose from two main dishes of pizza and ferocious putty, so I will eat pizza. Then your decision is based on free will, the decision is pre-determined. In order to fully understand if your action is derived from free will or determinism it must first be defined for each item. The determinism is that everything will happen due to some reasons and determinants that can be observed and measured. In short, determinism does not mean predicting the future. Discussion of free will is classified / marked in most cases as a discussion between "free will and determinism". This means that if determinism is incompatible with free will (if it is the case), it just needs to indicate that determinism does not necessarily apply, so that automatic possibilities are automatically opened It is a misunderstanding. In other words, when someone opposes free will, many people return to the idea that the universe may not be deterministic, denying this free will becomes their free will and savior. In the philosophical world, the concept that uncertainty contributes to liberation of free will is called free will of liberals (not to be confused with economic / political standpoint). On the other hand, people who accept determinism but still believe in free will be called compatible, and in most cases do this through a defined shift of the term "free will". Discussion is often called "free will and determinism", but this is a wrong dichotomy. In other words, if the universe is deterministic, such a rule can exclude free will, and if the universe is not dominated by the determinism of free will, this is not true . This is not a fact. Such lack of certainty opens up "possibilities" for free will. This means that the label of "free will and determinism" is not sufficient for discussion about free will. That is why I have marked myself as a discrepancy not as a solid determinist. Not just determinism Instead of focusing on just determinism, a better label for discussing free will may be "free will and determinism or non-determinism". Historically, many of the past free skeptics have adopted a more solid deterministic position against free will. Difficult determinism means that they believe that the universe is deterministic and that free will and determinism can not work together. Then the fact that there is quantum physics where the deterministic nature of the universe is questioned by the interpretation of uncertainty and the deterministic interpretation needs to be "non-native" is an intuition of long-term transient behavior It is a view contrary to that.

Indigenous son's naturalism and determinism "Today's big Thomas and its thugs are strangers but they hate them because they are afraid they do not know the reasons they are blind It is an incompetent pawn that exercises social power in a way. "This sentence reflects the most radical influence of the criminal racial discrimination situation in the United States. However, perhaps the most important role of this part is that it embodies the overall philosophy of light naturalism or social realism. Perhaps the most important argument about naturalism and free will is Peter Strawson's 1962 paper "Freedom and Resentment" which transforms the subject from its truth or free will of determinism into its Hume's argument. Rational "truth" which is completely independent from determinism. Or free will paper. This is, of course, a resting position, as we abandon the natural beliefs and there is no reason to bring sympathy for others, feelings of appreciation and resentment. Surprisingly, this famous Strawson article mentions only about Hume. This is a footnote that Hume denied "reasonable" induction. Therefore Mr. Stawson said that according to the so-called reaction attitude, there is no reasonable denial of moral responsibility. This discussion led directly to the subcompatibility of John Martin Fischer. Strawson is a "pessimist" - a true moral skeptic - a ranking for "optimist" - clearly compatible - and I want to harmonize them. Would you like to read this article? Or are you bound by the laws of nature? David Hume described the problem of free will as "the most controversial issue of metaphysics". The initial investigation of this ideology created several philosophical views supported by contemporary thinkers. The deterministic view is based on strict causality theory and denies the concept of free will. On the contrary, liberalism opposes this and supports the notion of free will and denial. The position that everything about us can be attributed to the laws of nature and the environment of our predecessors is called determinism. There is a philosophical controversy about compatibility (or incompatibility) between determinism and free will. Whatever this philosophical argument, if reliability is true, everything about us is ultimately beyond our control. There are two general correspondences to this problem. Firstly, some people reject the principle of control to maintain the way we do ethical evaluation.2 Secondly, we change the way we do ethical evaluation and maintain the principle of control To make it

In free will, determinism, and the life of a responsible person, there are many events that have a big influence that will change that person 's life forever. I hope that most of these activities are positive and will help him throughout his life. However, there are facts that it can not deny that bad things happen. It is not uncommon to hear someone wondering why the incident occurred. There is a doubt about the behavior of a person, and he wants to know what the motive of that person is. As we begin to cast doubts on our events in our lives, we begin to experiment with different theories that can be heard over time. Free will, determinism, moral responsibility and relations between distributors are taken into account. Defining a deterministic view here is that an individual has only one possible outcome in the decision context, not multiple results, in other words this person can not do this . This view does not deny moral responsibility or the phenomenological experience of choice. In the decision making process only one result is obtained, but from the point of view of personal choice, this final result is unknown during the review process. Criticism of recent comments and free will, determinism, moral responsibility, and psychological research on institutions. Evaluation of free will is confused with projects that evaluate ethical responsibility and self-control; similar operations that reduce freedom may also reduce agents. Keywords: determinism, free will, agency, choice Extensive incompatibility believes that both free will and moral responsibility are incompatible with determinism. Narrow incompatibility believes free will is incompatible, but moral responsibility is compatible with determinism. Semi-sensitive people are narrow compatriots who do not know free will and determinism, but argue that moral responsibility is compatible with determinism. For those who know uncertainty, at least in microcosm, many people deny that opportunities and quantum randomness are important to free will. Strangely, this includes a causalist who assumes a non-material cause (such as the cause of material thought), and a non-causalist who asserts that his intention and intent have not been canceled at all .

