Calm down, dear, it's only chaos

[Anmon]

Quote by: Winter wind I don't think that counts as a reason. Why should chance care about whether an event will be life altering or not, it just happens. This is the basis of the Butterfly effect.

Not just life altering, world and society altering.
Hitler was never going to die until his part in this had been played out, he himself said in WW1 that he never felt in any real danger, a telling comment from him, when you think of all the possibility's of getting killed.

[Winter wind]

Not just life altering, world and society altering. Hitler was never going to die until his part in this had been played out, he himself said in WW1 that he never felt in any real danger, a telling comment from him, when you think of all the possibility's of getting killed.

But again, why would chance care if he was going to blow the world up or not.

Second, he said he felt no fear because he wanted to look like a war hero.

[lsbskins1]

Quote by: Anmon Yes and he could have zigged straight into a bullet as well, a lot of guys die in war not from avoiding bullets, or from ones aimed at them, but by going into the path of one. If Hitler had done that then WW2 wouldn't have happened, thats just too big a world altering event to lay down at the mercy of chance.

Why, because it would be too disturbing to believe we have no more control than that? It's impossible that some jerk like Oswald could have shot Kennedy on his own, because the world can't be that unpredictable? Why is fate a more appropriate historical determinant? What attribute does it have over chance?

[grandpa]

Quote by: lsbskins1 Why, because it would be too disturbing to believe we have no more control than that? It's impossible that some jerk like Oswald could have shot Kennedy on his own, because the world can't be that unpredictable?

People are more likely to see, or want to see, order in the world. When things go "out of order," we call it chaos. It doesn't mean there is no determinism at all, but functionally intelligent beings have basically been "determined" to have capacity for choice, even when choices available appear limited. If Hitler had been raised under different conditions, one can easily assume he may have been different.

However, in authoritarian societies, despots and assassinations are not unpredictable.

Grandpa h.

[Anmon]

=Winter wind;496600]But again, why would chance care if he was going to blow the world up or not.

Exactly, thats why I don't believe it is chance that decides everything.

Second, he said he felt no fear because he wanted to look like a war hero

He didn't say that, he said he felt no fear of dying, as in he didn't believe he would die in the war(WWI) but of course he would have felt everyday fears of being hurt or just fear of conflict, that is natural to everyone.

[Winter wind]

Quote by: Anmon Exactly, thats why I don't believe it is chance that decides everything.

Yep, there we go.

This is Calvinism. But say, the butterfly effect still stands. The reason is, if God wanted to not have WWII, all He would of had to do was to have Hitler shot during WWI.

The butterfly effect is true because small things can snowball and have a huge effect on the world.

PS, what does anmon mean?

[Anmon]

Quote by: lsbskins1 Why, because it would be too disturbing to believe we have no more control than that?

Im not arguing we have control, but fate does.
We have as little control over that as chance.

It's impossible that some jerk like Oswald could have shot Kennedy on his own, because the world can't be that unpredictable?

That could be, but there is too much evidence that JFK was really done in by his own government, or whatever is pulling the strings of that government, Oswald was a patsy expertly groomed and positioned to take the fall, I suggest you read up on the assassination, and strange circumstances that allowed a marksman to kill JFK so easily.
Its already been established that there is no way LHO could have taken those shots from the position and angle where he was placed, especially so accurately, and with the rifle he had.
Most damning of government involvement also is in the Zapruda tape, you see just before Kennedy's car comes into the killing zone, bodyguards who normally stand on the car in places or at least walk/run along side it to help block a possible shot, are called back to the car behind Kennedy's leaving the President open for a clear shot on him.
This says who ever is co ordinating security obviously knows the President must be in the open so he can be taken out, its just too convenient to be co incidence, that within a minute of security being removed out of the assassins firing line the President is also killed.
You see one agent throw his hands up in bewilderment because he probably doesn't know why he is being pulled away from the presidents car.

YouTube - JFK assassination: Secret Service Standdown

Why is fate a more appropriate historical determinant? What attribute does it have over chance?

Destiny.

[Anmon]

[quote]

Quote by: Winter wind Yep, there we go. This is Calvinism. But say, the butterfly effect still stands. The reason is, if God wanted to not have WWII, all He would of had to do was to have Hitler shot during WWI.

So there must have been then a reason for WW2 to happen, because it leads on to the cold war, which leads on to how the world is now.
And you put all this down to chance? That none of this may have happened if Hitler had zigged instead of zagged?

