Considerations of Free Will

A

Asguard

Kiss my dark side
Valued Senior Member
free will is an illusion. We are just as deterministic as a microbe, the only difference being what it feels like to be an out-put of a complex system

Mod Note: This topic is split from another discussion.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
People have yet to prove that free will is an illusion. Some people are as unpredicatable as the universe.

So...... mutations are not random, eh?
 
truth seeker: does a bactirum have free will?

when you look at one it LOOKS like it has but how can that be? does an animal?

how do you know we are not all part of a complex system. Just because there is no free will doesnt mean that you can predict the future, its called an "emergent property"

Just like the weather we cant predict it ahead of time very well but it is still deterministic
 
Ok. I think I can agree with that. Maybe there is a certain percentage that cannot be defined? :confused:
 
TS think on this for a minute. I was reading a book that pointed out that people only act like they are the only single person with free will. ie If a guy who you thought was hedrosexual (please dont use this to start a gay debate) kissed a guy would you say "oh x is exersising his free will, he has been much happier since he kissed y" or are you more likly to say something along the lines of "thats not like x" untill you justify it by him being drunk or doing it for a bet ect or we say something like "now thats something i didnt know" ect and think we can use it in latter dealings with x

the point the book was making is that we arnt choice making machines we are judgment machines
 
Asguard said:
TS think on this for a minute. I was reading a book that pointed out that people only act like they are the only single person with free will. ie If a guy who you thought was hedrosexual (please dont use this to start a gay debate) kissed a guy would you say "oh x is exersising his free will, he has been much happier since he kissed y" or are you more likly to say something along the lines of "thats not like x" untill you justify it by him being drunk or doing it for a bet ect or we say something like "now thats something i didnt know" ect and think we can use it in latter dealings with x
Click to expand...
*heterosexual...

I'm not sure about what you are saying. I would simply say that wither an internal or external circumstance compelled x to kiss y, or that x went against the circumstances (such as the "danger" of losing his "image", or whatever ridiculous throughts people have about homosexuals) and chose to do what he wanted to. Either way, it is a choice. Both choices are "determined" either by previous circumstances or historical circumstances, eventough there is still the "random" element of choice, which comes from either following the "flow of life" or going against the general flow of your life.

A good example of how free will and determinism work together is in habits. A habit is an action that is determined by previous conditioning. If we had no free will, our lives would be simply a complex string of habits. However, we do have free will, so we can become aware of the habits that we have and change them, which would go against the general flow of life.

the point the book was making is that we arnt choice making machines we are judgment machines
Click to expand...
Yes, we do make judgments. But one thing that is crucial in determining the existance of free will is the explanation of spontaneous meaningless choices. For instance, if you raise a finger, what is the reason behind that? Why did you raise your finger? If there is no reason for that, no logical cause behind it, than how can free will not exist?

Not only that, but we also often go against the general flow of life, as I said before. If someone is constantly abused and/or neglected throughout half of his/hers life, you would expect that that person would become bitter, right? That would be a simple cause and effect matter. What about me? Am I bitter? Well, I should be, because I've had a pretty shitty life. Still, I'm a compassionate person. Why? Because that is the choice I made. Not that it was an easy choice. Of course, the general flow would be for me to become a very bitter, disgusting person, but that didn't happen. How do you explain that without free will?

I could go on and on for the reasons. I have an entire psychological theory based on cause and effect, and how our choices relates to that. Maybe I should post that later...
 
TS wether there is a religious meaning or not (ie gods plan) doesnt matter. There doesnt have to be a "meaning" for it.

As for wether you become bitter or not it depends on YOU, how your brain is wired. As i said TS just because something LOOKS like its making a choice doesnt mean its not just a complex system. Go one step further and ignore humans and look a Guae (sorry cant rember how to spell it). If you take the whole earth as a system and study it, it COULD look like it was making choices. Ie which species live, which die ect ect. You cant tell any of this before hand and you also cant tell what the earth will end up looking like. This is because all biology is a complex system by default. That means that the results are emergent and arnt oviouse from the indervidual parts, infact in this case even the PARTS arnt oviouse at the start. Why if we form a part of a complex system in relation to the earth would we be so special that we have "free will" and the rest of the system doesnt? Because free will is just an illusion
 
Re: Free Will

Free will may or may not be an illusion. Cosmology, actually, is a major factor in determining that answer. A finite Universe with finite potential produces a strong likelihood of a determinist Universe. An infinite Universe is just as determinist, except for the practical effect that the number of factors affecting any determined outcome is infinite.