Discussions between free will and deterministic free will and determinism have been discussed for many years. What is the difference between the two? In the dictionary, free will is not limited by human forces, free choice, and external environments and institutions like fate and God's will. Free makes free choice possible. But determinism is the opposite. Determinism has such a definition: a philosophical theory that all events, behaviors, and decisions are inevitable consequences of the ancestry of human will. Discussion about free will and determinism Discussion on free will and determinism includes whether we can choose how to act. In order to be responsible for my behavior, I must be able to choose the way I act. I have no choice, so I can not blame it for taking action. From another point of view, the sense of freedom of movement occupies much of whether our character is determined by how we identify ourselves and do it. People are admired to make choices that produce good results. People with a high moral character will choose to act consistently. The ability to choose freely from among the options is the core of how we see ourselves. But what if we think that this ability to freely choose in alternative plan is just an illusion? What will happen if all our actions are decided. In the deterministic world, each effect always follows its cause. Things can not be what they look like Discussions between free will and deterministic free will and determinism have been discussed for many years. What is the difference between the two? In the dictionary, free will is not limited by human forces, free choice, and external environments and institutions like fate and God's will. Free makes free choice possible. But determinism is the opposite. I would like to make a leap - reasonable and I promise - and that rumor already guesses Dido's proposal or speculates her reactions . Furthermore, it was said that she was furious. If she is just a bystander, or if there is no personal investment, she will not take such emotional behavior. In addition to that sentence, the latter has an implicit Fama

Determinism and Freedom From the outset, the concept of free will is closely related to the issue of moral responsibility. Free will is defined as the ability to be released from physical, social, and psychological factors. For example, suppose that a person is neither a madman nor a child, and consciously and freely chooses a crime without being influenced by the causal relationship of past events. In contrast to the concept of free will, there is an idea that may not trigger the conditions of other events for the concept of determinism, or for all the events that occur. Freedom and determinism - This question is whether human beings can control their actions and understand the motivation behind them or whether they are determined by the causal relationship of the power whose actions can not be controlled. Behavior is classified according to various theories as unconscious, environmental or biological. Genetics and environment - Personality is thought to depend mainly on genetics and biology, or environment and experience. Modern research shows that most personality traits are based on combined effects of genetics and the environment. One of the pioneers of this stage is C. Robert Cloninger who developed a temperament and personality model. Compatibility and incompatibility In philosophy, the term compatibility often refers to the position in the problem of freedom and determinism. Intuitively, freedom seems to exclude determinism, and vice versa. However, some philosophers have denied this, arguing that actions can be free and deterministic, traditional problems are confusion thought caused by excessive attention to the meaning of words It is often added that it is the result of. Hume takes this position. In the eighth part of his "Investigation on Human Understanding," he explained his project as "necessary" and "free" which are terms of his freedom and determinism. Hume said that freedom includes acting according to your will, acting according to your decision. Freedom is not an unrestricted act, it is an act caused by the need, desire, decision of the person performing it. In understanding multiple positions of freedom and deterministic paradox, we can understand that determinism is the basic foundation of the determinist. The determinist believes the determinism is correct. If all the actions are triggered, then there is no free action. If there is no free action, no one will be responsible for that action. Therefore, no one is responsible for the action. Starting from the determinist's conclusion, they accepted the final premise of incompatibility. Incompatibility, for any action A, we believe that A is determined by causal relationship beyond agent control if A is determined by the ancestor. If the agent does not have control, the action performed by the agent is not free. Incompatible people end in a pairing statement: If the certainty is true, each action is determined by the ancestor, and if the certainty is true, the action is not free.

Criticism of Infant 's Decision The early experience can only decide future development. In his book, Chapter 2, The Three Temptations (1998), Kagan questioned the fact that Kagan unduly highlights the private life of the first two years. There is no doubt about its importance, but we believe that it is more important for human development to build experience and perception and to compare myself with others in the fifth or sixth year of life. His argument is reasonable, as infant determinism overestimates the importance of the past two years throughout human life. The next article analyzes and reviews three learning and development theories and their applications for educating children in Aotearoa infants and young children. The three theories I chose were the social and cultural theory of Russian psychologist Lev Vygotsky, the cognitive development theory of Swish's development psychologist Jean Piaget, and the attachment theory of American development psychologist Mary Ainsworth. - The intent of the introduction is to suggest a modified intervention for the "sports element" of the Pathways intervention plan, the basis of the revision is a socio-ecological model. This article describes the course of self-efficacy of physical activity, participation in physical activity, and the course of this part of the Pathways intervention program. Criticism of Infant 's Decision The early experience can only decide future development. In the second chapter of his book, The Three Temptations (1998), Kagan raised doubts that it unduly highlights the private life of the first two years. There is no doubt about its importance, but we believe that it is more important for human development to build experience and perception and to compare myself with others in the fifth or sixth year of life. Mary Ainsworth (Ainsworth and Bell, 1970) designed a test to judge the quality of attachment to a mother of a 1 year old baby. In this test called "unfamiliar situation", a stranger observes the reaction of the baby when the baby enters the room playing with the mother. Then my mother leaves, letting a child alone with a stranger, and my mother in a short time. Based on this experiment, children can be classified as "safely attached" or "not securely attached". When the mother leaves, children safely attached show some pain, but they are ready to talk to strangers. When their mothers return, they greet eagerly to her and if they feel uneasy, she can comfort them. Children who are not safe will respond in various ways, such as not reacting to the mother, refusing when returning home, feeling a terrible pain to leaving. Therefore, we refuse to contact with strangers.

