₦airaland Forum

Proverbs 29 Amplified Bible (AMP)
Warnings and Instructions
29 He who hardens his neck and refuses instruction after being often reproved (corrected, criticized),
Will suddenly be broken beyond repair.
2
When the righteous are in authority and become great, the people rejoice;
But when the wicked man rules, the people groan and sigh.
3
A man who loves [skillful and godly] wisdom makes his father joyful,
But he who associates with prostitutes wastes his wealth.
4
The king establishes (stabilizes) the land by justice,
But a man who takes bribes overthrows it.
5
A man who flatters his neighbor [with smooth words intending to do harm]
Is spreading a net for his own feet.
6
By his wicked plan an evil man is trapped,
But the righteous man sings and rejoices [for his plan brings good things to him].
7
The righteous man cares for the rights of the poor,
But the wicked man has no interest in such knowledge.
8
Scoffers set a city afire [by stirring up trouble],
But wise men turn away anger [and restore order with their good judgment].
9
If a wise man has a controversy with a foolish and arrogant man,
The foolish man [ignores logic and fairness and] only rages or laughs, and there is no peace (rest, agreement).
10
The bloodthirsty hate the blameless [because of his integrity],
But the upright are concerned for his life.
11
A [shortsighted] fool always loses his temper and displays his anger,
But a wise man [uses self-control and] holds it back.
12
If a ruler pays attention to lies [and encourages corruption],
All his officials will become wicked.
13
The poor man and the oppressor have this in common:
The Lord gives light to the eyes of both.
14
If a king faithfully and truthfully judges the poor,
His throne shall be established forever.
15
The rod and reproof (godly instruction) give wisdom,
But a child who gets his own way brings shame to his mother.
16
When the wicked are in authority, transgression increases,
But the righteous will see the downfall of the wicked.
17
Correct your son, and he will give you comfort;
Yes, he will delight your soul.
18
Where there is no vision [no revelation of God and His word], the people are unrestrained;
But happy and blessed is he who keeps the law [of God].
19
A servant will not be corrected by words alone;
For though he understands, he will not respond [nor pay attention].
20
Do you see a [conceited] man who speaks quickly [offering his opinions or answering without thinking]?
There is more hope for a [thickheaded] [a]fool than for him.
21
He who pampers his slave from childhood
Will find him to be a son in the end.
22
An angry man stirs up strife,
And a hot-tempered and undisciplined man commits many transgressions.
23
A man’s pride and sense of self-importance will bring him down,
But he who has a humble spirit will obtain honor.
24
Whoever is partner with a thief hates his own life;
He hears the curse [when swearing an oath to testify], but discloses nothing [and commits perjury by omission].
25
The fear of man brings a snare,
But whoever trusts in and puts his confidence in the Lord will be exalted and safe.
26
Many seek the ruler’s favor,
But justice for man comes from the Lord.
27
An unjust man is repulsive to the righteous,
And he who is upright in the way [of the Lord] is repulsive to the wicked.

Cameron should be done for treason taken to the Tower and shot for leaving the country in this mess. How he could not have conceived the majority would vote out and prepare for it is just treason! And then resigning!? That's like the captain jumping first when his ship sinks in this case because he drove it into an iceberg while everyone was warning him!

Brexit is tricky. Each country in UK has different needs that need to be balanced and this is what's being ironed out. Teresa is doing a wonderful job, imo, balancing everyone's needs following the processes and the law. Could you imagine how this would be done back home? Bags of money would change hands and we'd find ourselves in a mess. I hope she doesn't resign.

bloodofthelamb:
No, I am just living. I am good to you, because that is who I am. I have no need to be good to you. I am just being myself to you.

I see no need here.

You will not be good without a reason! It's just way too much work to do for nothing. And claiming "you are just being yourself" makes you sound as if you are just naturally good to me, like born to be good, which is unlikely. The truth more likely being that if you truly are as effortlessly good to me as you say you are, it would have taken you a lot of effort and practice and learning through the years to become so good. And to do so much work to be so good you must be fulfilling a need. And that need cannot be "no need".

I put it to you to consider that, in your, "just living", "just being myself", being "good to you", and being the "I am", you are fulfilling a need but might be unaware of the need you are fulfilling.

shadeyinka:
The student just brought one of the "so called" things on the table: emptiness.

