What attributes of freedom would they lack?
The actual ability to do otherwise.
No. I am saying that they have the ability to do otherwise until they do it (decide, will, etc), and afterwards they will have no ability to have done otherwise.
Thinking that one has the ability to do otherwise is not the same as actually being able to do otherwise. In a strictly determined universe (the scenario under discussion here) the universe is not determined only at the point of decision, but at every point in the past. You accept that in such a universe a decision, once taken, would be set in stone and if time reversed and played through again the same decision would be made. What you can't seem to build into your understanding is how the decision was fixed from the outset.
So it's not a case that they have ability to do otherwise
until they do, but that they never actually have the ability to do otherwise. The only thing we have is the appearance and belief that we might possibly have been able to do otherwise.
Which means you have - in theory - observed it.
It means that if it were possible to know the initial state...
Which means you have made measurements over sufficient time to record the direction and magnitude of continuing changes. Which means your measurement is not instantaneous.
No need to bring practical considerations into a theoretical perspective. IF one could know the initial state, and IF one could accurately model the interactions, then one could arrive at knowledge of all subsequent states whether the actual system functions or not.
Which means one could - in theory - back you up to the beginning of the universe if there are any patterns changing on that scale. (Which there would be, in a holistically determined universe. You never pick up on the holistic determinism stuff).
Are patterns not part of the overall state of a system? If you accept that they are then you are flogging a dead horse. If you don't, then please let me know how a pattern sits outside.
Acceleration, phase, velocity, direction, etc, do not physically exist, cannot be observed or measured, at a single point in time. Neither do quantum phenomena such as location, charge, etc. Determinism has nothing to do with that.
It's not about taking a snapshot and working out positions. It is about knowing state A. This includes the acceleration, phase, velocity, direction etc.
Is this practically possible? No. Nor does it need to be.
And by "decision making process" you mean the system - everything in the light cone, was your description.
But the matter at hand is the human being making the decision. Nobody is arguing that the universe has freedom of will.
Nor is anyone disputing that humans make decisions. Everyone accepts that the will, the making of decisions, is a process that we go through. The question is whether those decisions are free. Or whether they were set in stone, for example, at the dawn of time.
Then I genuinely look forward to you no longer responding to the discussion on whether the will is actually able to do otherwise.
By handwaving at logical levels of pattern, making arguments completely dependent on a vague and conflicted bottom up determinism and a supernatural conception of freedom. Continually blowing off the physical nature of the matters at hand.
They would all be good requests to someone who is doing any of them. I am not hand waving at anything, rather it is you who is trying to invalidate the argument by alluding to logical levels of patterns while so far unable/unwilling to show how such is actually relevant. There is no dependency on vague or conflicted bottom-up determinism, but rather a consistent argument from what I perceive as a more holistic determinism. And as for the supernatural concept of freedom, yes, it is the conclusion reached from the argument in the case of strict determinism. That is the way of things when the conclusion is that something can not possibly exist.
And I do not blow off the physical nature of anything, if it is relevant to the argument. The physical nature is that things operate in a strictly deterministic manner (in the scenario being discussed). Unless you can justify its consideration, which you have so far failed to do, anything else you are waving your hands about would seem to be a red-herring.
If we aren't considering the freedom of will of the human being, I'm not sure what the topic is. The freedom of will of a light cone volume?
Don't be so pathetic. We are considering the freedom of will of the human being, but that decision making system necessarily includes everything that I have previously described, lest it be viewed as open and in which case can appear indeterministic. Car/driver/light is an indeterministic system since the driver, on seeing the colour red, could go forward one time, and could stop another time. Only taking into account those three things the system might appear indeterministic, because it is open with respect to that specific decision. You need to consider the closed system.
That was your definition. Seemed ok to me - at least, for the purposes here.
Wow. Yet you manage to avoid consideration of everything that logically follows from that? Like predetermination? Wow. If that's the case then I'm sorry, I definitely gave you more credit that I should have done.
Not in my universe. In my universe nothing appears indeterminate. When different outputs are observed, different inputs are deduced - not merely assumed, but demonstrated.
Oh, I agree with you if you look hard enough, and with the driver you would look at the decision making process that they were at least aware of. But there comes a point when someone just says: "I don't know why I did that..." and if given the same inputs (that they are aware of) again they would choose differently. That is indeterminism, or at least the appearance of it.
Now, I admire your belief that you are always able to show that the inputs were different in that case, not merely deduced but demonstrated. Especially in our actual universe which isn't strictly deterministic.
You're going to have to offer more than just your bravado. But then you're not actually interested in this topic, so I do finally look forward to your non-response.
