Ontology talk:9k/RD/Q22,28 - Revision history

Reversedragon: A deterministic statement is not a statement that something will occur inevitably under all sets of conditions

2026-09-06T06:30:39Z

A deterministic statement is not a statement that something will occur inevitably under all sets of conditions

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:30, 6 September 2026
Line 3:		Line 3:
	{{HueCSS}}<ol class="hue clean">		{{HueCSS}}<ol class="hue clean">

	<li class="field_mdem" data-qid="22,28" value="2228" data-dimension="S">lambda-calculus determinism / lambda calculus style determinism / mathematical function determinism / necessity (process of individual things being determined by laws of behavior and surrounding conditions) -> for some weird reason people always assume that determinism equals Calvinism, where there is one set of conditions that lead to a single ending, rather than determinism itself being the path from a million initial conditions to a million associated endings. this is the intuitive definition of determinism if you've studied enough Newtonian mechanics: if a ball and a ramp start in one particular position they end up in one particular place but it always depends on what position they started in which is not necessarily controllable by an experimenter in the context of daily life. if you start with this definition of determinism you see it is no existential threat to a bunch of individuals floating around making decisions and having some set of processes they struggle to describe and label as Free Will; if determinism is discovered and people become "robots" then no aspect of human experience has been lost.<br />		<li class="field_mdem" data-qid="22,28" value="2228" data-dimension="S">lambda-calculus determinism / lambda calculus style determinism / mathematical function determinism / necessity (process of individual things being determined by laws of behavior and surrounding conditions) -><br/>
			for some weird reason people always assume that determinism equals Calvinism, where there is one set of conditions that lead to a single ending, rather than determinism itself being the path from a million initial conditions to a million associated endings. this is the intuitive definition of determinism if you've studied enough Newtonian mechanics: if a ball and a ramp start in one particular position they end up in one particular place but it always depends on what position they started in which is not necessarily controllable by an experimenter in the context of daily life. if you start with this definition of determinism you see it is no existential threat to a bunch of individuals floating around making decisions and having some set of processes they struggle to describe and label as Free Will; if determinism is discovered and people become "robots" then no aspect of human experience has been lost.<br />
	said another way: determinism is when there is an uncontrollable variable "x", similar to a person, or an unknown quantity of water, or a tennis ball of unknown mass, but you know what the "x" object is going to do even if you don't know exactly how. x goes into the lambda-calculus style function, and it pops out some wide array of possibilities based on the wide array of possibilities that go in — a graph of stuff looking like a curve or a filled shape or a volume, not a single point, describing the outcome. the presence of two objects "x" and "y" doesn't change this, it just creates a 3d graph z = f(x,y) containing a bounded cube of possibilities rather than a bounded square. the top thing to ask people who want to deny "cube determinism" is, do you want people to be able to infinitely deny that there is a possibility they will have to stop being racist, or would you be okay with the possibility of a world where them choosing to stop being racist is inevitable? if that possibility or the possibility of finding it inside the bounded cube sounds good to you, certainly that doesn't make "cube determinism" a known fact about reality, but it does mean you should investigate it.		said another way: determinism is when there is an uncontrollable variable "x", similar to a person, or an unknown quantity of water, or a tennis ball of unknown mass, but you know what the "x" object is going to do even if you don't know exactly how. x goes into the lambda-calculus style function, and it pops out some wide array of possibilities based on the wide array of possibilities that go in — a graph of stuff looking like a curve or a filled shape or a volume, not a single point, describing the outcome. the presence of two objects "x" and "y" doesn't change this, it just creates a 3d graph z = f(x,y) containing a bounded cube of possibilities rather than a bounded square. the top thing to ask people who want to deny "cube determinism" is, do you want people to be able to infinitely deny that there is a possibility they will have to stop being racist, or would you be okay with the possibility of a world where them choosing to stop being racist is inevitable? if that possibility or the possibility of finding it inside the bounded cube sounds good to you, certainly that doesn't make "cube determinism" a known fact about reality, but it does mean you should investigate it.

