I tend to agree with Matt Dillahaunty who cites Danial Dennett frequently. We seem to have an illusion of free will and the idea that we could have made something different if we wanted to. However, if we could actually back up time so that every atom and molecule was in the exact same place and every neuron subject to firing in the exact same way, the exact same decision would have been made. So what is this free will everyone speaks of and where does it come from?
And why do we need the word "free" in front of it. Isn't that just a theological "hang on" that is about as useful as the too long part of a toe nail. Isn't it just will? And if it is just "will." What does it mean to have a 'will" in the face of a deterministic universe.
(Just thought I would start something as all the insane theists seem to have given us a break.) So thoughts on Determinism and Free Will anyone? What is "will" and just how determined are things?
Subscription Note:
Choosing to subscribe to this topic will automatically register you for email notifications for comments and updates on this thread.
Email notifications will be sent out daily by default unless specified otherwise on your account which you can edit by going to your userpage here and clicking on the subscriptions tab.
There is no Free Will. Right to choose, yes. Thus it is better to call it Free Choice, if you still want the word "free" in it.
rmfr
My feeble mind can't seem to get around this concept.
One of the first arguments I came up with on my journey was the incompatibility of freewill and omniscience. I used the basic design that since freewill, therefore no omniscience. It may be possible to show no omniscience in some other manner, but this seemed concise and when presented to any theist there is never a logical response.
I'm been listening to Dillahaunty lately and have heard his arguments, but I just haven't processed them. Perhaps I'm clinging, but I just can't or don't want to accept determinism.
Is it possible that quantum mechanics and uncertainty (the inability to predict the future location of a particle despite identical circumstances) to play a part in this as they seem a counter argument to determinism?
Very interested in what others have to say.
Surely humans as conscious animals have autonomy that is governed and limited by circumstance. The larger the brain the more autonomy, is an idea that makes sense and that my limited intellect can grasp. It's hard to accept the idea that everything is somehow predetermined, as this seems at odds with reality. I find ideas like astrology and karma too risible to entertain.
The idea any omniscient being exists is mutually exclusive with the concept of free will, indeed we would be rendered mere automatons.
@NewSkeptic
It is a neat argument, but it does not work backwards. We can and will argue omniscience = no free will. But we cannot use it to prove that there is free will. There likely is other ways to show that omniscience as a theory is unworkable. For one, if such an entity knew everything, there would be zero reason to pray to it, acknowledge it, or change your behavior in anyway towards an entity that "knows everything." Such an entity would know whether you ever believe in it (if it even cared.) Also such an entity would be utterly incomprehensible to us. It would be a far greater difference in knowledge then our knowledge compared to the knowledge of a pebble of sand is to us.
Very possible. Determinism like any other theory is just that a theory. It does not really have any observable testable evidence to back it. The human brain is the most complex thing we know of. Complexity on a scale that even if you spend a lifetime studying it and trying to understand, we would only begin to understand that is even more complex than that. Can free will arise from carbon chain atoms working together when you ratchet the complexity into the trillions upon trillions (more then all the stars in the known universe) of connections the human brain has?
And Dillahunty probably has much better and more concise answers then this, but can take a bit to "unpack."
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
▮I am an atheist that always likes a good debate
▮Please include @LogicFTW for responses to me
▮Tips on forum use. ▮ A.R. Member since 2016.
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
@NewSkeptic: Agreed, "Free Will" and ':Omniscience" are mutually exclusive. It's also the reason I gave up the "free" part. I have not found a theistic ideology that can logically get beyond this assertion.
I have the will to do this or that at any given point, but exactly how "free" is it?
For me the "free will" question boils down to something really simple. It doesn't exist. I can choose to eat chocolate but I can't choose to not like it. Thus I have freedom to choose but not free will.
Hi btw. Long time reader, first time poster!
@master_jeebus
Welcome to the boards! Great that you found a topic to jump in on.
To any long time readers but not posters: always feel free to jump in if you want, I think I speak for most of us at least that the more the merrier.
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
▮I am an atheist that always likes a good debate
▮Please include @LogicFTW for responses to me
▮Tips on forum use. ▮ A.R. Member since 2016.
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
@Sheldon: "as this seems at odds with reality." Yet this is exactly what reality is currently suggesting, ala Sam Harris, Danial Dennett, and others. "Free will" is an illusion. How do we work the "will" into a predetermined universe? How do a bunch of mere automatons keep happy/busy? They develop the illusion of free will.
@master_jeebus: How do you choose to eat chocolate when the choice was already predetermined. Back up time. Put every atom, every particle, every synaptic nerve ending in the exact same place and then run forward again. All things being the same, the choice will be the same as well.
