Free will - does it exist?

HungryJoe wrote:

Chucky wrote:Your last paragraph is exactly how I would describe the argument against there being a free will. Everything we do can be predicted, if we only knew the current state of the myriad preconditions prior to the event. These preconditions include our body temperature, our level of tiredness, the weather, our past history, etc. All contribute to our decisions.

Of course, the Uncertainty Principle would tell you that you cannot predict events. However, that does not mean that we have free will. It just means that we cannot predict.

We view bugs as stupid because they have no brains; just small bundles of nerves. They are relatively complex but not on our scale. We just happen to have a super complex-network of nerves; the majority of which are assembled into the brain. That does not make us intelligent, however. We are just as 'stupid' as the bugs and everything else.

Kevin

It may have escaped you, but you haven't actually made an argument here. You've asserted that there is no free will because everything can be predicted and then, rather than back up this, you proceed to say that we cannot predict after all. So you need another basis for your assertion.

I think he feels the same way I do, or at least he appears to. If we COULD know EVERYTHING about EVERYTHING then we could predict the future indefinitely. I don't think we can ever do that so I feel that the future is fixed, but essentially unpredictable so the fixed part really doesn't matter that much.

HungryJoe wrote:

Chucky wrote:

Third_Eye_Seed wrote:Philosophy is boring.

I strongly agree.

And what evil force in the universe compelled you both to not only read but also answer on a topic that was so obviously connected to what you find boring? Or are you both masochists by any chance?

Amm, clearly you don't know what the word 'masochist' means, because there is absolutely no way you can infer from my posts that I am a masochist.

"Masochist: The deriving of sexual gratification, or the tendency to derive sexual gratification, from being physically or emotionally abused."

Well I'll be damned... ...Yes, it's clear from my posts that I do this...



Philosophy IS boring to me but, if you look closely, you will see that my post had a scientific basis.

HungryJoe wrote:

Third_Eye_Seed wrote:Drives = no free will.

If we feel hungry we are compelled to eat, it's out of our hands and we can't control it. It's like this with everything.

Philosophy is boring.

Do you always eat the minute you feel the slightest hint of being hungry? Drives alone is not enough to claim we don't have free will unless you're talking about a completely uninfluenced will which is so obviously ridiculous that i don't think it's worth discussing.

You don't have to always eat when you are hungry; and that fact still does not imply that there is free will. A person can eventually arrive at a point in their life where they go against their feelings of hunger... ...and starve themselves purposefully. They reach that point due to a myriad of reasons, each founded on no free will.

HungryJoe wrote:

Chucky wrote:Your last paragraph is exactly how I would describe the argument against there being a free will. Everything we do can be predicted, if we only knew the current state of the myriad preconditions prior to the event. These preconditions include our body temperature, our level of tiredness, the weather, our past history, etc. All contribute to our decisions.

Of course, the Uncertainty Principle would tell you that you cannot predict events. However, that does not mean that we have free will. It just means that we cannot predict.

We view bugs as stupid because they have no brains; just small bundles of nerves. They are relatively complex but not on our scale. We just happen to have a super complex-network of nerves; the majority of which are assembled into the brain. That does not make us intelligent, however. We are just as 'stupid' as the bugs and everything else.

Kevin

It may have escaped you, but you haven't actually made an argument here. You've asserted that there is no free will because everything can be predicted and then, rather than back up this, you proceed to say that we cannot predict after all. So you need another basis for your assertion.

You just don't understand what I said, that's all. Just because there is no way for us to predict exactly everything that happens, that is not to say that things happen at random. We are good at predicting the majority of things such as the orbits of planets and moons. However, what is most striking, is when you begin to examine the human body itself (which I have done to some extent). When you do that, you will see that everything that happens in the human body is based on simple biochemistry and electromagnetic effects... ...and that includes everything that occurs in the brain, which is where this notion of 'will' apparently resides.