In either case, the breadth of possibility leaves human beings awash in an illusion of free will.

I wish I could remember the post, but once upon a time someone asserted that they had free will, and provided the example that when he is hungry, he chooses to eat.

The History of every major Galactic Civilization tends to pass through three distinct and recognizable phases, those of Survival, Inquiry and Sophistication, otherwise known as the How, Why and Where phases.

For instance, the first phase is characterized by the question How can we eat? the second by the question Why do we eat? and the third by the question Where shall we have lunch?

Hitchhiker's Guide To The Galaxy
Click to expand...

Free will, baby. Can ya dig it?

I tend to hold with the "illusion" camp.

There are so many factors determining our fates, though, the effect is the same: we notice what we think we choose. At some point, it's good enough.
 
Asguard said:
TS wether there is a religious meaning or not (ie gods plan) doesnt matter. There doesnt have to be a "meaning" for it.
Click to expand...
No, that wan't what I mean. I was talking about "meaning" as in "cause".
Does everything has a cause? I think this is the question that can solve the free will issue. If everything is directly caused and produce an effect, than free will does not exist. But if there are things that are not deermined by cause, than free will does exist.

As for wether you become bitter or not it depends on YOU, how your brain is wired.
Click to expand...
Ok. So what is that? What does the "wiring" of my brain implies?

As i said TS just because something LOOKS like its making a choice doesnt mean its not just a complex system.
Click to expand...
Never said otherwise. I even pointed that out in another thread. However, what I have in mind is that the system is complex because it includes free will. :eek:
That is, it i more complex than we think it is....

Go one step further and ignore humans and look a Guae (sorry cant rember how to spell it).If you take the whole earth as a system and study it, it COULD look like it was making choices.
Click to expand...
Ahhh... do you mean "Gaia"? :confused:

Ie which species live, which die ect ect. You cant tell any of this before hand and you also cant tell what the earth will end up looking like. This is because all biology is a complex system by default. That means that the results are emergent and arnt oviouse from the indervidual parts, infact in this case even the PARTS arnt oviouse at the start. Why if we form a part of a complex system in relation to the earth would we be so special that we have "free will" and the rest of the system doesnt? Because free will is just an illusion
Click to expand...
The argument that complex systems produces illusionary randomness does not prove that we don't have free will. To prove you have to make the connection.


Also, if free will does not exist, how can you explain our throughts? How can you explain all our cognitive processes? How can you explain creativity, imagination and wisdom? If we were just a black box that can be pushed around, like Skinner said, than we wouldn't have anything in our minds, we would just be hopelessly affected by everything around us without ever being able to go against that. How would J. K. Rowling create Harry Poter, or JRR Tolkien create Lord of the Rings if it wasn't for free will!?!?
 
yes i ment Gaia (its the name a scientist gave to a smiliar theory)

now why do you make the jump that just because everything is part of a complex system it must involve free will?

there is no requirement for intelligence to make a system complex, the solar system is a complex system, ecology is complex, the WEATHER is complex. There is a little computer program called something like ant country, in which a little dot on the screen moves differently as it comes across different sqares (the whole screen is like a giant chess board). When it hits a black it turnes one way, when it hits a white it turns the other and as it steeps on a square it changes its colour. After a few goes it looks chaotic but if you let it run eventually it makes a highway of squares runing diagnolly across the screen. From the start no one would have predicted that this would happen and there is no short cuts to work out how it will end except to run the whole program. They also dont know if there are any other possable endings for it. This is not because the ant has free will (altho it could look like it was intelligently making the highway), its because its an emergent property of the complex system

Why do you think that just because a system is complex that it means its dull? LOTR, HP, ect are all emergent propertys of the system, ie they are things that wernt oviouse from the sum total of the parts, at least not until they were close to being writen. Some amount of prediction in a complex system maybe possable (like tomorows weather). Once LOTR was writter and we saw what we could do with movies we could have predicted that it was PROBABLE someone would try to turn it into a movie, we might (looking at how good special effects are now) have predicted it would be a GOOD movie, but we couldnt have predicted the WHEN because the system is emergent.