	</li><li class="field_mdem" data-qid="22,28" value="2228" data-dimension="S">~~determinism~~ (mathematics) / 必然論 (数学) [https://kotobank.jp/word/%E5%BF%85%E7%84%B6%E8%AB%96-610884] -> so apparently in the Japanese language it's more common to use the word "necessity" for this than "determinism". do I pick my words weirdly? I know for sure I do, but I also know that across English language texts people will use like five totally different words from different academic departments to say the same thing. I don't think you can ever get around the difficulty of differentiating underlying concepts with words by picking "more correct words".<br />		</li><li class="field_mdem" data-qid="22,28" value="2228" data-dimension="S">necessity (mathematics) / 必然論 (数学) [https://kotobank.jp/word/%E5%BF%85%E7%84%B6%E8%AB%96-610884] -> so apparently in the Japanese language it's more common to use the word "necessity" for this than "determinism". do I pick my words weirdly? I know for sure I do, but I also know that across English language texts people will use like five totally different words from different academic departments to say the same thing. I don't think you can ever get around the difficulty of differentiating underlying concepts with words by picking "more correct words".<br />
	必然論 (数学) + special relativity / 特殊相対論 = relativistic determinism (still no idea how to translate that. it'll be "相対" something I guess)		必然論 (数学) + special relativity / 特殊相対論 = relativistic determinism (still no idea how to translate that. it'll be "相対" something I guess)

Line 14:		Line 15:
	<ol class="hue clean">		<ol class="hue clean">

	{{li\|start=y\|I=S2/STM\|Q=22,21\|Q2=2221}}Determinism can form out of non-deterministic elements		{{li\|start=y\|I=S2/STM\|tradition=STM, MX\|Q=22,21\|Q2=2221}}Determinism can form out of non-deterministic elements

	{{li\|I=S2/STM/MX\|Q=22,21\|Q2=2221}}[[E:DeterminismFromNonDeterminism\|Determinism can form out of non-deterministic elements]] -> we already know this is possible, at least in a mathematical sense concerning material things that really appear unpredictable versus material things that really appear predictable. the most widely-accepted example right now is quantum mechanics. nobody really knows much about the individual particles, yet as things scale up all the particles form into predictable patterns. this is the key to building models of society and historical materialism.		{{li\|I=S2/STM/MX\|tradition=STM, MX\|Q=22,21\|Q2=2221}}Determinism can include non-deterministic elements / [[E:DeterminismFromNonDeterminism\|Determinism can form out of non-deterministic elements]] -> we already know this is possible, at least in a mathematical sense concerning material things that really appear unpredictable versus material things that really appear predictable. the most widely-accepted example right now is quantum mechanics. nobody really knows much about the individual particles, yet as things scale up all the particles form into predictable patterns. this is the key to building models of society and historical materialism.

			{{li\|I=S2/STM/MX\|tradition=STM, MX\|Q=22,21\|Q2=2221}}Determinism already acknowledges hidden variables / A deterministic statement is not a statement that something will occur inevitably under all sets of conditions, but a statement that something will occur at some particular probability under a particular set of conditions, or more specifically that beginning from a particular unknown probability that the real set of conditions will line up with the predicted set of conditions in a particular fraction of real situations, the model claims to be able to closely approximate the real outcome that particular fraction of the time; all deterministic models already contain and account for the concept of unknown information (indeterminism; probability; hidden variables; wave functions) in that determinism itself is the prediction that unknown information will produce unexpected outcomes and confound calculations some particular fraction of the time which is ideally a small one

	</li></ol>		</li></ol>

Reversedragon: Idealist economics

2026-09-06T04:43:53Z

Idealist economics

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:43, 6 September 2026
Line 30:		Line 30:

