Well that just does not make any sense.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
I mean … the sense ain\u2019t sensing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Math ain\u2019t mathing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Smart ain\u2019t smarting \u2026 at all.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Apparently, some science-y guy says \u2026 humans actually do not have free will.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Essentially, this mistaken genius says \u2026 we (the human we) are just biological organisms reacting to environmental stimuli.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Really<\/em> \u2026 do tell.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Yes, and we (the human we) cannot be held morally responsible (no morals\/morality, remember?) for our behavior because it (our behavior) is all predetermined and destined and fixed from jump, ergo\/to wit \u2026 free will as a concept is a myth, and each decision made has already been made based on, well, everything that ever happened to that biological organism merely reacting to stimuli starting in the womb.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Right.<\/p>\n\n\n\n OK so when the (not-so) logical conclusion of this theory reaches its inevitable conclusion \u2026 which is, what, the pointlessness of everything, then what is the point of the hypothesis? More importantly, what is the point of even sharing this hypothesis in the first place?<\/p>\n\n\n\n Some highly-educated, book-trained intellectuals really aren\u2019t all that smart. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Exhibit A: Robert Sapolsky.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Mr. (Dr.?) Sapolsky, Stanford-claimed neurobiologist, has studied primates in Africa (don\u2019t you dare) for decades and reached the conclusion that humans lack free will because \u2014 get this \u2014 neurochemical influences dictate every decision, and neurons merely react to uncontrollable external stimuli \u2026 ergo\/to wit, humans are just meat puppets dancing with the wind.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Well that\u2019s comforting.\u00a0 Guess I won\u2019t bother with the whole debt satisfaction thing after all \u2026 I was predetermined to make horrible financial decisions, so I can\u2019t be held accountable.\u00a0 I\u2019ll just let the judge know when I get sued (again).<\/p>\n\n\n\n Mr. (Dr.?) Sapolsky likens humans to machines, albeit with emotions (which makes humans utterly unlike machines but wait\/there\u2019s more) and completely disregards the variable effect of external stimuli on similar organisms \u2026 one thing might be like the other but not react the same under identical circumstances.<\/p>\n\n\n\n What a lowlight.\u00a0 To be such a smart guy, and to have dedicated so much of his life to abject foolishness, must make him feel pretty mid (thanks to theKid for that one.\u00a0 And how is \u201crizz\u201d in the dictionary?\u00a0 Isn\u2019t it just shorthand for \u201ccharisma\u201d?\u00a0 I am so very old\/digress<\/em>) and pointless in his every endeavor.<\/p>\n\n\n\n He was predestined to form a hypothesis and reach a conclusion and write a book about the fundamental meaninglessness of human life. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Good job, sir. Mom must be proud. But he is entitled to a viewpoint. Opinions and [butt]holes, as it t\u2019were.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Guess \u201cThe Purge\u201d should be a nightly event. Why limit it to one night a year, when none of us are responsible for anything, anyway? <\/p>\n\n\n\n Oh wait {Romans 2:15<\/em>} <\/p>\n\n\n\n GOD saw that one coming, too.\u00a0 The debt of morality is written on every heart.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Well that just does not make any sense. I mean … the sense ain\u2019t sensing. Math ain\u2019t mathing. Smart ain\u2019t smarting \u2026 at all. Apparently, some science-y guy says \u2026 humans actually do not have free will. Essentially, this mistaken genius says \u2026 we (the human we) are just biological organisms reacting to environmental stimuli. … <\/p>\n