Which one of the so called things on the table was in the student's empty hand that had nothing in it? How do you conclude that the table was empty from the empty student's hand?

shadeyinka:
Can you see from this that it doesn't fit. Something cannot be Nothing and Nothing cannot be something!

So, you agree with me when I say, "Nothing is not something! Nothing is absolutely nothing"?

shadeyinka:
In case you don't still understand: a table cannot be 100% full. If nothing is something, it means that the total Something on the table must include the nothing. The student thus brings that something called Nothing: can't you see that this is a contradiction and logical fallacies!

Not only fallacy, but illogical and off point.. First, the fullness of the table is irrelevant since we only have the contents of the student's hand and not a record of what is or is not on the table. The table might be full of stuff or have nothing on it, in fact, there might not even be a table in the space we sent the student to, but that's not a judgement one makes so swiftly on seeing the empty hand of the student. Just think. You send someone to the bank to get you 100k and they return empty handed. Would your first assumption be, the bank was empty?

shadeyinka:
I think this case is closed.

I appreciate your time and an a-game. It is highly regarding of you. You never forgot we began with an empty space, filled it with something but call it nothing because we cannot see it in a student's hand. I'll write it in bold my sake.

Empty space is not nothing. It is a space that is empty.

Empty space is something, a space with nothing in it.

It's been wonderfully refreshing discussing with you, Shadeyinka.

Dhumancanvas:
I don't know why y'all get so mad? What's so sickening about what I've said? I simply tried to articulate my view and i did so as respectfully as i could. Could it be because your God is a creation of you, your god is you and anything seen as a threat to your God or his existence is automatically translated as a threat to you?

You got it in one. People's God is them. It is a concept created in their own image by all the knowledge they have managed to acquire. It is in fact a hyper version of the self, as in not just my flesh and my body or even my spirit, but deep into my soul and into my being the I Am. So when you poke at my God you poke at me being, and how dare you "simply tried to articulate my view and I did so as respectfully as I could", successfully and understanding my profundity to be sickened and mad!?!

GoodMuyis:
Not in this, structure of nairaland. Maybe in the future of grace.com.ng if I have the time for it

You GoodMuyis, will not be fruitful here and increase in number and fill this earth and subdue it and rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky and over every living creature that moves on nairaland where you probably expend quite a lot of yourself, but will wait till a future when you have the time for it.

The following is a bav translation of [url=https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+25%3A29&version=NIV]verse[/url]. "Those who do little will do even more but those who do nothing do nothing".

shadeyinka:
It simply means "nothing" isn't part of the "somethings" on the table. If "Nothing" is "Something", you wouldn't find it difficult to agree that he has brought "Something" even though empty handed.

Lol! So, because the student returns empty handed, we are to assume the table had nothing on it!? What if the student was being lazy or just stupid and didn't pick up anything from all the things that were on the table? Is it not truer that it is the student's hand that is empty which says nought about whether there is something or nothing on top of the table? But that's beside the point.

Nothing is not something! Nothing is absolutely nothing, not tables, not spaces, not heads, not student's hands, just nothing. Hence, nothing can be empty, because nothing is nothing.

Empty things are 'somethings' - tables, spaces, heads, student's hands - that have nothing inside or on top of them. A something with nothing in it is empty.

GoodMuyis:
If the good old days can be revived, you will see the Grace-filled Christian here.

If they can't revive the good old days their Grace might be not as filled as you think!

Yes, I am challenging you Good.

UyiIredia:
People feel a strong need to materialise something even if it's not there. But why the quotes? Don't you think God is immaterial?

The quotes were to convey a message I knew you would recognise which is, in which way do you mean immaterial. It's a long word afterall, long enough for us to misunderstand what is meant.

Did you mean immaterial, as in not physical nor formed of matter for instance, or as irrelevant, not worth considering and unimportant?

People always materialise what is not there. Its the creativity that's in us. A creativity we are so much ignorant about that some wrap it up in an image called God for want of a better name.

Maxi3k:
I think gods are created in the minds of desperate individuals

And in some very intelligent individuals' minds too.

UyiIredia:
I don't understand the need to create God in an image. God is immaterial.