Free will is an illusion but that doesnt stop us being self aware, its just another emergent propity of our bodys
 
Asguard said:
now why do you make the jump that just because everything is part of a complex system it must involve free will?
Click to expand...
I never said that. I said that free will should be considered even if you have a complex system. It doesn't matter how complex your system is, it could either have free will involved or not. I'm not jumping to the conclusion that it must involve free will, it is you are jumping to the conclusion that it must not involve free will.

there is no requirement for intelligence to make a system complex, the solar system is a complex system, ecology is complex, the WEATHER is complex. There is a little computer program called something like ant country, in which a little dot on the screen moves differently as it comes across different sqares (the whole screen is like a giant chess board). When it hits a black it turnes one way, when it hits a white it turns the other and as it steeps on a square it changes its colour. After a few goes it looks chaotic but if you let it run eventually it makes a highway of squares runing diagnolly across the screen. From the start no one would have predicted that this would happen and there is no short cuts to work out how it will end except to run the whole program. They also dont know if there are any other possable endings for it. This is not because the ant has free will (altho it could look like it was intelligently making the highway), its because its an emergent property of the complex system
Click to expand...
I can make a computer program that simulates a city. What happens when I click a button or when I build something in one place as opposed to the other is determined. However, my creation is my only creation and it looks different from all other's creation, because it is a reflection of who I am.

Once again I say, the only way to disprove free will is if you prove that there is anything in the universe that is not caused.

And you haven't explained what happens in our minds either.

Free will is an illusion but that doesnt stop us being self aware, its just another emergent propity of our bodys
Click to expand...
What is the nature of cosnciousness anyways? It doesn't resemble anything else in the universe.
 
TS thats a BIG leep. how the hell do you know that there havent been dinosauar civilisations, crab wars, intelligent squid all who have died millions of years before we even came out of the trees. How the hell do you know that no other planet has inteligent life? hell how do you know that a PLANET cant be intelligent

"I can make a computer program that simulates a city. What happens when I click a button or when I build something in one place as opposed to the other is determined. However, my creation is my only creation and it looks different from all other's creation, because it is a reflection of who I am.
"

so what? i can play an ultima game, nither have anything to do with the fact that this is a simple program following BASIC rules: when you hit a black square you turn left, when you hit a white square you turn right, when you step on a square you change its colour. Three simple rules and there is NO WAY we can predict what these 3 rules will do. The ant has no choice, its totally controlled and we know its limitations EXACTLY yet it is still unpredictable

"Once again I say, the only way to disprove free will is if you prove that there is anything in the universe that is not caused.
"

caused by WHOM? cause and effect are deterministic too, If you throw a ball at a wall the "laws of physics" predict how it will bounce off, basically its predictable (basically because there could be hidden constraints we dont know about). Basically that is the whole point, between chaos (which says you need to have the starting measurements EXACT or its unpredictable) and complexicty and emergence (which state that it doesnt MATTER how well you measure the conditions, you STILL cant predict it) there is no REASON for "free will". Infact it would die to the whatshisname's rasor. Or are you saying that bacterium have free will?

what makes us special isnt our illusion of free will, its our self awareness, the ability of our brains to recognise its OWN pattens as well as the patterns around us
 
Asguard said:
TS thats a BIG leep. how the hell do you know that there havent been dinosauar civilisations, crab wars, intelligent squid all who have died millions of years before we even came out of the trees. How the hell do you know that no other planet has inteligent life? hell how do you know that a PLANET cant be intelligent
Click to expand...
I don't. Why are you saying that?

so what? i can play an ultima game, nither have anything to do with the fact that this is a simple program following BASIC rules: when you hit a black square you turn left, when you hit a white square you turn right, when you step on a square you change its colour. Three simple rules and there is NO WAY we can predict what these 3 rules will do. The ant has no choice, its totally controlled and we know its limitations EXACTLY yet it is still unpredictable
Click to expand...
Do you know anything about programming?

caused by WHOM? cause and effect are deterministic too,
Click to expand...
Yeeees.... that's what I clearly said that you have to disprove that not everything in the universe is dependent on causation. Determinism implies that there is a cause for everything, that everything is determined by a cause, which produces an effect. It is not caused by "whom", the question is by "what". If something in the universe cannot be explained through causation, than determinism fails.

