this post was submitted on 26 Jun 2024
81 points (96.6% liked)

Asklemmy

43792 readers
819 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy ๐Ÿ”

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Have you went down any internet rabbit holes only to come out with a deep set existential crisis? If so, what are they?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] Hegar@fedia.io 30 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (31 children)

Free will.

It's hard to accept, but free will is just not compatible with reality. It's like geocentrism. It seems obvious on its face because of our limited perspective, but nothing else in the universe makes sense if it's true. We live in a mechanistic universe and cause and effect doesn't suddenly stop when the atoms are part of a human.

I freaked out for about a week once I came to realize how much of our society is based on a scientific impossibility. Redesigning justice, ethics, healthcare, the very concept of blame, etc. to account for this is a daunting fucking prospect.

[โ€“] TheOneCurly@lemm.ee 22 points 4 months ago (6 children)

Subatomic particles act in insane ways that are absolutely not mechanical or predictible. A very limited size of object behaves "normally". I think believing that the universe mostly acts like our everyday objects is the skewed perspective.

[โ€“] bitfucker@programming.dev 12 points 4 months ago (2 children)

Our current understanding is not enough to state that with confidence. We used to be so confident with classical mechanics and even claims that physics is almost complete. God knows how long our current probabilistic model will last before we find another better model. It may be probabilistic, or it may not.

[โ€“] antrosapien@lemmy.ml 4 points 4 months ago

And what if its a pseudorandom generator all the way down

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (28 replies)