An image, an idea of, a thing as a concept, materialised. If God is "immaterial" why have we bothered to create images of it?

shadeyinka:
You are caught in your own web of misdefinition. Didnt the student brought "something" called "nothing" from among the "somethings" on the table!?

You are caught in your own misunderstanding!

No! The student brought nothing from amongst the somethings on the table! The student never picked up nothing off the table and brought it!

shadeyinka:
What ever that means (the bolded). You just stated that nothing is NOT a noun. If it's not a noun, nothing cannot be a Something!

Nothing, is not a noun, nor is something. Nothing is nothing. And something is something. An empty something is however not nothing since a something needs to be empty.

I think you are wrongly replacing empty with nothing. If there is nothing there is nothing at all, no space, no table and no your head to be empty. Empty always describes the state of something and is therefore not about nothing.

shadeyinka:
Empty nothing cannot make sense
Nothing that is empty cannot make sense

Precisely. Nothing cannot be empty. Something has to be empty.

shadeyinka:
Empty Something (cup,room , box) make sense
Something (bowl, kettle, ) that is empty makes sense

Precisely. Something has to be empty.

shadeyinka:
Can you find an adjective to describe "empty" or an adjective that describes "nothing"! For if they are really "Something", they should have verbs and adjectives describing them.

Empty is an adjective that describes a noun, why would you want an adjective that describes an adjective

Nothing and something, however, are pronouns, i.e. words that can function as a noun phrase used by itself and that refers either to the participants in the discourse (e.g. I, you, space, something ) or to someone or something mentioned elsewhere in the discourse (e.g. she, it, this, table ).

shadeyinka:
Let me help you with some starters:
The Goat is black!
You'll find a greenish thing in the hole!

As in, the goat (something) is black.
And, You'll find a greenish thing (something) in the hole (somewhere).

You would only use the words black and find in your above given contexts to describe a something somewhere, like a goat greenish thing in the hole.

MuttleyLaff:
Thats why, God in Exodus 3:14, said to Moses:
"I AM WHO I AM.
This is what you are to say to the Israelites: 'I AM has sent me to you."

Essentially means, I will become whatsoever I may become.

I read this book just yesterday and could hear the Israelites go, "What do you mean by 'you sent yourself?'" And by the time I got to Leviticus this morning I could not help see Moses as the God and Aaron as his prophet!

shadeyinka:
A space is a boundary defined by area or volume and The volume could be real or virtual. Emptiness qualifies/describes a space.

Agreed. Emptiness describes a space, real or virtual. It is the space that contains nothing, but that space still exists with boundaries defined by area or volume, real or virtual. That space is not nothing even though it is empty. The house, cup, space and your head may all be empty but they are still your head which is quite a lot of something.

shadeyinka:
A virtual space is not real just like the square root of -1 is not real. A cup however is real, a room is real, a cupboard is real hence they can be described as empty. Contains NO-THING.

Above, you said "Emptiness describes a space, real or virtual", but here you seem to be making a distinction just by changing your mind! Why?

shadeyinka:
Let's have an example:
You asked a student to bring something (anything) from your table and he returns empty handed. Would you take it that he really brought something?

I would say the student brought nothing from the table that I told the student to bring something from. After it is the student's hand that is empty. The table is still there occupying space. It would be very incorrect to say nothing was where I told the student to bring something from unless the table itself were not there occupying the space it did.

shadeyinka:
Just as empty is an adjective, nothing is an adjective. It can't be simpler than that.

Really? Yet, here we are for days now trading words over it.

Space is not an adjective!

shadeyinka:
You can have "an empty house", an empty cup, etc

NO-THING ≠ SOME-THING

No-thing= Something
if and only if No or Not=Some

What you have is an empty something, a something which is empty, a something with nothing inside it, and not an 'empty nothing'.

Basically, empty ≠ nothing, since always, a something, which is not nothing, has to be empty.

Hermes019:
Exactly, I wouldn't say I am absolutely certain a creator exists,but even if it does I am convinced it is not what people portray as God

I agree. We create images in our puny heads and call it God despite the advice not to create images nor bow to worship them then we claim we are doing the will of God.

What a bunch of amusing people we are.

jesusjnr:
It goes without saying that most atheists are only using atheism as an excuse to justify their rebellious tendencies against God.