	== Related ==		== Related ==
	~~<!--~~
	<ol class="hue clean">		<ol class="hue clean">
	</li></ol~~> --~~>
			{{li\|start=y\|I=S1/YR\|Q=22,11\|Q2=2211}}Idealist economics / Yaroshenkoism (generic) / ({{9k\|RD/Q618-YouMustServeFreedom}})

			{{li\|I=S1/YR\|Q=22,12\|Q2=2212}}We have chosen poverty / All human individuals or all citizens each-separately-in-parallel-all-at-the-same-time have the power to spontaneously end poverty just because they can point their fingers at it / ({{9k\|RD/Q618-YouMustServeFreedom}})

			</li></ol>

	== Ideology codes ==		== Ideology codes ==

Reversedragon: integrate in Q22,16 "Nation-states are neither natural nor intentionally constructed"

2026-09-06T04:38:11Z

integrate in Q22,16 "Nation-states are neither natural nor intentionally constructed"

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-<!-- == Ontology entry ==
+{{NextNineThousand|PPPA=lambda-calculus determinism|User=RD|E=Q22,28|Contents=y}}
-{{HueNumberPreview|E=Q22,28}}
+== Main entry ==
--->== [[User:Reversedragon/FirstNineThousand/900|Prototype]] notes ==
+<li class="field_mdem" data-qid="22,28" value="2228" data-dimension="S">lambda-calculus determinism / lambda calculus style determinism / mathematical function determinism / necessity (process of individual things being determined by laws of behavior and surrounding conditions)  ->  for some weird reason people always assume that determinism equals Calvinism, where there is one set of conditions that lead to a single ending, rather than determinism itself being the path from a million initial conditions to a million associated endings. this is the intuitive definition of determinism if you've studied enough Newtonian mechanics: if a ball and a ramp start in one particular position they end up in one particular place but it always depends on what position they started in which is not necessarily controllable by an experimenter in the context of daily life. if you start with this definition of determinism you see it is no existential threat to a bunch of individuals floating around making decisions and having some set of processes they struggle to describe and label as Free Will; if determinism is discovered and people become "robots" then no aspect of human experience has been lost.<br />
 said another way: determinism is when there is an uncontrollable variable "x", similar to a person, or an unknown quantity of water, or a tennis ball of unknown mass, but you know what the "x" object is going to do even if you don't know exactly how. x goes into the lambda-calculus style function, and it pops out some wide array of possibilities based on the wide array of possibilities that go in — a graph of stuff looking like a curve or a filled shape or a volume, not a single point, describing the outcome. the presence of two objects "x" and "y" doesn't change this, it just creates a 3d graph z = f(x,y) containing a bounded cube of possibilities rather than a bounded square. the top thing to ask people who want to deny "cube determinism" is, do you want people to be able to infinitely deny that there is a possibility they will have to stop being racist, or would you be okay with the possibility of a world where them choosing to stop being racist is inevitable? if that possibility or the possibility of finding it inside the bounded cube sounds good to you, certainly that doesn't make "cube determinism" a known fact about reality, but it does mean you should investigate it.
@@ Line 13: / Line 11: @@
 </li></ol>
-== Rants to be re-read ==
+== Determinism and "indeterminism" ==
-* [[Special:PermanentLink/10503|determinism (physics) / Dec. 26]]
+== Subpages or related scraps ==
 [[Category:Next nine thousand (RD)]]  <!-- page ends here.  TTS-unfriendly numbers incoming
-redirects:   [[User:RD/9k/Q2228]]
+redirects or titles:
-duplication hint:   copy markup from [[Special:PermanentLink/NNNN|9k/Q22,28]] -->
+   [[User:RD/9k/Q2228]] [[Ontology talk:9k/RD/Q22,28]]

Reversedragon: Reversedragon moved page User:RD/9k/Q22,28 to Ontology talk:9k/RD/Q22,28: Moving 9k pages to EC: or nickels/5c to R: talk for search purposes