The problem of free will and determinism is the mystery of what humans can do. The best way to explain it is to consider alternative methods to consider when deciding what someone should do as part of various "alternative functions" (Van-Inwagen). Robert Kane discusses the new version of liberalism with uncertainty. He believes that deeper freedom is not an illusion. Derk Pereboom took an agnostic approach to causality determinism and considered himself a firm incompatibility. There are three standard answers to the problem of free will. The first is known as "hard decision theory" and accepts incompatibility between free will and determinism ("incompatibility"), asserts determinism, thereby refusing free will. The second reaction is liberalism (which is also unrelated to political philosophy), it allows nonconformance but denies that determinism is realistic. This seems to be a promising approach. After all, is modern physics still telling us that the universe is uncertain? The problem here is that some kind of uncertainty provided by modern physics is not what the liberalist needs or wants. If the order soup turns out to be completely dependent on the laws of physics, the state of the universe 10,000 years ago, and the inversion of countless subatomic coins, the appetizer will not be more free than before. In fact, it is randomly chosen and it does not help liberals. Without the free will of the liberals? In other words, if there is no free will, or if the companion's free will is free will, is punishment reasonable? Discussion of free will and determination is important when examining the validity of punishment. Utilitarianism means that the citation of Jeremy Bentham is a theory that applies to "the greatest happiness for most people". Behavior is the greatest joy for most people. Most people are always winning rather than a few, and happiness is unique. Discussion of free will is classified / marked in most cases as a discussion between "free will and determinism". This means that if determinism is incompatible with free will (if it is the case), it just needs to indicate that determinism does not necessarily apply, so that automatic possibilities are automatically opened That was a misunderstanding. In other words, when someone opposes free will, many people return to the idea that the universe may not be deterministic, denying this free will becomes their free will and savior. In the philosophical world, the concept that uncertainty contributes to liberation of free will is called free will of liberals (not to be confused with economic / political standpoint). On the other hand, people who accept determinism but still believe in free will be called compatible, and in most cases do this through a defined shift of the term "free will".

Free will and determinism are like complex, intertwined and interdependent discussions like nature and child rearing, or even an ancient question whether it is a chicken or an egg. Philosophers have considered this problem for many years, but I am not satisfied with the answer. When discussing which topics to suggest for this assignment, I asked philosopher friends questions about free will and determinism. As anyway it does not affect our behavior, he feels this question is not worth asking. Discussion of free will is classified / marked in most cases as a discussion between "free will and determinism". This means that if determinism is incompatible with free will (if it is the case), it just needs to indicate that determinism does not necessarily apply, so that automatic possibilities are automatically opened It is a misunderstanding. In other words, when someone opposes free will, many people return to the idea that the universe may not be deterministic, denying this free will becomes their free will and savior. In the philosophical world, the concept that uncertainty contributes to liberation of free will is called free will of liberals (not to be confused with economic / political standpoint). On the other hand, people who accept determinism but still believe in free will be called compatible, and in most cases do this through a defined shift of the term "free will". Discussion is often called "free will and determinism", but this is a wrong dichotomy. In other words, if the universe is deterministic, such a rule can exclude free will, and if the universe is not dominated by the determinism of free will, this is not true . This is not a fact. Such lack of certainty opens up "possibilities" for free will. This means that the label of "free will and determinism" is not sufficient for discussion about free will. That is why I have marked myself as a discrepancy not as a solid determinist. Not just determinism

Determinants of Human Behavior Have you ever wondered what we have to do? Why do we get healthy when we are angry. When we are suffering, why do we cry? What inspired us to express our behavior in the various situations we entered? People can give us various answers, but there are two theories which are particularly discussed with each other. One view is that action is determined by the free will called liberalism. Some deterministic forms of the above form include human behavior and perception, but other forms of determinism considers itself as an answer to nature as an argument. They suggest that factors determine the behavior completely. However, as scientific understanding deepens, the most powerful versions of these theories are widely rejected as the sole cause of mistakes. Environmental determinism, also known as climate determinism or geographical determinism, suggests that physical conditions, not social conditions, determine culture. Advocates of environmental determinism often also support behavior decision theory. The main supporters of this concept include Alan Churchill Sper, Ellsworth Huntington, Thomas Griffith Taylor, and perhaps Jared Diamond. Controversial Social determinism refers to the theory that only social interactions and structures determine individual behavior. Consider specific human behavior such as having a specific sexual orientation, making a murderer, or writing a poem. Social determinists focus only on social phenomena such as customs and expectations, education and interpersonal relationships, to determine whether someone indicates any of these behaviors. They ignore biological and other nonsocial factors such as genetic makeup, physical environment, and so on. Views on nature and biology are regarded as social construction The biological theory of criminal causation is based on the genetic or physical characteristics of each individual and country. Although it does not mean that his child grows up as a murderer just because he is a murderer. "In the biological theory of the criminal causal relationship in the 1920s and 1930s, especially focusing on genetic mental deterioration, the eugenics of mentally disabled women have a mentally disabled child As historical knowledge, not all physical or mental disorders are hereditary (Schmallenger, 2009).