Some atheists surely would find absurd a need to "justify their rebellious tendencies" - if they have any rebellious tendencies that is - to a God that they do not accept exists. To some atheists, it would be like eating invisible food when hungry and expecting to be full.

It goes without saying by whom exactly?

TheArranger:
This conclusion would point to a being quite different from the omni-x God theists describe.

So, a Creator God exists after all, you just don't agree it's the described God?

EdifiedHebrew:
The MOST HIGH said don't add and don't subtract from his DOCTRINE, simple. Yahawah bahasham Yahawashi is not talking about school books, pencil, shoes, cars, etc.

I'm afraid no most high ever told me anything of the sort! If a most high did say that and I were willing to obey I would still be sacrificing animals and washing the temple with it as ordered way back in Leviticus!

I guess we have different instructions. I fast because I find reward in fasting. You don't because man made it. Peace.

shadeyinka:
Let's start from your premises:


It started with:
Empty Space= Something

If you won't accuse me of changing meaning, it can be rephrased as
Emptiness = Something

Empty/Emptiness is an adjective or a verb
Something is a noun

Scientifically, emptiness means devoid of matter. Matter is always value noun. Emptiness is thus a description of absence of substance/thing.

It's not possible to stretch the argument beyond that and still make any sense.

Except your argument is like: "zero" means strictly "no giraffe"! Then,

Emptiness ≠ mean something. It just implies something that is empty, as in, a thing that has no things in it.

Empty space means a space (noun) that is being described by the adjective 'empty'. The space itself is empty, i.e. has nothing in it, but there is still a space that needs to be empty. Emptiness is therfore a quality of the space that is in this case, empty, as in the space is devoid of content. The space itself however must exist for it to be empty.

Examples are, a house is empty, a cup is empty, a space is empty, my purse is empty, your head is empty etc. Something - the house, cup, space, your head, are what are empty, but the house, cup, space and your head are something in their own right and are therefore not nothing.

In 2012, Sam Harris, one of the famed ‘four horsemen’ of New Atheism, published a book called Free Will, arguing that it doesn’t exist. He’s a neuroscientist, and he contends that the more science learns how our brains work, the less plausible is a self with free will. He calls them ‘illusions’. By contrast, in his 2003 book Freedom Evolves, Daniel Dennett, another of the horsemen, argued for a concept of free will that is “an evolved creation of human activity and beliefs” and is compatible with causal determinism. Who is right, if either of them?

Frank S. Robinson ‘chooses’ to remind ‘us’ of problems some contemporary philosophers have with these central human concepts.

Defending Free Will & The Self

Proverbs 28 Amplified Bible (AMP)
Warnings and Instructions
28 The wicked flee when no one pursues them,
But the righteous are as bold as a lion.
2
When a land does wrong, it has many princes,
But when the ruler is a man of understanding and knowledge, its stability endures.
3
A poor man who oppresses and exploits the lowly
Is like a sweeping rain which leaves no food.
4
Those who [a]set aside the law [of God and man] praise the wicked,
But those who keep the law [of God and man] struggle with them.
5
Evil men do not understand justice,
But they who long for and seek the Lord understand it fully.
6
Better is the poor who walks in his integrity
Than he who is crooked and two-faced though he is rich.
7
He who keeps the law [of God and man] is a wise and discerning son,
But he who is a companion of gluttons humiliates his father [and himself].
8
He who increases his wealth by interest and usury (excessive interest)
Gathers it for him who is gracious to the poor.
9
He who turns his ear away from listening to the law [of God and man],
Even his prayer is repulsive [to God].
10
He who leads the upright astray on an evil path
Will himself fall into his own pit,
But the blameless will inherit good.
11
The rich man [who is conceited and relies on his wealth instead of God] is wise in his own eyes,
But the poor man who has understanding [because he relies on God] is able to see through him.
12
When the righteous triumph, there is great glory and celebration;
But when the wicked rise [to prominence], men hide themselves.
13
He who conceals his transgressions will not prosper,
But whoever confesses and [b]turns away from his sins will find compassion and mercy.
14
Blessed and favored by God is the man who fears [sin and its consequence] at all times,
But he who hardens his heart [and is determined to sin] will fall into disaster.
15
Like a roaring lion and a charging bear
Is a wicked ruler over a poor people.
16
A leader who is a great oppressor lacks understanding and common sense [and his wickedness shortens his days],
But he who hates unjust gain will [be blessed and] prolong his days.
17
A man who is burdened with the guilt of human blood (murder)
Will be a fugitive until death; let no one support him or give him refuge.
18
He who walks blamelessly and uprightly will be kept safe,
But he who is crooked (perverse) will suddenly fall.
19
He who cultivates his land will have plenty of bread,
But he who follows worthless people and frivolous pursuits will have plenty of poverty.
20
A faithful (right-minded) man will abound with blessings,
But he who hurries to be rich will not go unpunished.
21
To have regard for one person over another and to show favoritism is not good,
Because for a piece of bread a man will transgress.
22
He who has an evil and envious eye hurries to be rich
And does not know that poverty will come upon him.
23
He who [appropriately] reprimands a [wise] man will afterward find more favor
Than he who flatters with the tongue.
24
He who robs his father or his mother
And says, “This is no sin,”
Is [not only a thief but also] the companion of a man who destroys.
25
An arrogant and greedy man stirs up strife,
But he who trusts in the Lord will be blessed and prosper.
26
He who trusts confidently in his own heart is a [dull, thickheaded] fool,
But he who walks in [skillful and godly] wisdom will be rescued.
27
He who gives to the poor will never want,
But he who shuts his eyes [from their need] will have many curses.
28
When the wicked rise [to power], men hide themselves;
But when the wicked perish, the [consistently] righteous increase and become great.

