Yes, the extensive evolution of our genetic intellectual capacity has enabled us to do such things.
Just like with every other genetic malefactor.
Wrong. A number of things could stop someone. Such as:
(A) The genetic/intellectual fairure to recognize anything wrong.
Aside from downs syndrome, is there any person who doesn't eventually find out that there is something wrong with them?
Come to think of it, I think those with DS know that something is up with them anyway.
(B) Inbreeding into a modest trailer park environment, where one may lack the funds needed to visit a shrink.
Medicare should cover that. Or whatever government compensation your country has available. Failing that eg. busy shrinks, you could always try psychology on yourself.
(C) A genetic malfunction resulting in procrastination.
It's like. "Sorry, miss. I didn't do my homework. I have a genetic anomaly that causes me to procrastinate."
Get over it then.
.... Among many other viable scenarios. Deep down, at the root of things, I cannot just visit a psycologist of my own accord. My genes/environment must be properly aligned in order to make this decision apparent, viable, and/or plausible.
Actually, when it all boils down to it all, it's merely a matter of what you want or don't want.
Once again;
Free Will- The power of making free choices that are unconstrained by external circumstances or by an agency such as fate or divine will.
If a person is not able to move i.e. paralysis, can s/he try to will her leg to move?
Our genes/environment determine our fate in many ways, in this case, causing me to contract a particular psycological problem. A supposedly free willed being such as God could have chosen such an affliction. I, on the other hand, am at the mercy of particular external circumstances.
Most likely because you let it and don't do anything about it.
What could th problem be? Actually, don't answer that; it's none of my buisness. But just an example; say I have bad genes and have cancer. Am I going to just let myself be at the mercy of it? Or would I do everything in my power to do something about it? Even if the doctors can't do anything, even that wont stop me from wishing or imagining or anything. My will to say live would still be there. Nothing can stop it except me. And if I wish to die, my genes wont stop me.
Is it responsible? Based on your line of thinking, no.
I however, apply this very concept to ALL crimes. This is one of the reasons I decry so called "tough on crime" policies. I favor working at abolishing the circumstances that lead one to commit crimes, rather than focusing on punishment (which, by the way, is statistically much more effective in most cases).
Well, if this is all about genetics, by all means shouldn't that mean that you should support "tough on crimes" stuff? I mean, that way, it would stop people who don't have "bad genes" to succeed in passing on the genes and thus evolution would be pointed away from that direction.
They would either have to die or loose their right to procreate for the human race to evolve.
I don't follow...
The concentration of what?
The people carrying the genes. How do you think organisms evolve? There migh be one mutation, but if a group of organisms with a certain mutation are seperated from it's parent organisms, and grouped together with other organisms with a similair mutation, you get a form of evolution. If the organisms are not seperated, there is less genetic separation though.
I'm not sure if I'm explaining it very well try looking up the various forms of evolution.
Through inherent genetic intelligence advantages aquired over thousands of years of evolution.
The same way any other gene gets there.
Chromosomes can alter any characteristic, including perceptions.
Tell me, aside from the above example, would the really be any mechanism for evolution; for any genetic anomaly that would stop a human from "being fit" and stopping it from surviving?
Even cancer, deadly as it is, won't stop a human.
The ability to turn a tomato blue does not denote some form of free will.
When babies can pick and choose which genetic qualities they wish to possess before even exiting the womb, then we will talk.
Actually, I think I was seeing that as more of a test of free will.
People free themselves from their instincts? How? Where do instincts end and "free will" begin?
It is perfectly plausible to say that everything we do has its basis in instinct. But as there is currently no scientific way to measure human instinct (that I know of), it is hard to tell.
Well I think there's genetic mapping. But you sense your own urges, can't you?
Every single thing that every single person of every single generation over the last 100 million years has done.
Prove me wrong. As previously noted, there is no real way to differentiate instinct from independent will.
No example? Well, maybe I can try;
There is an instinct not to eat anything that revolts you. Eg. if a roach crawled over your food you would instinctively not eat it.
Beaten since eating roaches unfortunately is a popular party trick I have seen.
There is the instinct to spit out anything that tases biitter, observable from the many kids who hate their vegetables but love their sweets, which insticts tell them to favour.
Beaten with so many people acquiring a taste for alcohol.
There was this whole TV series to do with human instinct....
The current creed of Homo sapians are undoubtedly different than those who lived hundreds of years ago, albiet only in tiny increments.
However, assuming you and I would be capable of interbreeding with the likes of the ancient Egyptians, then we would still be considered among the same species.
Now may I ask, just what is the relevance of this question?
It was a question trying to show how I am talking about human free will alone. Free will requires sentience, and from what I know, sentience requires free will.
Why? Have you been around long enough to know?
My lifetime, short though it is, has been enough to teach me this.
I hate God, as I have every right to. I am sorry free speech denotes that you be subjected to such a view, and hope you can understand it in your own right.
Who says I want to stop free speech?
It's just, Eg. I would like to say "I love God. He is the greatest and I cannot undertsand why you don't like him logically you should love him. People who don't love him are fools."
Can I really say that on a debating forum such as this? Probably. But what would the result be?
Anyway, here's a query for this debate; Any person can just think how he or she wants. He can go rob a bank if he wanted to; no ones stopping him. Sure, the cops would catch him, but he has the will to attempt it if he wanted to. Now, if someone conceived of the idea, eg. me (I'll admit I'm hardly innocent) of doing something wrong, would that be because of instinct? If so, wouldn't that mean I would HAVE to go out and do it? It couldn't, though, because I didn't go out and do it. Would that mean I have the instinct not to do it If so, how come I was able to concieve such a situation?
'Belief is never giving up.'- Random footy adverisement.
Sometimes even a wise man is wrong. Sometimes even a fool is right.