We began discussing determinism and free decision making theory and point out that human behavior can be determined by natural law if we can access all relevant variables. If you want to know someone's gene composition, the environment they are raising, the family they are raising, etc., you can make an effective guess about their behavior. For example, if a child has a very active limbic system (related to feelings and seizures), grows in a very poorly stressful environment, and if parental feelings are not obtained much, predicting it It is effective. Such children will show violence and crime in their advertisements. Discussion places these two views, determinism and free will on the other side of the coin - determinism means to exclude free will. maybe. However, like other words in the human language, its meaning is not simple and often complicated (ambiguous). Whether determinism and freedom contradict is up to the meaning and understanding that we use. First of all, determinism. One of the meanings that most philosophers seem to use in the discussion is the strict causal logic behind all events. If we believe that all input is given and there are physical laws governing reality, the output is determined in the same way as mathematical calculation. In other words, the latter event is "determined" by the previous event. Logically speaking, previous events are also determined by earlier events, if any, to the origin of the universe. Not only history, all future is decided in advance. Maybe I have wrinkles There are three standard answers to the problem of free will. The first is known as "hard decision theory" and accepts incompatibility between free will and determinism ("incompatibility"), asserts determinism, thereby refusing free will. The second reaction is liberalism (which is also unrelated to political philosophy), it accepts incompatibility, but denies that determinism is realistic. This seems to be a promising approach. After all, is modern physics still telling us that the universe is uncertain? The problem here is that some kind of uncertainty provided by modern physics is not what the liberalist needs or wants. If the order soup turns out to be completely dependent on the laws of physics, the state of the universe 10,000 years ago, and the inversion of countless subatomic coins, the appetizer will not be more free than before. In fact, it is randomly chosen and it does not help liberals. According to philosopher J. J. C. Smart, the standard discussion on free will focuses on the influence of determinism on "free will". But he believes that freedom will be denied, regardless of whether determinism is true or not. On the other hand, if the certainty is true, all our actions are predicted, we can not be considered free, but if the determinism is false our actions are random It is considered to be. It is not involved in controlling what happens. Author and neuroscientist Sam Harris also opposed free will in his "moral landscape". He offered crazy scientists representing thinking experiments, determinism. In Harris' example, a crazy scientist uses a machine to control all the desires of a particular human, thereby controlling all actions. In this case, Harris thinks that it is no longer attractive to say that the victim has "free will".

Harmonization of free will and air and Holbach's determinism The discussion between Air and Holbach believes that lack of certainty and compatibility with free will have problems. Holbach provided a strong reason for firm determinism in his natural system. There, he defined determinism as all things, and most importantly, as human behavior as the cause, we do not have moral responsibility because we are not free. About our behavior In the following paper I will discuss A.J. Ayr's "freedom and necessity" and explain the deterministic dilemma and Ayr's compatibility solution. I will explain some examples of what Ayer uses to explain the difference between cause and constraint and how two of them affect human free will. It also explains why Ayer's compatibility solution is the best solution so far. According to AJ Ayr, the problem of free will is the result of two different virtual conflicts, where men are responsible for their actions in their actions, human behavior comes from a causal relationship . Ayer first attacked the determinist. Determinism is that there is no voluntary intention, and all events and behaviors are determined by causality. Causal law raises questions about voluntary intention. Because they may not be able to act freely if their behavior is determined by causes and consequences. Subscribing to a weak determinism attacks Ayre's determinism and freedom incompatibilities. He stated that he had no compatibility, stating that the causal relationship invalidated his freedom. An incompatible position is to assert that freedom can not exist in the deterministic world. I think that we made P2 vulnerable because compatibility was ignored. We will publish this by verifying the possibility of compatibility. This survey will be driven by the concept of Hume's soft determinism. I think that this is the most notable discussion of compatibility. The average determinist believes that human behavior is not free. Paul Holbach is a deterministic deterministic philosopher who wrote an article titled "illusion of free will". Among them, he explained that everything is caused by something beyond his control. People generally have the motivation to pursue happiness and avoid suffering, but people can not help them bring pain and happiness. Anyway, a chain of endless causal relationships leads to inevitable behavior. An important example of the use of Holbach is toxic water. It proves that what they do is for the reasons, and that the reason is that a simple change made by the brain is to decide to choose people to do. This means that no one can control their behavior, as there is no way to control the changes in the brain that lead people to choose what they chose.

Billy seems to explain that using Time Travel and Trull Mama Dorian, you can not control the events of life after the destruction of the Dresden bomb without opening your eyes to see how the universe works . According to Billy's life, the plot traces the rapid change in time to reflect some serenity to the reader, reflecting the deterministic ideal of the novel. Uncontrollable time manipulation used by Vonegut on Billy Pilgrim's time travel caused a deterministic theme across the Slaughterhouse. Both sides of Billy's pilgrims may be destroyed in the five battles of Kurt Vonegut slaughter. I can teach war. In Kurt Vonnegut's book Slaughterhouse Five, the central character Billy Pilgrim is the result of the test. In creating and developing Billy's pilgrims, Vonnegut's goal was to show the influence of contemporary war to the sensitive person who tried to play the game in the same way as social expectations. Along with family influences, it shaped Billy's behavior in his two different lives: life and military life. The role of religion in the life of Billy Pilgrim is an important point of the Slaughterhouse - Five. At the beginning of the novel, the narrator told the pilgrims "As the assistant of a pastor at the Second World War," he said. The pilgrims tried to touch Kilgo Trout's novel "The gospel of the universe". Fictional novel by Slaughterhouse-Five Trout is exploring tourists' trips from aliens studying Christianity. "Why does Christian feel it so brutally?" Remember some of the contrast squid novels, the narrator and Billy pilgrims hope to create a new sense of Christianity and more humanistic Jesus. Slaughterhouse-Five is an exciting sci-fi novel with plenty of interesting themes such as space-time journey, philosophy of death, war, and aliens. In the novel Slaughterhouse Five, the main character Billy Pilgrim is not in the first chapter. Kurt Vonnegut, the author of this book, is the hero of this chapter (Harris). As Billy Pilgrim lived his life like this the books were written in a fairly random order. In the novel "Slaughterhouse Five", the imagination of the author gives the illusion that it crosses time and space without dying, and it helps overcome the reality (Westbrook).