LUCAS99:
So Guys I have been listening to Andrew Yang who happens to be the founder of Venture of America (VFA) & a 2020 Democratic Presidential Candidate.

I'm particularly interested in one of his Policy called "Universal Basic Income"

Basically Universal Basic Income proposes a $1000/month "Freedom Dividend" to all U.S. Citizens over the age of 18 regardless of income or employment status.

I know we have Savy Business men on Nairaland...

My question is the Universal Basic Income Policy Attainable without Blowing up the Deficit...

The more I listen to him speak the more sense he makes...

My only worry will be that we would be encouraging Laziness for immediate gratification...

On the Other hand that also sounds like a good way to help the Poor Class & Middle Class who are the Backbone of the American Economy...

I mean if someone offers me $1000/Month Tax Free that equates to $12,000/Year...

I don't get to save $12,000 every year so this policy sounds promising...

But I need to know the Pitfalls & Drawbacks if any...

Inflation for starts. Millions currently work for much less than $12k a year so why bother when you can get it for sitting on your ass? Fewer people would wanna work unless they're paid much more and that extra pay would be added to the cost of goods and as prices go up your sit on your ass get very fat $12k a year would buy less and less till eventually you're sitting on your ass getting very thin on $12k a year that now only buys what $1.2k bought and you're wondering what the fuq!

I just wonder why no one offers free education!

A Birmingham City fan has been jailed for 14 weeks for attacking Aston Villa captain Jack Grealish during the second city derby.

Paul Mitchell, of Rubery, Worcestershire, ran on to the pitch and hit Grealish from behind about 10 minutes into Sunday's game.

Mitchell, 27, admitted assault and encroachment on to the pitch at Birmingham Magistrates' Court earlier.

He "cannot explain what came over him yesterday morning", his solicitor said.

More on the beeb.

Dhumancanvas:
A single test of volition upon which failure means a curse on man from that point till eternity. Don't you think it's a little extreme for a loving God?

I will keep my eyes open for any of these 'bizarre' occurrences. Frankly I've always been curious.

Go read Exodus. I see you falling off a chair laughing.

EdifiedHebrew:
so you can't even understand simple commandment?

Commandment not to bother with manmade things? It would be a very difficult one to keep I tell you, unless I want to deceive myself. There aren't a lot of phones made by women, see, nor houses either. What would I do about manmade books?

Are you certain you understand what you are quoting?

shadeyinka:
Emptiness cannot be a property of something: as in what property can we attribute to emptiness?
Mass, Volume, Charge, Length, etc. If its a property of something, quantify it.

I see what you did there, jumping from my "emptiness is a property of something", to your, "emptiness has properties". I hope you see the jump.