Obviously this can not be known. We have no way to turn back time. Logically it makes sense; however, is there room for random fluctuation. Would a random fluctuation of neurons count as free will and allow you not to choose instead of choose?
@Cog "How do you choose to eat chocolate when the choice was already predetermined. Back up time. Put every atom, every particle, every synaptic nerve ending in the exact same place and then run forward again. All things being the same, the choice will be the same as well."
Point is that I do not think the outcome would be the same again. A butterfly farts in Brazil or a cancer cell decides to go left instead of right in the body of terminator could mean it doesn´t all end in the same way. Not to even speak of what I decide to do myself, eat or not eat. What you are suggesting is that IF everything is already predetermined, a god could have had a chance of existing. Where everything is planned nicely (I just vomited in my mouth a bit) from start to finish why would you need evolution? Instead og going A to B to C and so on, you could just go from A -> Z.
@Point is that I do not think the outcome would be the same again.
Already addressed in the previous post. (No one said anything about a God.) You are missing the point completely. THANK YOU FOR PLAYING. (Evolution would not be separate from choosing to eat or not eat chocolate.) Back up time. Put everything exactly in the same place. Start up time and the results will be the same.
Cognistic asks, "Would a random fluctuation of neurons count as free will and allow you not to choose instead of choose?"
I don't think anything that occurs below consciousness can knock a hole in the idea that free will is an illusion. If anything, it only contributes to the illusion by adding a little variation into what would otherwise be perceived as purely mechanical. Don't we at least have to "know" we are choosing some action over another for it to be in consideration? ("Know" in quotes because of arguments put forth by Harris, Dennett, et al.)
@NatJustNat: "Below consciousness???" Variation does not happen at the point of choice, Variation happens in the mind after a choice is made. We tell ourselves we could have made the other choice. This is the issue at hand. After the fact, could we have actually made any other choice but the one we did. How do you know you are choosing.
My understanding is that Sam Harris can hook you up to a machine and predict whether you will respond negatively or positively to a question before you give a conscious answer. A scientist can know your choice before you actually make it. "BEFORE YOU ARE CONSCIOUS OF IT." Where is your freedom of choice? Knowing you could make another choice happens after the choice is made, not before. That is the problem.
Just as determinism and freewill contradict each other; determinism and special relativity contradict each other. Or phrased another way: determinism demands that information travels faster than the speed of light.
@Nyarlathotep: " determinism demands that information travels faster than the speed of light." Eeewwww..... I LIKE THAT! Excellent point! THANKS! Now I gotta go listen again with a new brain.
@OP by cognostic and thread:
This is a question I wrestle with as well.
I boil it down to: Does great complexity create the illusion of free will, or does it enable it? I am not sure we will ever be able to know.
If we simplify things down, then free will definitely disappears, then scale it back up to human brain level complexity, if we could add one step of complexity along the way, when (if it could?) hit the point of free will?
Even at human brain level free will, if we put electrodes on a body in precise locations we can make a person move their arm, (or other body part) overriding the brain and that person "loses" free will over their arm.
Does a worker ant have free will or is it utterly compelled by scents left by others to follow a predetermined path to the best of its ability?
Also I agree with your bit about time. Most of people when they talk about "time travel" they follow hollywood's fictional script on it. Back to the future, the terminator etc. Talk about time and come up with this "time travel" concept that is completely erroneous to what the movie really depicts what is really going on. What is really going on, is: everything in the universe is going back to some state it was before, except for whatever thing/person that supposedly "traveling through time," that stays exactly the same. If you wanted to build a "time machine" what you would need is a universe builder that can handle incredible amount of exact detail. Then a way to insert yourself in this new universe, leaving the old one behind, (or you could overwrite the current universe, but that does not seem very fair now does it?)
You would not be changing the "past" you would be completely altering the present, (or creating a new universe,) for everything else but yourself if you "traveled" in time. People trying to create time travel are really just trying to become "god like" in power to create or change. In a lot of ways it would be far easier to create a compelling virtual world, and then wipe your own memory of entering it. Making the virtual world your new reality to "time travel" into the past. And for the future, well that is a lot easier, just find a way to quickly freeze and thaw people/consciousness (without damaging them) at or near absolute zero.
I could ramble on but will stop here for now.
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
▮I am an atheist that always likes a good debate
▮Please include @LogicFTW for responses to me
▮Tips on forum use. ▮ A.R. Member since 2016.
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
I just listened to a Radiolab podcast episode (called "Loops" if you want to check it out) in which they looked at the way people with short term memory loss behave. Transient global amnesia causes temporary memory loss, which can begin with you forgetting what's happened recently and how you got where you are, but then you continue to forget every 90 seconds or so. They played a recording of a woman with amnesia having a conversation with her daughter, and each time the woman's memory reset, she started the exact same conversation over again, almost word for word, with the same inflections and everything. It was eerie. If we would do that same thing over and over given the same circumstances and inputs, are we actually choosing?
