most time for males and females in this culture we have created we can't connect because of physicality there are many men and women who want a stable loving committed relationship but because they don't look like barbie or ken they never come together the standards for a rich man are usually not always a wife like the sex vixen but many not all of those women are materialistic and the same goes for women. I think we are raised from small children to seek out the most beautiful people not necessarily the smartest or the stable I'm not a scientist but I do see people choose the wrong mate all the time and usually based on looks not how they can provide for a family or partner
Recently I've become a lot more picky. For instance, I would never consider a woman if she is a religious believer. The lowest I'm willing to go is "spiritual non-religious," but that falls short of what I want- an atheist. I used to be willing to put up with a woman's religious beliefs, but not anymore. I absolutely can't stand Bible thumpers. If a Barbie prays to Jesus, she just needs to keep on walking and keep on praying. I don't want anything to do with her, no matter how pretty she is. She's a psychotic idiot, and she's bad news for me.
I think over the centuries the evil Roman Catholic Church (in the West) and the evil religion of Islam (in the East) have murdered and punished many people who were too intelligent to believe in these stupid religions. Only more recently did you not get ex-communicated or executed for being an atheist. I argue that the psychology of a psychotic, gullible, ignorant idiot has selectively been rewarded because this is the psychology necessary to believe in any religion, and the psychology of an intelligent free-thinker has been targeted for removal from the gene pool. So people are largely too fucked-up stupid to see that their religions are brain-washing scams.
Yes, and that together with the fact that religious people get babies like rabbits and thinking people get few or no children. It makes you wonder that there are still thinking people around - so there is some hope for humanity....
The examples you give, in a car, would correspond to repairing what goes wrong. But how, in the same terms, could you account for someone driving on a certain day to Albany to see a friend? What evolutionary psychology can't account for is our free will and the meanings that drive our conscious behavior. It can't, as far as I can see, even tell us why we like ice cream.
Demonstrate that we have free will, don't assert it. I deny that we have the libertarian free will that theists tend to believe in, as almost all atheists and some theists deny, as well. What evidence do you have that demonstrates free will? ... because I just see a very complex, deterministic system.
I experience I have free will. That's my choice. You choose to regard yourself as determined. Fine. I see no problem with that. I don't have to persuade you against your will, anyway I see no way to resolve the issue--no adequate logic exists to declare either choice superior to the other. We are free to disagree.
Many of our experiences are flat-out wrong, as I've said elsewhere. That's why we study and test this stuff. You're trying to use free will as an argument for other things, though. That requires a demonstration, not a simple assertion.
Hell, you admitted elsewhere that physics as we understand it is not compatible with free will, so you assert that physics must be wrong. Which is more likely, that the the heavily tested, well studied model of reality is wrong or that your wild assertion about free will is wrong?
I worked for twenty years with dysfunctional families and troubled children. It didn't take very long to realize that individuals with foolish, stupid, irrational, dyslogic (my term) thinking have few rational ideas why they think and act as they do. Looking a little deeper, and oversimplifying, imagine a baby looking out of his or her crib and seeing a happy mother and father, who coo and play with the child, even as they discuss problems and conflicts intelligently; imagine another baby looking out of his or her crib and seeing an angry mother and father, who do not play with the child, even as they discuss problems and conflicts using aggressive and violent language and actions.
When these two babies grow up, do you think they will think and behave differently? Do you think these adults have free will? Do you think they understand why they think and act differently?
Proving that some children don't have free will (though you merely assumed it) doesn't prove that you don't have free will
What is your definition of free will because, despite being told the determinist's definition, I don't think you actually understand the definition being used.
I define free will as the experience of being able to initiate changes in the world that would not come about if everything about me functioned according to today's physics. My experience of having free will is logically prior to my knowledge of physics. If they conflict, that is proof today's physics is incomplete.