Emptiness is an adjective. The archaic definition of adjective is "can't stand alone". You have to add a bold noun like space to prop up emptiness, and that space is something, a measurable something at that. Unless you want to claim your space has no lenght and breadth.

When the word emptiness is used, absolutely nothing, is implied, inside of a quantifiable something, which can be measured Mrs Dawkins.

EdifiedHebrew:
i don't obeserve lent because it is man made.

You don't go to manmade school? Or can't see that some of us poor people might need to deprive ourselves and focus on God during lent? Or do you just think we are all as wealthy as you are?

Proverbs 27 Amplified Bible (AMP)
Warnings and Instructions
27 Do not boast about tomorrow,
For you do not know what a day may bring.
2
Let another praise you, and not your own mouth;
A stranger, and not your own lips.
3
Stone is heavy and the sand weighty,
But a fool’s [unreasonable] wrath is heavier and more burdensome than both of them.
4
Wrath is cruel and anger is an overwhelming flood,
But who is able to endure and stand before [the sin of] jealousy?
5
Better is an open reprimand [of loving correction]
Than love that is hidden.
6
Faithful are the wounds of a friend [who corrects out of love and concern],
But the kisses of an enemy are deceitful [because they serve his hidden agenda].
7
He who is satisfied loathes honey,
But to the hungry soul any bitter thing is sweet.
8
Like a bird that wanders from her nest [with its comfort and safety],
So is a man who wanders from his home.
9
Oil and perfume make the heart glad;
So does the sweetness of a friend’s counsel that comes from the heart.
10
Do not abandon your own friend and your father’s friend,
And do not go to your brother’s house in the day of your disaster.
Better is a neighbor who is near than a brother who is far away.
11
My son, be wise, and make my heart glad,
That I may reply to him who reproaches (reprimands, criticizes) me.
12
A prudent man sees evil and hides himself and avoids it,
But the naive [who are easily misled] continue on and are punished [by suffering the consequences of sin].
13
[The judge tells the creditor,] “Take the garment of one who is surety (guarantees a loan) for a stranger;
And hold him in pledge when he is surety for an immoral woman [for it is unlikely the debt will be repaid].”
14
He who blesses his neighbor with a loud voice early in the morning,
It will be counted as a curse to him [for it will either be annoying or his purpose will be suspect].
15
A constant dripping on a day of steady rain
And a contentious (quarrelsome) woman are alike;
16
Whoever attempts to restrain her [criticism] might as well try to stop the wind,
And grasps oil with his right hand.
17
As iron sharpens iron,
So one man sharpens [and influences] another [through discussion].
18
He who tends the fig tree will eat its fruit,
And he who faithfully protects and cares for his master will be honored.
19
As in water face reflects face,
So the heart of man reflects man.
20
Sheol (the place of the dead) and Abaddon (the underworld) are never satisfied;
Nor are the eyes of man ever satisfied.
21
The refining pot is for silver and the furnace for gold [to separate the impurities of the metal],
And each is tested by the praise given to him [and his response to it, whether humble or proud].
22
Even though you pound a [hardened, arrogant] fool [who rejects wisdom] in a mortar with a pestle like grain,
Yet his foolishness will not leave him.

23
Be diligent to know the condition of your flocks,
And pay attention to your herds;
24
For riches are not forever,
Nor does a crown endure to all generations.
25
When the grass is gone, the new growth is seen,
And herbs of the mountain are gathered in,
26
The lambs will supply wool for your clothing,
And the goats will bring the price of a field.
27
And there will be enough goats’ milk for your food,
For the food of your household,
And for the maintenance of your maids.

Own up, you're high!

Dhumancanvas:
Determined not inevitable. What will happen will happen and wouldn't have happened any other way but tomorrow is still pregnant.
Noone in particular is meant to exist but when you do your existence was determined.

Tomorrow is very pregnant with today's seed, as in, dependent but not so much determined by, nor inevitable. What happens happens and couldn't happen any other way.

With our will, we can make tomorrow whatever we determine it to be within the constraints of our existence of course, and can make tomorrow Friday if we determine to make tomorrow Friday. We already do it with time. In the UK the clocks go forward 1 hour at 1am on the last Sunday in March, and back 1 hour at 2am on the last Sunday in October. But even our so powerful wills remain constrained by our preceeding wills (choices).