@Stone Jade: Cool! This could be a response to @Nyarlathotep's post. The information is already there and all the lady is doing, like a record with a scratch on it. Is she repeating the information that got there first and was already there waiting for her?
Memory does not really work like that guys. Memory recall is directed chemically by the hippo-campus (love that name), to the different areas of the brain that are called upon where initial memory/cellular growth occurred. They are activated again, where the physical cellular growth of a memory is re-written every time. Likely because, each new recall is never identical, as new information is always added, or changed. Memory is more fluid than you think.
Without a flux capacitor I'm guessing we will never answer this question.
@Workingclasshero: But we all know where to get one. Tin Man has one right next to his right lung. We don't even need a blow torch. Aluminum sheers and wire snipers will work nicely. Hmmm ,,, We could do this.
I've got an electric tin opener (never used, rubbish gift) I knew it would come in handy one day ;)
@Cog and Workingclasshero Re: Flux capacitor
Tin snips?.... Electric can opener?... *waving hand in dismissal*... HA! Good luck, suckers! Titanium upgrade around the ol' ticker recently. Along with flame proof liner and automatic fire extinguishing system. So, Cog, you can feel free to take your blow torch and roast your nuts with it!... *sinister laugh*... Mwaaaaa-haaa-haaa!... I fart in your general direction! Your mother was a hamster, and your father smelt of elderberries. Now, go away, or I shall taunt you a second time!
@Workingclasshero... A Tungsten Carbide cutting wheel and dremel will run us about $10. We can make that up with our first sale of diodes. Wanna go for this? My greatest fear is that we cut into Tin's useless corps and find nothing of actual value on the inside. The thought of wasting $10 is abhorrent to me. If ole Tin is as rusty on the inside as he is on the outside, we would just be wasting our time.
@ Cog
Ummm...guys, sorry to break this but I have already been there and taken the best and most valuable components. I silver soldered a couple of bolts to the circuitry so providing he doesn't heat up too much it all works. I got a couple of other bits and bobs from an old transistor radio and a Lionel Train Set I found on the dump...he doesn't notice anything when he is on charge. So all the good stuff is gone from inside Tin Man.
Hey, it kept me in Shiraz for two weeks!
The Titanium (I replaced it with double thick aluminium foil over card) I have been making into jewellery, it goes such pretty colors when heated! I just go cut a piece when he is comatose, charging. Simples. Sell it when I need a top up!
Go find your own source of riches...well wineness...*hic*
Oil frigging everywhere..... what a mess.....
I thought this looked a bit empty, and when I tried to stick it all back together, well....... UMMM....
Attachments
Attach Image/Video?:
A short two bob philosophy follows:
Discussions about free will tends to focus on the individual, on each of us, vain buggers that we be, in particular our own sense of self determination, what we think we decide to do because we will it, and that we think we are free to do what we want because we are adults, as if.
Theists and philosophers invariably steer the discussion towards abstract things like sin, determinism, omniscience, Adam and Eve and that Tree, predestination etc etc as if it all was just no more than another aspect of our relationship with their god.
But isolating the individual for dissection distracts from the greater, substantial, influence that society has over us all. I am sure fellow atheists are familiar with morality being directed by social influences rather than a 'spiritual gift for the soul from god at birth'.
I don't believe we have souls, only consciousnesses. We don't have free will, we make decisions and choices which are determined by our experiences of and expectations of society that in turn will define that intangible quality we share, called morality.
That wasn't worth more than two bob, but you can keep the change.
edited for my fat fingers
When you guys get around to tinkering with Tin, if you happen to come across a radial thermostatic diode, yeah? Only if you come across it, of course. There should be one under what passes as his left shoulder blade. Somewhere close to the shoulder joint. Ta.
@Grinseedradial: Um... I hate to be obvious about this but if I'm pulling out the flux capacitor and then have to go through all the work of getting under that left shoulder blade to the radial thermostatic diode,... well..... what's it worth to you? Keep in mind that Tin Man's are Axial Lead Standard Recovery Diodes that Rectify Mechanical Characteristics .. They cost about 10 bucks each new so I figure they are worth at least $3.00 used. Would you like me to jerk out the other 9 as well. I mean. as long as I am in there I might as well make a buck. Anyone else need any spare Tin Man parts?
@Cog Re: Radial thermostatic diode
Ummmm.... Hate to break the news to you, but only the newer models have the radial thermostatic diode under the left shoulder blade. I am a MUCH older model, and.... uhhhh... well, let's just say you probably do not want to venture to where my diode is located. And I am REALLY glad it does not have to be replaced very often...*cringe*...
I could do with a heart... Oh wait.....
Pages