by

I agree with JK Rowling


In her argument that Trump has to be allowed to say his bit even we find it offensive.

How else would we be able to call others dickheads if we limit others from replacing the shoes in their mouths?

About makagutu

As Onyango Makagutu I am Kenyan, as far as I am a man, I am a citizen of the world

34 thoughts on “I agree with JK Rowling”

  1. john zande says:
    May 18, 2016 at 16:41

    Strange man.

    Noel, take a look at Steve’s post on Free Will. Thoughts?

    Free Will and the Perfect Pool Table

    Like

    Reply
    • makagutu says:
      May 18, 2016 at 16:53

      I have read and I disagree with him.
      I can right a longer response later but at the moment I can simply say the biggest problem is with the definition. What do people talk about when they have freewill? If this address clearly then we can move forward.
      I see he asks why punish criminals if they have no freewill. Society has a duty to protect itself. Anyone punishment should be geared toward reform. The basis should be that training – in this case rehabilitation should lead to change in future.

      Like

      Reply
      • john zande says:
        May 18, 2016 at 16:59

        Pen a longer response when you get the time. i’d be interested to hear your thoughts, and Steve’s counterarguments. As you know, I’m agnostic (ignostic?) on this subject.

        Liked by 2 people

        Reply
        • ShinashiZ says:
          May 18, 2016 at 17:57

          Sorry to jump in on this conversation, but for a long time after coming across this discussion, I was quit adverse to it, using all manners of thinking to force, logically, that free will is real. I do not think it is now. If you don’t mind, I would like to address the article and look forward makagutu’s thoughts on the matter.

          “We end up with an imperfect, non-deterministic game, one in which the result of any balls being set in motion becomes quite uncertain.”

          Here he makes a presumption that because, up to a point, it is uncertain to a human how much they could control on a pool table, it is non-deterministic. However, I feel that if one were diligent enough, the measuring of the friction, bumps, holes, and edges, the control of the pool stick, its placement, angle and force, and all other factors would, eventually, get someone with a pretty accurate conclusion of what happens when someone makes a shot. With all the factors in play, only a singular group of results will happen. So, still deterministic.

          “So, the universe cannot dictate how a table will be played”

          Pretty much ditto to above, but with the added comment that if the universe wanted to know, it would.

          “And sometimes they get frozen in a state of indecision, that is they have two paths forward that they cannot distinguish between and they get “stuck” not being able to decide.”

          I find this to be more indicative of determinism than free will. With indecision, a person has been able to apply all the factors they could think of to that point, and still unable to choose. Even if one told themselves to ‘find’ the right answers, it would probably come up to even more determined outside influences, and not from a free will within.

          “But many, many of the decisions we make are subconscious, that is we are not aware which of our thoughts or feelings added up to the decision involved.”

          Again, looks like a point for determinism. If one can’t explain why they came to a decision, is it really their decision? Or is it ruled by a uncontrollable subconscious? I feel it’s the latter.

          “I see he asks why punish criminals if they have no freewill”

          I see this as the number one argument against determinism, though it’s not really an argument- whether or not something is true isn’t contingent on the consequences of the reality. Although, I find it a fair accusation that one could ‘make up’ determinism to boost another morality (like capital punishment). But that is not the case.

          As the annoying guy on The Walking Dead has said multiple times, people change. Anyone and everyone can change. Rehabilitation will do a lot more than prison. And if we see it from a deterministic point of view, and realized the tried and true results of imprisonment (and not from the free will view that makes some people believe that repeat criminals just need to ‘change’ themselves, like, out of nowhere), we could encourage better ways of helping people that can’t help themselves.

          If we were to compare people to computers (something most are sure are set by the laws of determinism), we don’t blame the computer for breaking- but we still try to fix them, now don’t we?

          Liked by 1 person

          Reply
          • john zande says:
            May 18, 2016 at 18:10

            Interesting. I hope Steve will be along soon.