Decision theory, objectivity, and pessimism on outdoor ship In Stephen Klein's short story 'Open Ship', American naturalist literary schools are used and three of the eight features are the most obvious. That work is a good example. Natural Rhythm School. Three of the eight features are determinism, objectivity and pessimism. They know better than others how Steven Crane looks at the world and the environment around him. The certainty is of course the most obvious of the three functions. In the two stories written by a crane, objects and letters mean more than their entity names. The two stories I refer are "open boat" and "blue hotel". These two stories were written in 1898. "Open boat" is a story about what the crane experienced in the Commodore wreck. "An opened ship" raises a deep philosophical problem and is filled with a symbolic meaning. (LRC - 1) There are four main characters in this story, their names or their thoughts and behaviors are symbolized in the story. "Open Boat", 1897 Author: Steven Crane (1871-1900) central figure: This story does not have a real core figure Steven Crane's story An open boat analysis. Everyone on board is told more or less, and prominent figures will not jump out from the reader as a central figure. Noteworthy are located in the correspondent and Billy oil can. Other features: Chef: Please give water from the boat. - Alfred Hitchcock in the rear window of the rear window of Alfred Hitchcock, L. Jeffries played by Jimmy Stewart was completely addicted to spending all the time while watching a neighbor from a wheelchair. He used a camera to improve his vision, thereby enhancing his role as a bystander and a voyeur. This will help you to create a movie that is playing outside the Jeffries window. In this "movie in the movie", the life of his neighbors became the theme of conspiracy.

The fourth world countries clearly reflect consciously the unfinished history. And it continues to insist on the self-determination spirit of millions of refugees who are constantly involved in struggle for justice and freedom to gain such a degree of sovereignty. A country with the right to restore dignity and self-esteem. These countries are known as "internationally unknown" countries. The term "Fourth World" published in 1974 with George Manuel's "Fourth World: Indian Reality" publication has a tendency to accept various indigenous peoples from indigenous peoples in that country. Literature has always reflected people's interests and activities throughout history. Therefore, from ancient times to now, several themes dominated world literature. One of the themes is greediness and generosity, which was explored by Guy de Maupassant in French short novel "The Necklace". On August 5, 1850, Maupassant was born in France near Normandy where he spent his childhood. He is the eldest son of Laure Le Poittevin and Gustave de Maupassant, both of whom are from famous bourgeois families. For students, literary enthusiasts, and reading enthusiasts, a comprehensive understanding of the biggest works of Oriental and Western literature and the themes connecting them. Literary books are a fascinating journey through great works of world literature, from Iliad to Don Quixote, and to great Gatsby. Whether it is ancient Greece, post classical Europe, or contemporary Korea, we rebuilt the art of writing at the time and about 100 crystal clear articles revolutionize novels, short stories, theater, and poetry I searched. DK award winning big idea Simple explanation As part of the collection, literary books use infographics and images to explain important ideas and topics. Biographical biographies of important writers provide insight into their lives and other writings, and the section on reading that detail details more than 150 additional works. Students do the following. • Identify the main theme of the extended novel and associate one or more of these topics with other literary works you read. • Identify important points in extended novels and link this point to short stories. Explain how important people develop with extended fiction and explain how these developments will help readers understand the theme of the novel. Please explain how the events of extended novels are related to the revolutionary ideas of the time. Analyze the artwork, photographs, poetry expressions related to one or more subjects in the extended novel, and

Whether quantum mechanics forces we to abandon determinism. Definition of Terms and Effort 1 Unpredictability and Uncertainty We assume a pendulum and describe its state s (t) only at time t up to that Bob's position. For simplicity, it is assumed that time is quantized with multiples of the basic time unit and if not disturbed, the motion of the pendulum is periodic; therefore, any state s (t) can be indefinitely Is executed. For example, let s (t1) = s (t2). This means that s (t1 + 1) = s (t2 + 1). Quantum mechanics of each person is a MOOC of four weeks and teaches the fundamental idea of ​​quantum mechanics which does not require complicated mathematical operations (calculators can not be used) other than taking square roots. The teachings of quantum theory do not "reduce" any material and give you the same version that experts used in current research. Mountain range 101 is a comprehensive and comprehensive overview of the mountain world. This 12-course course covers interdisciplinary research areas, focusing on the physical, biological and human aspects of Alberta and the mountains all over the world. Quantum computation is computed using quantum mechanical phenomena. On the surface, this definition is not particularly useful as it gives preliminary doubts such as "what is quantum mechanics". And, "What kind of quantum phenomena we are talking about?" Let's answer these preliminary questions quickly. Basically, quantum mechanics is the rule we have found to explain the world on a microscopic scale. Through years of experimentation we have made it possible to see microcosms functioning in amazing and seemingly unreasonable ways. Over the years, physicists and mathematicians have developed equations and rules that accurately describe the odd behavior of the microcosm. These equations and rules constitute the theory of quantum mechanics People have proposed many demands on quantum mechanics. Yes, my basic model is not built into quantum mechanics (as it does not establish general relativity). Well, it is a bit difficult to judge exactly what the essence of "quantum mechanics" is. However, like the physics I know, there are some very suggestive signs that my simple network actually has quantum behavior. I've been doing this for the past 15 years or so - more than I want. My main finding so far is that it is easy to actually find programs that are not clearly our universe. There are plenty of programs that have distinctly different spaces or times from how they are doing in our universe, or some other pathology. But obviously it is not difficult to find a candidate universe that is not our universe.

