|
| Thread: Is free will an Illusion? - Determinism |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 · «PREV |
|
Ecoris
Promising
Supreme Hero
|
posted January 21, 2008 02:30 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Sorry but that is not true. Just because an action is predetermined it doesn't mean we are nothing but mindless observers. You still interact with your enviroment which determines your actions. Determinism is not something like "Destiney".
If my actions are predetermined how can I affect them? If it was predetermined that I would write this reply, could I have chosen not to?
I fail to see the difference. It seems to me that determinism implies that we do not have a free will.
____________
|
|
Azagal
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Smooth Snake
|
|
posted January 21, 2008 02:46 PM |
|
|
Yes determinism implies that we are not free to take the actions we take. However I feel like this is wrong and I had hoped to make that clear in the master post. However determinism also states that actions are predetermined and this I found to be true.
But the predetermination of our action depends on the situation we are in and our personality. And as you shape your own personality you have free will. It You can teach your body how you want to react to signals and this is free will. You are still in charge of how you react you just determine it before you get in a situation where you would "decide" how to react. In your character you have allready "programmed" a reaction.
____________
"All I can see is what's in front of me. And all I can do is keep moving forward" - The Heir Wielder of Names, Seeker of Thrones, King of Swords, Breaker of Infinities, Wheel Smashing Lord
|
|
Ecoris
Promising
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted January 21, 2008 04:10 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Yes determinism implies that we are not free to take the actions we take. However I feel like this is wrong and I had hoped to make that clear in the master post. However determinism also states that actions are predetermined and this I found to be true.
Now I'm confused.
____________
|
|
Gnoll_Mage
Responsible
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted January 23, 2008 03:41 PM |
|
|
Quote:
@Gnollmage
Quote:
However, since there is no `true` free will, one could argue that the definition of free will is "where it seems like we have a choice to make".
But we are alive. We are not atoms or electrons that can be explained by the laws of physik.
Well general consensus is that we are. There is certainly nothing else making up our physical selves is there? What proof do you have that life is anything more? But that is my point - if life is just atoms and electrons, there is no room for free will. There must be `something else`, something that makes us alive and conscious maybe, that presents a method of bringing free will into the equation, if you wish to believe that it exists.
Quote:
We are an organism who's reactions may be predicable but to deny that we have any free will is somehow odd to me. There is no rule for human existance is there? For example if I but all human in situation A they will allways do B. This depends on the individual and a individual shapes his personality (together with his environment,etc.) thus he has influence on his personality/emotions and therefor has free will.
No, of course there is no global rule. But there are rules of a sort that could theoretically be used to guess what people are going to do. Even if they are perfect, randomness still stops us from getting anything perfect (but as I said, it is impossible to predict with maximum accuracy, we can predict future events but in order to be able to make those predictions quicker than they actually occur, we must sacrifice accuracy). Yes, we are shaped by our personalities and so forth. Again, this comes down to, do you think there is some sort of effect or something that makes an exception from the usual laws of physics? If we assume not, there is no way we could control ourselves. We `influence` our emotions and so on insofar as our influences are causes that lead to changes in emotions. But this is the point - without the `magic effect`, this is all an illusion. It all occured because probabilities led to certain events happening at the microcosmal scale.
Quote:
When I say influence I don't say control. It simply means you can teach your body how you want to react to signals. And those actions will be predetermined. But predetermined action don't mean that we are empty shells.
It sounds like there is a small confusion here. There are two contrasts to be made. One is the philosophical / scientific "is everything pre-determined/random, or can consciousness change the world around it", the other is the psychological "are humans able to control their emotions and put thought above basic desires etc.". The second one is the smaller question. It can be asked whether the first is true or false. If the first is false (there is `real` free will), then there is an obvious debate about how much we can make use of this `free will cloud` to control our emotions and feelings, and actions etc.. It is possible to control things, but do we? If the first is true, then we use the ideas of `the illusion of free will` and the `lack of free will entirely`, and again say, to what extent to we have access to the former? Well, now I am just confusing myself; this really is an interesting topic but it is impossible to get to grips with  . (Logically speaking the impossibility of grasping it makes some sense, as the presence or lack of free will affects what caused me to write this, if you see what I mean... This is similar to the idea that we will never be able to fully understand how are brains work, because we have only our brains to do that, and we'd need a better brain to understand how it works, which means it is more complicated and harder to understand, etc. etc.. It's also kinda similar to the idea of the impossibility of time travel being brought about by the fact that, if it were possible, there would be some sort of paradox arising somewhere.)
Quote:
Why does one have to deny mondern science in order to say that free will exists? I haven't heared that free will has been disproven yet.
As above, I'm not sure we could prove it didn't exist. And as for denying science, I think what I said was that, if you don't accept that there is some sort of special `magic effect` going on somewhere that we haven't yet discovered in science, then you have to think that there is no free will, because how can there be? There is no way that it could be present, there is nothing that would allow it, no way it could enter the system.
Quote:
Besides crimes can not be predetermined. As I already said there are no circumstances that inevitebly force an individual to commit a crime. Because crimes have to be planed (I'm not talking about crimes that happend on a impuls here).
Even if there was no free will, we would still not be able to work out whether a crime would happen or not. So your statement doesn't support your argument really.