            Like

            Reply
          • Steve Ruis says:
            May 18, 2016 at 18:42

            Many of the arguments I referred to in that post are not mine. The “why punish criminals if they have no free will” is one of the points often raised. The point about getting stuck “on the points of a dilemma” and not being able to choose is an anti-determinism argument. If the universe were deterministic, the choice would already be made, in essence, and we shouldn’t be able to be stuck.

            In my follow up I refer to an experiment which shows that neurons ramp up action potentials for physical actions before we “consciously” decide to make that action. This, I believe is one of those problems of identification. We identify ourselves with our conscious minds. We act when “we” consciously decide to do something. This is the standard definition of free will. But basically that experiment shows us that many things are decided subconsciously and the conscious mind gets the memo seconds later. This does not mean be are stimulus-response puppets, but that we need to include our subconscious mental processing, which includes decision making, into our definition of who we are.

            Liked by 1 person

            Reply
      • Ruth says:
        May 18, 2016 at 19:01

        I’d be interested in your longer response as well.

        I agree with you that any punishment should be geared toward reform, and perhaps not called punishment as it shouldn’t be punitive, but what happens when rehabilitation fails? Repeatedly. Of course rehabilitation should lead to change in future. But it doesn’t always. Then what?

        Liked by 1 person

        Reply
  2. Mordanicus says:
    May 18, 2016 at 16:42

    Idiots should be allowed to say idiot thing, so we can know that they are idiots.

    Liked by 3 people

    Reply
  3. clubschadenfreude says:
    May 18, 2016 at 16:49

    exactly. let such idiots express their stupidity. The rest of us need to know who they are and where they are.

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply
    • makagutu says:
      May 18, 2016 at 17:41

      And to keep our distance

      Like

      Reply
      • clubschadenfreude says:
        May 18, 2016 at 18:04

        that is true in real life. It is a thing to have them make their idiocy known on one’s comment sections on one’s blog. Then there is no doubt of what they said since I can control the horizontal and the vertical (a reference probably soon to be lost to history 🙂 )

        Like

        Reply
        • Arkenaten says:
          May 19, 2016 at 00:28

          The only danger, of course , is the number of idiots who listen and not only agree but vote a dick like Trump into power.
          Maybe there should be a very basic competency test that included an individual’s capacity for empathy before a person is allowed to run for any sort of public office ?

          Like

          Reply
          • clubschadenfreude says:
            May 19, 2016 at 02:56

            to be able to vote would be better

            Like

            Reply
          • makagutu says:
            May 19, 2016 at 10:34

            There is need then to always respond to the claims of bigots. If what they say is left to stand without criticism, there is a demographic that would think he and others like him are right

            Like

            Reply
            • Arkenaten says:
              May 19, 2016 at 11:02

              I am not saying people like him should not speak – shout their ignorant mouths off in fact – but as they ostensibly will represent everyone should they be elected to office a basic means test of competency prior to them raising their right hand and swearing to god and country might be a sensible precaution. After all, you probably wouldn’t board a plane if you discovered the pilot just recently qualified and only had one or two ”minor crashes”.
              🙂

              Like

              Reply
  4. ShinashiZ says:
    May 18, 2016 at 17:25

    If he wasn’t allowed to speak, I wouldn’t have known the low-key maniacs in my life. Oh, you find him admirable? That’s…. informative.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply
  5. inspiredbythedivine1 says:
    May 18, 2016 at 17:44

    I agree with her 100%. I like to know what people are thinking, even bigoted idjits. This way, I’ll know what a-holes to avoid. Hopefully, enough voters will disagree, and be offended by Trump, and not vote for him in November. Hopefully, but this is America and intelligent, clear-headedness in not something we have much of here.

    Like

    Reply
  6. Ruth says:
    May 18, 2016 at 18:21

    As I’ve already said over on mine, I abhor most of what comes out of the mango’s mouth, but I defend his right to say it. The PC police be damned. I like to know who the asshats are.

    Like

    Reply

Leave a reply to Arkenaten Cancel reply