It doesn’t matter if free will exists or not.
What difference would it make? None.
Worrying about it is mental wankery on par with solipsism.
Interesting and entirely unsupported observation.
I think most people consider that questions about the very nature of their humanity to be tremendously important.
The fact that you can dismiss it as uninteresting indicates a lack of interest in the human experience not often encountered on a board dedicated to overcoming ignorance.
It’s not an observation. It’s logic.
If free will is an illusion, then nothing matters, nothing can be done about it, there’s no benefit to knowing it, and you didn’t actually think it anyway. If free will is real, then nothing changes. The only logical conclusion is to assume the latter.
If you believe that the question of free will is a valid concern, then you must also believe that solipsism is a valid worldview. They’re the same thing.
Didn’t say it was uninteresting. Meaningless things can still be interesting. Looking into the reasons why people ponder the question can be valuable, from a psychology/sociology point of view, but that doesn’t make the question itself valuable.
Human vision is an illusion. Does that mean we have wasted much money investigating it?
Free Will absence (determinism) does not require solipsism.
I am quite happy with the idea of many other minds- in humans and maybe in animals as well, so i am no solipsist.
I see those minds as incredibly complex analyzers of the world with unexpected and unpredictable resultant behaviors.
Where did you get the idea that determinism indicates solipsism?
It’s the actor that causes the event. If the actor make conscious choices as to whether and how to act, then it has free will.
We’re using “free will” to mean different things, I suspect.
That’s all we need to observe to make the conclusion I have made.
I have a question…
So if determinism is the way the universe works then no event in history could have occured in any other way than it has. It must all have happened exactly the way it did without the possibility of variation. Similarly, no future event is avoidable because it was writ in the big bang.
But there are popular theories of multi-verses and branching decision trees based on what happens in the next moment. Theoretical mathematics exists to model these theories based on multiple possible outcomes. That leads me to think that either the branching decision model of the universe is wrong or determinism is wrong.
And why is it that I stood at the grocery store the other day deciding between pistachio and canolli flavoured ice cream, and in the end decided on both? Was I just covering my bases? If so, does determinism allow for free will to choose?
No, Yes and No.
Sure it is. Can humans be conscious of themselves, and how they interact with the outside world? Yes. Can humans form motives? Yes. Can humans take purposeful action in pursuit of those motives? Yes. Bingo - free will. Humans can act according to the motives that they create for themselves. That’s it.
By what process are those motives formed? We don’t know, and it doesn’t matter to this question.
Hi, genuwine psycho here. I’ve had experience
that sez theres a whole lot llrss free will used in
a day than a person might think, and I’ve come tp the
…or a place, anyway, where I’m thinking it don’t
exist, despite it feels like we make choices all day
long.
As to why belove in free will, experience here, its very
likely you’ll get suicidal if u think yer nothin but
An automaton.
There is free will.
The problem exists in an education that ignores consciousness and glorifies the mechanical brain and body. There is more, much more to the human being than a brain and body. Forget religion and start looking for consciousness. You are not your brain and it does not control you. When we look in the right places we will find free will.
Sounds a little bit like the description of the ineffability of the soul or of God.
How would we know it was free will when we found it? Either it is a slave to mechanical processes of the brain, or it in some ways makes the brain change course from what was predetermined by Physics. WHich do you think it is?
Could it be a third unknown method?
That syllogism does not follow at all.
You claim:
1/ Humans can form motives.
2/Humans can take purposeful action in pursuit of those motives.
3/ Therefore there is free will.
This technically begs the question.
I would reply:
1/ Certainly awareness of motives appear in human brains- they are caused by the physical processes of the brain as are all other experiences.
2/ Humans are complex interpreters of the world and act on external inputs (experience), internal models (previous learning applied) which together cause the formation of motives in the consciousness of the beholder.
3/ Human action follows directly from 1 and 2 with the epiphenomenon of motives riding alongside. It is the physical actions of the brain that cause the action and the epiphenomenon of consciousness that causes the individual to believe it was done of free will.
To me, this seems unnecessarily complex. An entire universe and associated laws of physics resulting in determinism masking as free will.
No, it doesn’t. Again, I don’t think we mean the same thing by “free will”.
Your #2 states that humans can form motives, and #3 that they act on those motives. Which is what I wrote. That’s your free will, right there. As long as whatever forms the motive is internal to the individual, that individual has free will.
Free will is defined as the participation of such a thing in a chain of activities without which that chain would not have occurred. As consciousness of motive is an epiphenomenon and not necessarily causative, it is not free will.
Consider a large hammer hitting a nail, the hammer being moved by a natural force of nature. It casts a shadow on the wall behind it. That shadow is the consciousness of motive- a belief; it plays no direct part in the hammer hitting the nail.
What you describe is mere consciousness which is independent of free will.
The claim of ‘free will’ is so great as an exception to normal physical processes that it needs massive evidence to support it if it is to be accepted as a scientific explanation of human behavior. That is patently lacking.
It is unnecessarily complex to claim that such a miracle as free will causes human behavior when all other events are explained merely by the laws of physical science.
Parsimony suggests that such an an=mazing answer should only be accepted with massive evidence.
Unfortunately for libertarians, such evidence that is emerging from recent brain research is indicating that Free Will is being shown to be a myth.
Brain imaging shows that action states occur in the brain many milliseconds before the person is aware that they have made a decision- implying that consciousness of motive is an epiphenomenon. These support the experiments of Libet and others which show that the action potential to cause a muscle to react actually occurs before the person is aware that they are about to make that movement.
I get that you want to go after libertarian incompatibilists, so maybe I should leave you to that, but note that the above is just one possible definition of free will.
The brain is a slave to consciousness. Will or free will can make people sick and it can cure them. Sometimes called the placebo effect it is really consciousness. There is no predetermined physics. Remember physics is man made and deviations from physics is a constant. If you doubt this study anomalies of science. You can find the so-called impossible events everywhere. Unfortunately it will take a person willing to research outside the box. About the soul or spirit. There is so much religious baggage that it is difficult to discuss it calmly with people. Thank of us as coming from another dimension and in order to live in this dimension we must wear a human suit. This suit or body enables us to feel and breath and do other essential things related to this dimension.