Almost all young people, old and young, know the so-called "social triangle". It is used as a symbol of dividing society into various classes. The class is also called "social class" which is the relative social class of income, wealth, education, status or power. Today, the existence of social class is very obvious. People are now experiencing social divisions to the three main groups that make up the "triangle". The upper class consists of wealthy people. Classificationism is unfair treatment based on low social class. The social class represents the economic strength of a person and is influenced by many factors. Historically, the class was determined by the birth of a man: they were born to a family with aristocrats, higher castes, or mass wealth. Determining who is a nobility and who is progressing, the process of the era of renaissance, enlightenment, industrial revolution helps to increase literacy rate and make education social liquidity (change of social class and more Accumulation of many wealth). Signature. Today it is difficult to discuss classicalism without arguing about a part of race, sex, religion, other individual identity, apart from social class. crossover Classificationism is based on different treatment of social class or perceived social class. Classificationism is a systematic repression of a subclass group, which contributes to strengthening the dominant group. It is a systematic allocation based on social class values ​​and abilities. Those owning or controlling the middle class and its classes (members of the main group) are considered smarter and expressive than the working class and the poor (subordinate group). In this way, the predominant group members (middle class and wealthy people) define "normal" or "acceptable" in the class hierarchy for others.

We should not condemn others or admire others, this is not their choice. From beginning to end, we are helpless and blind. There is no moral responsibility. Some of the reasons the deterministe raises are human nature, which means that people are born with a basic intuition that affects their behavior. The other is the environmental impact. It simply means that people are shaped by their environment and conditioned by their experience. In addition, social mechanics, ie the social forces, ie the social biological and psychological forces influenced by people, are dominated by psychological power. The determinism is (i) irresponsible for the lack of free will (ie human behavior is determined not by human freedom but by the laws of nature and the state of the world) and (ii) human behavior It seems to imply that it is. You can freely choose to do anything). Not all existentialists reject the laws of nature under the category law (that is, not all science is wrong), but we believe we have free will. Therefore, the key theme of existentialism is (i) to assert that we are free, and (ii) to clarify what that means. The history of philosophy has always been dominated by competition arguments over free will and deterministic thinking. Simply put, the problem is whether we should think that human beings can choose actions and shape their lives fundamentally free - or whether they should be considered to be determined by their strength beyond their control , They are destiny, biology, politics or class. The failure rate of some people is rising and we can easily assert that responsibility for things is always outside of ourselves. Tell us that their life is totally on parents, school, government, boss, media. In addition to ourselves. The result is fundamental low achievement and self deception There are three standard answers to the problem of free will. The first is known as "hard decision theory" and accepts incompatibility between free will and determinism ("incompatibility"), asserts determinism, thereby refusing free will. The second reaction is liberalism (which is also unrelated to political philosophy), it accepts incompatibility, but denies that determinism is realistic. This seems to be a promising approach. After all, is modern physics still telling us that the universe is uncertain? The problem here is that some kind of uncertainty provided by modern physics is not what the liberalist needs or wants. If the order soup turns out to be completely dependent on the laws of physics, the state of the universe 10,000 years ago, and the inversion of countless subatomic coins, the appetizer will not be more free than before. In fact, it is randomly chosen and it does not help liberals.

Edips' self-importance has made him unreasonably dealt with the news that he is a murderer. This led to false claims and allegations against Tiresias and Creon. When actually making a difference in his kingdom he actually proves how blind he is indeed. If Kryon decides to take a political action such as a coup daughter, he also risks life. Generally, once again we see again that blindness to the truth of Edps has made his fate permanent, leading him to the path of degeneration. Sophocles' "Oedipus King": Fate and freedom of the king of Oedipus, one of the most popular plays of Sophie, Sophocles obviously depicts the Greeks The general view of fate is the human willingness to do Despite this, it will affect the lives of men. People freely choose and ultimately are responsible for their actions. Throughout the whole of Edips, the concept of fate and free willing plays an essential role in the destruction of Edepus. Oedipus was partially led by fate, destined to marry his mother and kill his father. King Oedipus was written by C. Sophocles between C.A.496-406 B.C. In this theater, Edepus is a good example of Sophocles' idea that fate affects people's lives no matter how much freedom they have. Although it is a patient decision and perseverance, it is necessary to learn by making fearful prophecies with the ability to conceptualize and control beyond someone. Edipus 'actions were decided before it was born, but Edipus' s behavior is completely certain. Sophocles Oedipus King's Fate and Free Will In the King of Oedipus of Sophocles, the theme of fate and free will is very strong in the theater. However, only one person brought down the Edps and the death. These two points can be said to have great effect. In ancient Greece, fate was thought to be an important part of daily life. Every aspect of life depends on fate (Nagle 100). Humans have free will, and it is widely believed that everyone can decide the outcome of their life.