If you throw a ball at a wall the "laws of physics" predict how it will bounce off, basically its predictable (basically because there could be hidden constraints we dont know about). Basically that is the whole point, between chaos (which says you need to have the starting measurements EXACT or its unpredictable) and complexicty and emergence (which state that it doesnt MATTER how well you measure the conditions, you STILL cant predict it) there is no REASON for "free will".
Click to expand...
What do you think of the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle? Do you think that it is actually determined? What about those weird situations where a particle is in more than one place at the same time? What about Quantum Entanglement and String Theory?

Infact it would die to the whatshisname's rasor.
Click to expand...
Occam's razor is not necessarily true. Not to mention that even if Occam's razor is true, one could argue that free will is actually the simplest answer.

Let us not forget that the Theory of Everything itself already has many String theory scenarios.......

Or are you saying that bacterium have free will?
Click to expand...
I don't know. How would I know?

what makes us special isnt our illusion of free will, its our self awareness, the ability of our brains to recognise its OWN pattens as well as the patterns around us
Click to expand...
What is self-awareness? Wouldn't self-awareness imply free will?
 
Last edited:
TS i am going to ask tiassa to split the thread because this is to interesting to just take over another thread if thats ok with you

"Wouldn't self-awareness imply free will?" no, self awarness implies that we can recognise the pattens in OURSELVES not that we can do anything about them

"What do you think of the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle? "

This is going to insult alot of people probably but all that principle says is that WE cant do the sums. SO WHAT? just because we cant calculate it doesnt mean its not happerning

"Let us not forget that the Theory of Everything itself already has many String theory scenarios......."

say we work out the theory of everything, say its just a way to combine gravity with quantum macanics for agument sake. So we have this theory and we want to predict the weather so we have to plug in the EXACT positions of every quantium partical that could POSSABLE effect the weather? Thats not going to work because chaos takes over. Just because we cant calculate it doesnt mean it doesnt exist. all the "laws of physics" are just storys (lies to children so to speak) that give us rough aproximations of how the world exists. YES the current storys about quantum physics say that they involve random chance but even chance doesnt imply that a partical could CHOSE which way it will go

"Not to mention that even if Occam's razor is true, one could argue that free will is actually the simplest answer." how would free will be the simplest answer. We ALREADY have so much that MUST be deterministic (like the weather, solar system, the universe ect) that why must life be any different. The simplest answer would be that our minds make JUDGEMENTS but even those JUGEMENTS are deterministic. They are emergent propitys of the way our mind works against the background
 
Hey Asguard,

Sorry I took a while. I'm crazy with so much work....

no, self awarness implies that we can recognise the pattens in OURSELVES not that we can do anything about them
Click to expand...
Well, I question that because self-awareness often seem to affect the patterns. In psychology, we have something called "reactivity". Reactivity is basically a reaction that an observer causes in the person being observed when the person observed perceive that they are being observed. That is a major problem in simple observations and one of the reasons why we have studies. What I'm saying is that simple self-awareness can create "distorted" and "unexplainable" behaviour- I mean, it is not deterministic.

This is going to insult alot of people probably but all that principle says is that WE cant do the sums. SO WHAT? just because we cant calculate it doesnt mean its not happerning
Click to expand...
It is not that simple. The basic problem is with quantum entanglement. It is not a simple matter of calculation, it is how things are connected even tough they are extremely apart. Particles that are at the same time in two places?

say we work out the theory of everything, say its just a way to combine gravity with quantum macanics for agument sake. So we have this theory and we want to predict the weather so we have to plug in the EXACT positions of every quantium partical that could POSSABLE effect the weather? Thats not going to work because chaos takes over. Just because we cant calculate it doesnt mean it doesnt exist. all the "laws of physics" are just storys (lies to children so to speak) that give us rough aproximations of how the world exists. YES the current storys about quantum physics say that they involve random chance but even chance doesnt imply that a partical could CHOSE which way it will go
Click to expand...
Yes, but chance can create strange things...

how would free will be the simplest answer. We ALREADY have so much that MUST be deterministic (like the weather, solar system, the universe ect) that why must life be any different. The simplest answer would be that our minds make JUDGEMENTS but even those JUGEMENTS are deterministic. They are emergent propitys of the way our mind works against the background
Click to expand...
Well.... I don't know.....
They both seem quite simple, actually.....