The butterfly effect is true because small things can snowball and have a huge effect on the world.

Well its one hell of a big butterfly then if its true in Hitlers case.
I prefer pre-destination myself, your time to shuffle off this mortal coil will come when it is time, not because of chance.

PS, what does anmon mean?

nothing.

[grandpa]

Quote by: Anmon So there must have been then a reason for WW2 to happen, because it leads on to the cold war, which leads on to how the world is now. And you put all this down to chance?

There is a reason for all social events -- if we choose to find one. For example, we might say the Chinese government beats protestors because they were protesting againt China, but the explanations are infinite in number. We don't have time to examine all the things that COULD be true, so we may find the most likely explanations and assign order to what could just as easily be called chaos.

Grandpa h.

[Winter wind]

Quote by: anmon And you put all this down to chance? That none of this may have happened if Hitler had zigged instead of zagged?

I do, but from your point of view. It shouldn't matter, because predestination will work like that. Where they just change one little thing to make all the difference.

Well its one hell of a big butterfly then if its true in Hitlers case. I prefer pre-destination myself, your time to shuffle off this mortal coil will come when it is time, not because of chance.

Forget chance, do you agree that small actions can have a huge effect on how things will play out?

Quote by: anmon nothing

your hiding something..no man.

[Anmon]

because predestination will work like that. Where they just change one little thing to make all the difference.

Yeah but thats more planned not circumstance.

Forget chance, do you agree that small actions can have a huge effect on how things will play out?

Possibly, but I believe they are predestined as well, and could have hardly any effect, sometimes none.
What about big actions? You seem to be saying everything comes from just small actions that snowball into massive events, so where do you see a big action turning into?

your hiding something..no man.

lol an anagram isn't it? wasn't intentional, least I think it wasn't.

[Anmon]

Quote by: grandpa There is a reason for all social events -- if we choose to find one. Grandpa h.

Or identifying the chain of events that lead up to them.

[Chris the Chees]

Hitler did.

No, Hitler did not. Hitler had avast array of underlings who competed with each other to Make Nazi germany what it was and the way it behaved. Hans Mommsen and numerous historians sinse have made that abundently clear. The structuralist arguments, when it comes to the Third Reich are some of the most convinsing going.

[Anmon]

Quote by: Chris the Chees No, Hitler did not. Hitler had avast array of underlings who competed with each other to Make Nazi germany what it was and the way it behaved. Hans Mommsen and numerous historians sinse have made that abundently clear. The structuralist arguments, when it comes to the Third Reich are some of the most convinsing going.

Well of course he had a lot of people underneath him helping, duh, but he was the focal point for the movement that change the world.
Without him it would never have happened, he was the lynch pin so to speak.
Also you really need to use your spell check dude, you right click on all those mis pelt words and select the right option and hey presto! your post becomes more coherent.
It makes for easier reading, not to mention just common courtesy.

[lsbskins1]

Quote by: Anmon Im not arguing we have control, but fate does. We have as little control over that as chance. That could be, but there is too much evidence that JFK was really done in by his own government, or whatever is pulling the strings of that government, Oswald was a patsy expertly groomed and positioned to take the fall, I suggest you read up on the assassination, and strange circumstances that allowed a marksman to kill JFK so easily. Its already been established that there is no way LHO could have taken those shots from the position and angle where he was placed, especially so accurately, and with the rifle he had. Most damning of government involvement also is in the Zapruda tape, you see just before Kennedy's car comes into the killing zone, bodyguards who normally stand on the car in places or at least walk/run along side it to help block a possible shot, are called back to the car behind Kennedy's leaving the President open for a clear shot on him. This says who ever is co ordinating security obviously knows the President must be in the open so he can be taken out, its just too convenient to be co incidence, that within a minute of security being removed out of the assassins firing line the President is also killed. You see one agent throw his hands up in bewilderment because he probably doesn't know why he is being pulled away from the presidents car. YouTube - JFK assassination: Secret Service Standdown Destiny.

As I suspected...

No more need to try. You need some bigger thing to be in control. Fate is code for God. And where it is not God, it must be something more powerful than some snively little freak, so it must be some powerful element of the government...

[Winter wind]

Quote by: anmon Yeah but thats more planned not circumstance.

That doesn't matter in the Butterfly effect. If a coin toss is the difference between peace and war, and it is destined one way or the other. it's still a small incident causing a vastly larger one.