The story of Stephen Craft 's "No free will" in this issue is one of the most interesting and enthusiastic discussions this month in the Atlantic Ocean. The galaxy known as the philosophical problem of 'free will and determinism' is where morality and physics are combined. This is a very important topic, and this topic is very interesting. The relationship between physics law and ethical law is intuitive for most people. How are we responsible for these actions if the rules governing the universe are outside ourselves and are applied to our actions before we are born? However, as some readers are already doing it, it is worth studying carefully. This shows the possibility that purely deterministic universe eliminates free will. If our choice is dominated by chemical interactions in the brain, it is not conscious or potential awareness, they are not choices or free will. The only possibility of free will is the quantum interaction in the brain, which may or may not be present (there is no evidence in either case) According to this line, the jury is worried about whether we have free will. Because it depends on the physics discovered about the randomness of our brain decision making process. Basically, the idea here is to do something - to do it freely - we need to be able to do other things. We need multiple choices and alternative possibilities How does randomness lead to free will? It is not the point of my daily decision that I am thinking, whether it is coffee or coffee, highway or street, comma or comma. Coin I will do one of things, the other is a completely random tail. Does this seem a bit like free will? Did you head up, drink coffee, tail, take face and tail, put commas and choose meaningful? After all, we can see strange but attractive bacteria here. If we are morally responsible it may be due to other reasons. A few years ago, I wrote my own article and advocated this idea called "semicombination". For his biggest champion, California philosopher named John Martin Fischer, it has a place in the philosophical circle. For now it is still a peripheral vision, hoping to overthrow the recognized wisdom of thousands of years about one of the oldest and most important issues in philosophy. For centuries the problems of free will and determinism have plagued philosophers and psychologists. People who believe in determinism believe that people's behavior is completely dependent on the external and internal forces acting on them. An example of external forces is the influence of parents in rewarding certain behaviors. As an example of internal force, there is a way that hormones affect others' behavior. People who believe in freedom will argue that things are more complicated. Most of them acknowledge the existence of external forces and internal forces. But they believe that people have free will, for everyone can choose their own actions under these power constraints. If we consider the following questions, we can see the difference between free will and determinism: "If the behavior of a person in a situation is different, is he / she different? Answer this question Discussion of free will and determinism between psychologists and philosophers has existed for many years. Identified people believe that actions are determined by the external and internal forces exercised to human beings. An example of external power may be that the parents support the act of encouraging it. On the other hand, internal forces are propelled by hormones. Those who believe in freedom think things are a bit difficult (Eysenck, 1994). They know that there are external and internal factors, but they believe that people can freely choose their own actions. Free will and deterministic debate can be accomplished by the following questions. And those who believe do not agree that freedom agrees

Sapir-Worf hypothesis: linguistic determinism and linguistic relativity Romantic idealism in the late eighteenth century observed by Johann Herder (1744-1803) and Wilhelm von Humboldt (I 762-1835) Very important. Language and culture of the world Edward Sapir (1884-1939), an American linguist and anthropologist, and his student Benjamin Lee Wolfe (1897-1941), this tradition, and widely in the Middle Ages for decades We accepted between influential language and thought. The relationship came up with a view. this century Theory of Language Relativity Theory Sapir-Wolf assumes even that language influences decide people's way of thinking  Linguistic determinism, language relativity, Wolf's hypothesis  "deterministic" opinion - (deterministic) views such as prisons, Language function - the language necessarily affected by the details of that language  It is impossible to translate effectively and successfully between languages; it is an elusive goal to be able to communicate between different cultures. Experience their world, but this impact is not constant. People can learn words and categories that closely resemble themselves, in order to communicate accurately, to focus on cultures, thought-language relations, and vocabulary changes.  Lots of snow, coconut, and camels  Brazilian Kamayura Indians - "color of a long tail parrot  ticks in West New Guinea - dark and light ▪ evidence and vocabulary on color perception is a deterministic version of the Sapir - Wolf hypothesis Fixed points, places, life flow and English - sports words refer to time as a specific point on a linear plane divided in the past, and the time of the present and the future will be more sustained o Hopi - Tense does not show respect and social hierarchy More convenient to display on Spain side "Language relativistic hypothesis" is also known as the Sapir-Wolf hypothesis, an American writer and linguist Sassel is defined by his article "Linguistics as a scientific standpoint" and BL Whorf. His article "Science" is described in detail. And linguistics (Hussein) This hypothesis represents the fact that language plays a very important role in people's lives because it influences people's behavior as well as being a means of communication. Concept (Hussein) In other words, people who speak different words tend to have different views about the world Theory thinks that not only vocabulary but also grammar as well as people's way of communicating will be influenced Language and polyglot Is visualized at the basic level and interacts with the world through extended functions.