You know what? It seems that determinism would be the simplest answer. But I don't believe the univere is that simple. I mean.... I cannot really explain gambling without randomness. Some gambling games might be very deterministic, but some seem completely random.

Also, the biggest factor that makes me believe in free will is struggle. I don't know about you, but I'm often struggling in life. First of all, no matter how good I'm at something, it is not just automatic. For instance, when I play piano, I might train for hours, weeks and months on a single music, but I never get to play it completely automatic. I have been able to completely space out in some musics, but regardless of how good I get at them, I need to be extremely concentrated and self-aware. Not only that, but when I'm still learning a music, I have to concentrate even more and clearly think in my mind which note I should be playing. There are many circumstances involved which could define whether I will play one note as oppoed to the other, but regardless of the circumstances, I still have the power to choose the right note even if I have been playing the wrong note for months!

Secondly, it is very hard to explain the breaking off habits with a deterministic point of view. For instance, last week I got my first speech at a Toastmasters meeting. I uttered 17 "uhm"s throughout the entire thing. I was completely unaware of that while I was speaking and after. When I heard I had had 17 "uhm"s, I was shocked. That was because it is a habit, that I wasn't aware off. That was totally deterministic. However, now that I became aware of that, I'm able to break off the habit, if I "choose" to do so. You may say that the decision is deterministic because thi is better for me and I simply chooe what is better for me, but it is not that simple. I might "choose" not to do it because I'm lazy, and that "choice" would be determined by my personality. Or, I might just be mazochist and that would determine my "choice". Or I just plain don't think it is important! And that's all good, it can all be considered as deterministic, if we find out that there's only determinism. However (and this is a big however), the process of break the habit requires A LOT of energy, determination and perseverance, because our minds are set up in a way that we simply keep following the habit. To break off the habit is to go against the determinism, the circumstances, and this is the key ingredient of my belief in free will- that we are able to struggle against the circumstances that surround us in order to change those circumstances through the choices that we make in our behaviour.

Now.... if you can explain our struggle in a way that completely denies free will, I would be more than happy to hear from you. Because my psychological theory is heavily dependent on circumstances and how we deal with those circumstances that shape our lives. If there was no free will, I would be competely able to determine the behavior patterns and even the destiny of many people, which would make my entire theory much more simple and straightforward.

But I love sponteneity. I'm more than happy to have to deal with this strange thing that we call free will....

So, in other words..... I "believe" in Random Determinism......
 
Asguard said:
"What do you think of the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle? "

This is going to insult alot of people probably but all that principle says is that WE cant do the sums. SO WHAT? just because we cant calculate it doesnt mean its not happerning
Click to expand...
Alas, I shall be predicatable here - HUP is not based on our inability to make measurements, it is a physical property of the wavefunction. Although HUP is a quantum rule, the same lack of determinism is found in classical waves.

As to Free will/determinism, both are essentially faiths, thus I believe in neither, but keep an open mind.
 
doesnt that principle say that WE cant know the exact position AND the exact speed? By DEFULT the partical "knows" were its going and how its getting there

sorry i have no time to respond to yours right now TS (not unless you want a rushed usless answer)
 
Without the establishment of free will, it is imbecilic to have laws.


Every wondered how to incarcerate a killer suffering from Multiple Personality Disorder? Is it reasonable to assume one personality has free will and the other doesn't without any justification whatsoever? Nope. Is it at all sensible by any standard? Nope.

Then why the double standard for single personalities? Hmm

Morons defend society.
 
Reading arguments for secular determinism is almost as jejune a field as Calvinist predestinationists debating if lapsarianism, infralapsarianism or supralapsarianism is correct.

So someone believes in free will and someone is a biological determinist or an infralapsarian.

OK by me.
 
geodesic said:
Alas, I shall be predicatable here - HUP is not based on our inability to make measurements, it is a physical property of the wavefunction. Although HUP is a quantum rule, the same lack of determinism is found in classical waves.

As to Free will/determinism, both are essentially faiths, thus I believe in neither, but keep an open mind.
Click to expand...
Since you seem to know quite a bit about HUP, I would love to ask you.... is there a connection between the HUP and quantum entanglement? :confused:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top