Quote:
Free will exists. Of course it does.
Heh, if you say so  . But this means you do believe we are more than atoms and stuff. Me, I'm more towards the `no free will` side. Question for you then - does a computer have free will?
Edit: PS, please don't take any of this as insulting, I just enjoying arguing... thanks for the opportunity!
Edit 2: Afterthought. Don't forget that, as we have developed, we have defined free will as the `feeling that we have some sort of control`. Maybe we actually do, but if we don't, then free will does really still exist. It just changes its definition slightly, to the one above, from `the ability to change things in the Universe around us, by manipulating probabilties etc.`. Something like that anyway... difficult to put into words really.
____________
|
|
russ
Promising
Supreme Hero
blah, blah, blah
|
|
posted January 23, 2008 11:14 PM |
|
|
I am with Mystical on the Hodgepodge theory. 
|
|
TitaniumAlloy
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Professional
|
|
posted January 24, 2008 02:37 AM |
|
|
It depends entirely on the observer.
For example if you flip a coin, what is the chance of it landing on heads?
The answer is 50%, because it is assumed entirely up to chance, or in this metaphor, the "free will" of the coin. i.e. the coin could "choose" either heads or tails, and that is all we know.
The coin is tossed and it lands on tails.
From this perspective, looking back on the coin toss, it could be argued that the chance of it landing on heads is 0%, seeing as it was never going to happen. If you went back in time it would, arguably, be tails every time. (although whether that is true or not is an entirely different question)
Knowing this, as common sense, we still refer to the chance of the coin toss as 50%.
Just as a man could decide whether or not to propose to a woman, perhaps 50% either way.
After he does propose, it is arguable that he had 100% chance of proposing to her all along and only had the illusion of doubt in his mind.
It is this illusion of doubt that is removed from the equation through an external observer.
It's just up to whether or not you believe that you had the capacity to do things that you didn't do, in hindsight.
Of course you did..
Maybe.
Of course it could be argued that our thoughts have absolutely no influence on our actions.
That thoughts, consciousness, are just the metaphorical "exhaust" from the "machine" that is our brain and body that we experience.
For example if I went in to a bar and thought "Damn, I could really go a beer.", ordered one, and drank it. It would appear as if that thought caused that action.
It is a possibility, however, that my brain and body were already gearing up for a bear and my thought merely coincided with the buying of a beer.
In this sense, our thoughts can be, well... thought of (for lack of a better word) as a kind of commentary on our life, like the external observer mentioned above.
Just as World Series of Poker commentators Lon and Norman may be very accurate in their comments on the game, they're not really causing the ace of spades to come out.
It's kinda scary, when you think about it.
____________
John says to live above hell.
|
|
Ecoris
Promising
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted January 24, 2008 12:06 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
But we are alive. We are not atoms or electrons that can be explained by the laws of physik.
Well general consensus is that we are. There is certainly nothing else making up our physical selves is there? What proof do you have that life is anything more? But that is my point - if life is just atoms and electrons, there is no room for free will. There must be `something else`, something that makes us alive and conscious maybe, that presents a method of bringing free will into the equation, if you wish to believe that it exists.
[...]
As above, I'm not sure we could prove it didn't exist. And as for denying science, I think what I said was that, if you don't accept that there is some sort of special `magic effect` going on somewhere that we haven't yet discovered in science, then you have to think that there is no free will, because how can there be? There is no way that it could be present, there is nothing that would allow it, no way it could enter the system.
Only if you believe in scientific determinism, which is still an open question.
You could even argue that free will lies outside the scope of science, because how should we define free will? Does absolute determinism really imply that free will does not exist?
____________
|
|
Gnoll_Mage
Responsible
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted January 24, 2008 01:37 PM |
|
|
Well yes and no, depending on what definition you use...? I kinda agree with your second sentence.
How is determinism still an open question exactly?
____________
|
|
Ecoris
Promising
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted January 24, 2008 03:31 PM |
|
|
Using the term "open question" was perhaps a bit rash considering this quote from wikipedia:
Quote:
The Copenhagen interpretation, due largely to the Danish theoretical physicist Niels Bohr, is the interpretation of quantum mechanics most widely accepted amongst physicists. According to it, the probabilistic nature of quantum mechanics predictions cannot be explained in terms of some other deterministic theory, and does not simply reflect our limited knowledge. Quantum mechanics provides probabilistic results because the physical universe is itself probabilistic rather than deterministic.
Apparently the physiscists have given up on the idea that the universe is deterministic. This does not answer whether or not we have free will (as mentioned that is a philosophical question), but it clearly suggests that our actions are not predetermined.
____________
|
|
Celfious
Promising
Legendary Hero
From earth
|
|
posted January 24, 2008 10:18 PM |
|
|
Fate, destiny, choice, paths.. We are all on our path but what makes our road what it is? Is it predetermined by nature? Or is it the aftermath of what we've done and who we've become?
Sometimes when I look into my past, I feel regret for choices I've made. Choice. Neo kept fighting because he choose to. Why did neo cross the road? Because he choose to thats why. In the end he didnt give up. He only invited the balance maker. Was it predetermined that I would ramble about a fictional movie to explain nothing?
|
| |
|
|
