I was having a discussion with a friend of mine recently about free will and determinism, and we decided that the whole issue really seemed to hinge on whether or not there is true randomness in the universe; if there is true randomness, then truly free will is possible, but if randomness is illusory, then so is freewill.
So is there true randomness in the universe, or is it just that we are unable to identify all of the determining factors that make up a ‘random’ event which in fact it isn’t random at all?
Suffice it to say that things look pretty deterministic outside the quantum realm, and maybe even inside it too (a matter of great contention and much research).
“Deterministic” : Predetermined. The outcome is certain, though we might not have enough information to predict it. It might not even be possible to get enough information.
Randomness exists from certain points of view, but when taking reality as a whole, randomness does not exist. Everything is the result of stilumi, and that stimuli is a result of the same. If you consider all the factors (in other words if you were omniscient) then you would be able to tell what would happen at any given point in time, starting with a point in time before that. It’s kind of like asking if miracles exist-I don’t believe in any deity breaking all the laws just for a moment to serve some good. I think what people call miracles are really just workings of certain laws that we don’t know about. One day I realized something, thought it may be simple I’d never heard it mentioned before: The probability of anything happening that does happen is 100%. As far as free will goes, I have a my own say on that also, which basically goes: We have the free will to accept or deny truth through what we do.
If randomness did exist then there wouldn’t be free will either as you wouldn’t have the ability to make a “free” choice. Whatever choices you did make would have no rationale or reasoning behiind them, they would be random. You were not free to decide one way or another. So either way, determined or random, you do not have free will.
I think sometimes people equate a lack of purpose or intent with randomness; I don’t think that order needs to have a purpose, though. On the other hand, I think that the presence of intent or purpose effectively rules out randomness.
Buckleberry Ferry: Doing something that other people don’t expect is not an example of randomness. In fact, nothing that you do with actual intent or purpose can be random, I think. Even if you were to ‘randomly’ press keys on a keyboard, a myriad of factors would determine which keys you press. This is speaking from a reductionist view, of course.
What the hell have you been smoking? You’re basically saying that if one thing is random then everything must be random. What on Earth led you to this conclusion? That’s no different than the insane people who think that if there is even one other planet out there with intelligent life on it, then they must be visiting here and anally probing farmers and trailer park residents. This is a discussion about the mathematical reality of randomness, not existensialism or metaphysics. If you want to talk about those things, fine. That’s what Great Debates is for.
[nonsequitor]
Dammit, I’ve run every compression algorithm and fitting program I can find on this data set, and there just isn’t any shorter way to describe it than an ordered list of each and every element.
[/nonsequitor]
RE: See, that was me excercising my free will. And you didn’t expect it, so it was random.
Ha! That’s funny. But seriously, a lack of expectation doesn’t mean a lack of determination. For example, I might unexpectedly punch someone in the face, that doesn’t mean that I didn’t have a reason for doing it. It’s just not apparent to the victim. Sometimes, a reason might not even be apparent to the instigator. Now we get into the debate on whether the appearance of randomness is good enough for free will…
That’s not what he’s saying at all. All interactions are either random or determined. While the existence of some randomness in the Universe doesn’t mean all interactions are random, all non-random interactions are determined. Therefore, free will is impossible. For any given interaction, it’s either determined, and therefore not free, or it’s random, and therefore not traceable to an excercize of the actor’s choice.
I think there’s a certain confusion here about what free will is. I take it to mean that in a particular situation, you have multiple, viable, possible choices. Although I can understand the point of the OP, I don’t think that randomness is really a factor. Without time travel, it seems impossible to prove that you were free to make either choice.
For example:
There is a party tonight. I’m not sure if I will go or not. Both options are possible and I could easily choose either one. If I choose to go, obviously I have reasons for it. That, however, does not preclude me from staying home. Of course if I stay home, I certainly had reasons for doing that too. So if I want to go, but I intentionally decide to go against my reasons and stay home, to me that’s free will. Of course you may say that staying home was planned all along and thus its not free will. Like I said, without time travel this could never be fully established. I would strongly argue that since both options were possible, you had valid reasons for both options, but you made the actual decision based on a whim, its free will. That whim is not really the same as randomness.
What about the situation where I decide (maybe on a whim) to stay home, but then after 15minutes, decide to go out instead?