2026-09-06T04:27:44Z

Reversedragon moved page User:RD/9k/Q22,28 to Ontology talk:9k/RD/Q22,28: Moving 9k pages to EC: or nickels/5c to R: talk for search purposes

← Older revision	Revision as of 04:27, 6 September 2026
(No difference)

Reversedragon: archive rant

2025-12-27T01:07:13Z

archive rant

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:07, 27 December 2025
Line 12:		Line 12:

	</li></ol>		</li></ol>

			== Rants to be re-read ==

			* [[Special:PermanentLink/10503\|determinism (physics) / Dec. 26]]

Reversedragon: Reversedragon moved page User:RD/9k/Q2228 to User:RD/9k/Q22,28: Moving numbered Item to TTS-pronounceable title

2025-12-26T16:29:54Z

Reversedragon moved page User:RD/9k/Q2228 to User:RD/9k/Q22,28: Moving numbered Item to TTS-pronounceable title

← Older revision	Revision as of 16:29, 26 December 2025
(No difference)

Reversedragon: copy markup from 9k/Q49,84

2025-12-26T16:29:18Z

copy markup from 9k/Q49,84

New page

== [[User:Reversedragon/FirstNineThousand/900|Prototype]] notes ==

<noinclude>{{HueCSS}}</noinclude><ol class="hue clean">
</li><li class="field_mdem" data-qid="22,28" value="2228" data-dimension="S">lambda-calculus determinism / lambda calculus style determinism / mathematical function determinism / necessity (process of individual things being determined by laws of behavior and surrounding conditions) -> for some weird reason people always assume that determinism equals Calvinism, where there is one set of conditions that lead to a single ending, rather than determinism itself being the path from a million initial conditions to a million associated endings. this is the intuitive definition of determinism if you've studied enough Newtonian mechanics: if a ball and a ramp start in one particular position they end up in one particular place but it always depends on what position they started in which is not necessarily controllable by an experimenter in the context of daily life. if you start with this definition of determinism you see it is no existential threat to a bunch of individuals floating around making decisions and having some set of processes they struggle to describe and label as Free Will; if determinism is discovered and people become "robots" then no aspect of human experience has been lost.<br />
said another way: determinism is when there is an uncontrollable variable "x", similar to a person, or an unknown quantity of water, or a tennis ball of unknown mass, but you know what the "x" object is going to do even if you don't know exactly how. x goes into the lambda-calculus style function, and it pops out some wide array of possibilities based on the wide array of possibilities that go in — a graph of stuff looking like a curve or a filled shape or a volume, not a single point, describing the outcome. the presence of two objects "x" and "y" doesn't change this, it just creates a 3d graph z = f(x,y) containing a bounded cube of possibilities rather than a bounded square. the top thing to ask people who want to deny "cube determinism" is, do you want people to be able to infinitely deny that there is a possibility they will have to stop being racist, or would you be okay with the possibility of a world where them choosing to stop being racist is inevitable? if that possibility or the possibility of finding it inside the bounded cube sounds good to you, certainly that doesn't make "cube determinism" a known fact about reality, but it does mean you should investigate it.

</li><li class="field_mdem" data-qid="22,28" value="2228" data-dimension="S">determinism (mathematics) / 必然論 (数学) [https://kotobank.jp/word/%E5%BF%85%E7%84%B6%E8%AB%96-610884] -> so apparently in the Japanese language it's more common to use the word "necessity" for this than "determinism". do I pick my words weirdly? I know for sure I do, but I also know that across English language texts people will use like five totally different words from different academic departments to say the same thing. I don't think you can ever get around the difficulty of differentiating underlying concepts with words by picking "more correct words".<br />
必然論 (数学) + special relativity / 特殊相対論 = relativistic determinism (still no idea how to translate that. it'll be "相対" something I guess)

</li></ol>

[[Category:Next nine thousand (RD)]]