What about big actions? You seem to be saying everything comes from just small actions that snowball into massive events, so where do you see a big action turning into?

Just as big. Why not?

the matter with the Butterfly effect is less about chance and more about how hard it is to predict the outcome of an action. Because it's effects are so wide spread.

its like the difference between softly touching a domino in a long chain as opposed to smacking it. Both set off a chain reaction.

lol an anagram isn't it? wasn't intentional, least I think it wasn't.

sigh...it was worth a try.

Still, why a random jumble of letters? why not something that means something to you?

[Anmon]

Quote by: Winter wind That doesn't matter in the Butterfly effect. If a coin toss is the difference between peace and war, and it is destined one way or the other. it's still a small incident causing a vastly larger one. Just as big. Why not? the matter with the Butterfly effect is less about chance and more about how hard it is to predict the outcome of an action. Because it's effects are so wide spread. its like the difference between softly touching a domino in a long chain as opposed to smacking it. Both set off a chain reaction. sigh...it was worth a try. Still, why a random jumble of letters? why not something that means something to you?

It does mean something to me, thats why I'm not telling.
I'll answer the rest tomorrow, I'm tired.

[Chris the Chees]

Quote by: Anmon Well of course he had a lot of people underneath him helping, duh, but he was the focal point for the movement that change the world. Without him it would never have happened, he was the lynch pin so to speak. Also you really need to use your spell check dude, you right click on all those mis pelt words and select the right option and hey presto! your post becomes more coherent. It makes for easier reading, not to mention just common courtesy.

but he was the focal point for the movement that change the world.

And? The fact of the matter is that Hitler did not single handedly shape the German Reich. He, just like a multitude of others, was but one individual who had a hand in shaping the regime.

Without him it would never have happened, he was the lynch pin so to speak.

But by the same token, it would not have happened without Göring, Goebbels, Bormann, Dietrich, Drexler, Eichmann, Göth, Heydrich, Himmler, etc. The list is vast, then you have historians such as Daniel Goldhagen who have argued that the entire German people were 'Hitler's willing executioners'.

Sorry, but the argument that the entire thing was down to Hitler, and Hitler alone is just wrong.

Also you really need to use your spell check dude, you right click on all those mis pelt words and select the right option and hey presto! your post becomes more coherent.

Tell you what, I will take your advice on spelling and post presentation seriously when you start using paragraphs properly and employ basic grammatical rules.

It makes for easier reading, not to mention just common courtesy.

[Anmon]

[=Chris the Chees;496773]And? The fact of the matter is that Hitler did not single handedly shape the German Reich. He, just like a multitude of others, was but one individual who had a hand in shaping the regime.

But your placing all these others on the same level of importance and influence in world history as Hitler, when they obviously aren't.
After Jesus Christ, he is the second most discussed individual in the world, doesn't that tell you something?
Yeah of course he couldn't have got anywhere without all those other guys to help, but he was the focus that bought them all together to make the Nazi party what it became.

But by the same token, it would not have happened without Göring, Goebbels, Bormann, Dietrich, Drexler, Eichmann, Göth, Heydrich, Himmler, etc. The list is vast

Agreed, but Hitler was still the most important one, thats why he was the leader.

then you have historians such as Daniel Goldhagen who have argued that the entire German people were 'Hitler's willing executioners'.

I doubt they were willing, in the lead up to WW2 the Nazi party had the streets under their control, and if anyone objected to them they were just beaten up or killed.
Fear tends to make you agree with people like that.
Of course if you just went about your business like you were allowed to, do all the normal things like allowed, like have party's, weddings get drunk etc, then they were your best buddy's, as long as you didn't speak against Hitler you were fine, they left you alone.
So offered that choice the average German person that wasn't a target of the Nazi party, just went along and pretended nothing was wrong, because their own liberty's were not being interfered with.

Sorry, but the argument that the entire thing was down to Hitler, and Hitler alone is just wrong.

Sorry, but you wouldn't have had WW2 without him.
Not in Europe anyway.

Tell you what, I will take your advice on spelling and post presentation seriously when you start using paragraphs properly and employ basic grammatical rules. It makes for easier reading, not to mention just common courtesy.

My paragraphs and grammar, are also better than yours.

[grandpa]

Quote by: Anmon Or identifying the chain of events that lead up to them.

Which doesn't necessarily mean "fate." Fate only exists in the sense that once something's happened, it's happened.

Grandpa h.