The problem of free will decision theory in Greek philosophy: The tradition of Aristotle Western philosophy was once called a series of "white papers", but it seems that at least one major philosophical argument is attributed to it. Heritage Plato is not his ancient brethren. The problem of free will and determinism does not seem to be a big problem directly affecting the idea of ​​ancient philosophers. There are two main reasons for this. Plato, especially Aristotle, represents the apex of ancient philosophy, but no matter how wonderful this philosophy is, it represents that era. Neither Plato nor Aristotle can escape from the contradiction between the concept of autonomous subjectivity represented by Socrates and the basic group of Greek culture. Likewise, the classical Greek philosophy is to succumb to the Greek city state submitting its internal contradiction and eventually replace it with the philosophy restricted within the scope of the new religion - Christian doctrine Let's see. However, as we have seen, Christianity expresses the subjective problem encountered in solving the Socratic form. The problem of free will decision theory in Greek philosophy: The tradition of Aristotle Western philosophy was once called a series of "white papers", but it seems that at least one major philosophical argument is attributed to it. Heritage Plato is not his ancient brethren. The problem of free will and determinism does not seem to be a big problem directly affecting the idea of ​​ancient philosophers. - In Aristotle's "Niccombe Ethics" volumes 8 and 9, the normative concept of friendship is precisely defined and is divided into various relationships between Socrates and the Arsibiad. Category To achieve this goal, people need to understand not only the notion of perfect friendship based on each other's good intentions and virtues, but also Aristotle's concept of imperfect friendship based on utility and pleasure. The ancient philosophy is almost entirely Greek. The greatest philosophers of the ancient world were the three Greeks of the 400s and the 300s, Socrates, Plato and Aristotle. Their philosophy has influenced the later Western culture. Our ideas in the fields of metaphysics, science, logic and ethics are derived from their ideas. Many unique philosophical genres flourish even in ancient Greece. Former Socrates was the first Greek philosopher. Their name comes from the fact that most of them lived before Socrates was born around 469 BC. The philosophers of the former Socrates focused on the nature and source of the universe, and the nature of reality. They want to identify what they think is the fundamental entity of all phenomena and can explain all phenomena

Steven Klein's short story "Open Ship" conveyed the experiences of the four survivors of the shipwreck, floating on the lifeboat of the sea. On the surface there is a dangerous portrayal of getting lost in the sea and the way four people gather and how to rely on strength and companion when they are killed. However, this story also discusses the subject of determinism or the ability to act on individual ideas beyond personal control, and these forces influence and shape the lives of the people they impose. . In Stephen Crane's open boat, the crane is using personal experience to draw this short story. The style of the crane includes very pronounced use of naturalism. Naturalism is just a struggle between nature and man, nature is the most powerful. In an open boat, the crane wrote a sinking ship and placed the character under a natural cigarette. Openboat's story line is based on the actual experience cranes smuggled guns into Cuba. So he found himself with three other men with a small boat. Klein uses naturalism that shapes nature, reveals his overwhelming personal feelings in front of nature, and effectively symbolizes a journey using color. Many experiments have been conducted between human and nature, from the Yukon Trail to the ocean realism and naturalist writers such as Stephen Crane and Jack London. Steven Crane is known for his story "Open Ship". The story involves the crew of three crewmembers seeking help in the sea storm. In Jack London's "making a fire" he will fight naturally to produce fire, he will not freeze and die. Stephen Clan's story "Open Ship" began with three men on board, including oil man, chef, injured captain. They are staring at the slate-like wave, except on top of the white bubbles. They want to find a certain land. They are hungry, but I do not eat anything except Obesity Chefs. They can circulate huge shadows in the water. They saw that sharks were swimming underwater, but scary but beautiful Captains, correspondents, refueling stations, chefs are not the only crane open boats. The fifth feature is natural. Nature always affects the four people on the board and is always suffering, so it can be seen as the protagonist of the story. In this research, many different views of nature are expressed: nature is indifferent to the human predicament as a causal factor of the whole trial, and it is individualized by that action

However, during treatment, unexpected results will arise: the music began to make Alex feel very upset. What makes this character the most interesting is gratitude for his music, especially Beethoven, Mozart and other works. His friends are in pop music of this age, but Alex 's passion for classical music gives him a high intelligence impression. In the beginning of the first performance, he listened to the Violin Concerto, so he excitedly explained his gratitude to classical music. "(36). The novel "Clockwork Orange" written by Anthony Burgess in the 1960s occurred in the future of fainting in London in England. The novel tells a 15 - year - old Nadbat (a boy) named Alex named him chosen to do bad things, committing a violent crime with his servants (friends). As time passed, Alex was trying to experiment with the government, so he could not choose right and wrong, lost his ability to free his will and became only clockwork orange. "Winning Orange" is a metaphor that Alex is governed by the government. Alex can not make himself hypocritical, it is influenced by the thought of others. Anthony Burgess's clockwork's orange selection and free will is necessary to maintain humanity including individuals and communities; without them, humans are no longer humans, but a kind of "clockwork orange" Machine toys like Anthony This is featured in Burgess novel Clockwork Orange. The choice between good and evil is a decision that everyone must make throughout their lives to guide their actions and control their future. To make someone gentle is not as important as making someone gentle. Anthony Burgess is very clear with the clock information on the orange. His belief in freedom of selection and oppression was clearly stated and hidden in the dark irony of a violent story. "Obviously, the feelings of Burgess is that those who intentionally choose evil may bring more benefit than those who are forced to be gentle." Each time a person reads it, masterpieces will come I guess. It is more powerful. Burgess has repeatedly expressed a strong belief that even the most violent crimes are not as important as the most violent suppression crime. Burgess not only believes that moral oppression is a mistake of human citizenship, but also believes that this is a destructive error in human spiritual existence. Because this book conveys this message very strongly, it is powerful enough to make the reader into a state of awe and deep thought after reading this book. I need this book, command, my concentration and thought