Dhumancanvas:
Determined not inevitable. What will happen will happen and wouldn't have happened any other way but tomorrow is still pregnant.
Noone in particular is meant to exist but when you do your existence was determined.

Interesting. Determined by what, exactly? The Determiner perhaps, or some Almighty God, to give it a name? Pray tell where the Determiner informed buda of what was "determined"?

Determinism is the philosophical idea that all events, including moral choices, are determined completely by previously existing causes. Determinism is at times understood to preclude free will because it entails that humans cannot act otherwise than they do.

I think a thing determined is a thing that is inevitable, hence, my existence is inevitable since I exist. But as stated in my response to my Lord, we look at today (my existence) and claim it was determined by yesterday (which it was to the very large extent of something ma and pa did 'yesterday'), but the truth is that my existence is more like the throwing of a coin where heads or tails has nothing to do with the previous throw apart from the dice being in the hand that's throwing it (before you ask why tomorrow can't be Friday!). If I did not exist, even you would have been doing something else right now instead of reading what buda wrote.

Question though. Is buda saying existence is by chance or existence is determined? Just imagine all that one sperm swimming towards an egg to form buda. Just one tiny variation in conditions (pa not liking ma enough to make buda for instance, or the bed being in a different room with a different temperature, etc) and the sperm and egg that produced buda could have produced a different person or no one at all if even they did not exist or had not met.

It all looks like its predetermined, is my point, after the fact, however.

LordReed:
I am still in rebellion against the idea because it is hard for me to accept that our wills are not impinging on what happens to us. However, I do understand the concept and as I ponder on it more, I am finding it increasingly difficult to formulate a rebuttal to determinism. Not even quantum physics with its uncertainty principle seems to be free from it. According to Sean Carroll if you take a state of the universe and all the laws that affect it you can determine how the universe will progress.

The universe is way too big to consider, let's look at earth, my Lord. We do not know all the laws that affect earth, nor can anyone determine where it's going or simply what would happen to it tomorrow. We don't even know all the laws that affect an individual not to talk of those that affect earth and the universe! Note how we argue about climate change.

We tend to claim a thing is determined in retrospect. We take a phrase like "I knew you before I formed you in your mother's womb", and forget the 'you', is oneself, and assume the 'I' is oneself. Then we claim not only determinism (I, buda, knew), but that the 'you' (buda), who's future is said to be known, is the 'I' that knows the future (and the past even), when in fact we know we very don't.

Our wills do impinge on our existence. Wherever one is has a lot to say about where one will be, and is within one's narrow limit of existence. I can, for all intents and purposes for instance be in London right now, and while I could get up and go wherever I wished to (limits of my existence permitting, i.e. have all the means to travel), I am still limited within the confines of my existence which may simply be the fact that I had not willed to travel elsewhere early enough to travel elsewhere. It's not likely I'd be in Nigeria or Mars tomorrow or anytime soon for instance, though, if I 'will' (want to, and take action along with my willing), I likely could, someday.

Then, chance. Could my being anywhere be by chance? I don't think so since I would have had to have 'willed' (or be 'willed' for), and set certain actions in motion (i.e. planned at some prior point in time to travel and taken specific actions to enable such travelling), to be in London and not anywhere else. Chance would be finding myself in London through no effort on my part (and 'my' here includes that of my parents, if being in London had anything to do with them). Too many stars would have to line up for chance to determine where I am (pun intended).

No one of us is able to determine what would be in the very next minute not to talk of the next hour or tomorrow, but tomorrow we will look back at today, and claim today was determined by yesterday and tomorrow will be determined by today. It works with the moon and planets by the way (as in, we can determine precisely where the moon and planets would be at any time in the future), and it works with days of the week (as sure as the sun rises this Sunday, tomorrow is predetermined to be Monday), but we cannot do the same for transient beings.


Now, does that not all sound like it was determined, like I knew what I was going to write before I wrote it? Considering I had to delve deep into what I already knew, one could say it was. But if you'd seen the process by which it was composed, you might understand how it changed while thinking and writing it, and the end result is nothing like what the initial thought was. Even I am still trying to understand what I myself have written, and I assure you that it will have a deterministic effect on what I think tomorrow though there's a chance it might be very different to whatever I think it might be today.