This thread reminds me of those threads where some idiot asks if you should call all-in with AA from the BB in the first hand of the WSOP ME if everyone at your table goes all in before you.

Except the "answers" to the "questions" proposed in this thread are much more difficult to come to. The uselessness of it all is the same.

Ya, EP9, you misunderstand what Compatibilism is...good post Geist...

Xaston, methinks you need to go to college.

Ok, So are you guys telling me the bans were all predetermined?

Why the hell was I arguing with Ice then?

1. That's ridiculous, I'm never going to die.

2. Yes, no-brainer.



Regarding free will...

Whether we have free will or not is completely insignificant, only whether we think we do or not is significant. It is better to assume we do (I assume we don't seen to argue this?). Calling it an illusion is deceptive and dishonest, since anything and everything could well be defines as an illusion (or perception), hence rendering the word meaningless in the context.

From a scientific point of view you want to use the uncertainity principle as proof of free will , or rather, as proof that determinism is impossible from a certain point of view. However, as previously stated, only the perception and assumption of free will is relevant.