when i nearly stay with the fact and cant be proven wrong

We are getting some where, yes i dont exclude enviormental effects

But do you claim that those effects are also owed to biology?

I have said this what 5 times now

i wonder if you are going to "remeber " it this time

Its both

how are you not getting that it is both

why are you so black and white

dont you have the ability to not think in absolutes?

Nice dodge. Are 'environmental' factors owed to biological factors?

All the sources i have posted , state that it is both

Do biological factors *cause* environmental factors?

in cludeing the beaver one that you strawmen`ed

yes

Then you are a biological determinist.

So if biological factors cause environmental factors, then that would cover all human actions?

iff your parrents have a predisposition because of their biological atributes they create a envirorment for teh child

biology creates the enviorment

And what about the actions of others?

siomething which you have been saying as well 😄

Including you and me?

and now you are arguing against me for having that stance

I didn't actually say that 'biology creates the environment'.

Nice straw man.

No it isnt a strawmen,

you u abnd me includiong ? wtf are you talking about, what is this vague on the person line of bullshit ?

Our actions have effects on other people, and they can contribute to effects on many more people than we think.

That's why I brought up the 'Butterfly effect'.

So your actions must also be owed to biology.

If so, you must be purely acting in accordance with you biology, and you can say that you know this. You have to be able to explain how this is correct.

And you have to know everything about yourself to do that since determinism involves a claim that *everything* is determined by something else - some force or another.

But at the moment that you try to model yourself, you have to account for you modelling yourself, and you have to fit this action of yours into the model of yourself.

And you have to account for that action of making this new model of yourself.

And so on.

This process can go on forever, but if you stop it at any point, you're left with a 'shit I don't know'.

You've already changed; if you can't account for that new change in your brand-new model, then how can you say that you're fully determined by something?

How come every time you make this judgement, you find something else which is a direct result of you thinking about this - something that you've never thought before?

You can keep saying that it's biology but something else will just pop out.

**In short: for biological determinism to be true, everyone including you must be biologically-determined, but you must prove this by showing that all possible actions that you and others make are owed to biology - but you cannot do this because you would have to be dealing with an explodingly-infinite amount of things which escape your reach simply because you've been thinking about this in the first place.**

**Given this and your inclusion in society, you therefore cannot explain how we think through biological models or through any model which does not include us as thinking, self-determining forces.**

***It means that the way in which you approach politics and economics is fundamentally missing what we are - you are instead opting to focus on frozen understanding of ourselves which you take as being representative of ourselves.***