I can prove fate and free will at the same time. Each being

Your paragraph defining free will is a total mess bordering on nonsensical. What do you mean when we can choose "from a set of actions that will always happen anyway"? If you can't satisfactorially prove this is the case to others, everything else you have falls apart.

>>2001885
>from a set of actions that will always happen anyway

>asking to be spoonfed.

It's in there, bud.

>>2001895

>I'm gonna make this super-bold claim about the nature of reality, but I can't prove my assertions

You have nothing more substantive than people who wonder if maybe we're the reflection, and what we see in the mirror is actually the real world.

File: paint.jpg (37KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 1024x768px

>>2001885
>>2001895

Okay so.

L2 is the choice of having chicken and not cereal, you live in the line you do not see the picture, you make the choice, when you take a step back and look at the whole line from start to finish form an earlier point you know what he is going to have for brekky (L1). It's essentially predetermined, but that's one singular iteration of the universe, the line goes for ever (or not depending if you believe in god). It is both determined and it is not.

>>2001932
>ideas such as free-will
>fate and the like can be proven objectively

Right. That's why this discussion exists in the first place, right?

The common thought of today it's either fate or free-will, when really its a form of both.

That's not what most people mean when we talk about it though. You didn't really solve anything, you just presented a simple idea in a convoluted way.

>There is only a certain amount of things which can happen due to matter and the finite amount of ways it can define itself.
No, maybe there's an infinite amount of things which can happen. You need to show this.

>there is a universe where you didn't have chicken and had cereal, yet everything in that iteration happened the exact same, it's just one day your choices are different. There is also a universe where this choice leads to vastly different outcomes.
This is really unscientific by the way. It's more a sci-fi trope with choices like that splitting into different universes. At the VERY best it's an unconfirmed hypothesis.

Holy shit get off your high horse and go read some actual philosophy before you start spouting bullshit.

>>2001941
>No, maybe there's an infinite amount of things which can happen. You need to show this.
Actually wrong. Are you asking me to do the maths on the amount of may after can align itself versus the size of the universe versus to find out how long it will take for the same things to strait happening? I won't, but people have, because that's literally the way it is. If the universe is big enough (our isn't) due to the finite way matter can align itself you will find your doppleganger. The size of our universe however does not allow for this, infinite iterations of a smaller universe does however.

>It's more a sci-fi trope with choices like that splitting into different universes
Kek, why did I even respond to you? Metaphysical choices create and destroy physical universes, not in an ideological sense, in a literal physical one.

xD, now that's some scyfy shit.

>>2001960
>versus the size of the universe
Holy shit, have you figured out that the Universe is finite? Better go publish that real quick, you're practically guaranteed a Nobel Prize!

Even if it is finite, who says matter has a finite amount of ways to align itself? It might be infinite.

So yes, I'm asking you to show your work.

>>2001960
Just fyi, my only evidence of infinite universes is this.

If we exist now, we can exist again - to what end? You don't believe the amount of iterations is finite simply because this is the only universe you will live in?

>>2001966
I literally told you it's not my work but others. I aint gunna spoonfeed you the rest.

Here is a test for you anon. I leave it up to you. The maths is there for you to find. It literally exists, your argument against mine is 'prove it'. I am not lying here, it's there.

Be ignorant, or not - it's up to you.

>>2001970
>I aint gunna spoonfeed you the rest.
Read: I'm not going to prove my statements.

OK, then I'm just going to reject them. You really should send in that proof of the universe being finite though, just as personal advice from me to you.