I think free will exists, it just isn't freely given out, you have to work for it. Society likes to trample on free will to keep everyone enslaved to their program (religion, familial status, etc.). To suggest to someone that it IS their choice to speak to family members or not, most will consider that idea too outrageous to consider. Society loves conformity and society continually bashes anyone who chooses to step outside of that conformity.

If you choose to break out of the conformity, the world will not actually come to an end, although many members of society will tell you that it will. A lot of people do not even realize that there is a choice, they are happy to live in the same place, talking to the same people, going to the same church, working at the same place for 10-40 years. Happy drones. It simply never occurs to them that things could be different. Parents want their children to be like them, being part of society is "safe".

People may not be free to choose to eat or not to eat, but they get to choose WHAT to eat. They choose where they live. They choose who they hang out with (or not). They choose whether to work or not. An individual makes a million choices every day, the only question is "are they making conscious choices?"

Granted, they are making 'choices', as defined by the English language. However, I am of the opinion that their choices are predetermined. Like, okay, today I have 'chosen' butterbeans, bamboo, and various other things for dinner; but I've only chosen them because I feel like a change from the regular things I eat. In fact, I was ALWAYS going to 'choose' these over my normal food today; and I had, in fact, no choice on the matter.


I can see where confusuion arises in this argument because it is so difficult to define both sides of it [the argument]. cott1203, I really don't see any correlation between this and "society ... [trampling] on free will to keep everyone enslaved to their program". However, I do respect your opinion.


To you, HungryJoe, I am sorry if I have offended you. It was not my intention. Life is too short for squabbles of this nature. I do not actively go around proclaiming that people have no free will. I do, in fact, live my life just like everyone else: with the idea that everything I do is based on choice. It is only when I think hard about it that I am of the opinion there is no choice at all.


Take care everyone,
Kevin.

Gosh. Having recently realized my mind/brain has obviously worked following a psychiatrically defined pattern all along, only seemingly having made independent decisions, made me feel very pessimistic about the concept of free will. Not wanting to give in to pessimism ("not wanting" would of course be part of the programming) leads me to agree with HungryJoe: the best shot, the most constructive attitude, is to believe in free will. But matter of belief it still remains, I'm afraid.

New information, new strategy, says my brain. Analyze more, that's the first advice it gives. Again. Old news: continue the same viscious circle as before. But I "choose" to break out, to try something different! What it is, dunno yet. Gotta think more...

many years back i took an interest in chaos theory. i've long since forgotten most of what i read on the subject, but the concept of a strange attractor, wherein chaos and order exist in mutual tension with one another, struck me as particularly fascinating.

i'll leave it to people smarter than me to judge whether it's actually applicable (n.b. i have no background in the sciences whatsoever) but for me i like the analogy that it suggests. constrained free will, limited determinism, or whatnot. not an all-or-nothing proposition, but rather they co-exist and condition one another.

and if perchance all our actions are predeterminable, well i say good luck trying to sort out all those neurons firing off real-time. determinability of action is predicated on one's ability to identify it. in the meantime, i'll hang on to the idea that free will exists in some form..........

astreal wrote:many years back i took an interest in chaos theory. i've long since forgotten most of what i read on the subject, but the concept of a strange attractor, wherein chaos and order exist in mutual tension with one another, struck me as particularly fascinating.

I read several books some time back and it is hard to remember some of that material. Between reading that and psychology I get a sense that our ideas of cause and effect are primitive and simple, suitable more for understanding steam engines and hydraulics than for minds.

Whenever I get interested in a subject like that I find it frustrating that there seems to be a gap in the available literature between the books that introduce the subject to the general public and the highly technical literature for the people who actually do the research. All the books I read overlapped.

A little story about free will:
http://www-cs-faculty.stanford.edu/~knuth/smullyan.html

It's a difficult topic.

I agree with chucky that a deterministic system is not necessarily predictable at a given level. For instance so called "random numbers" can be generated on a computer so that one can fairly rely on their "randomness" for practical applications. The function that generates the "random" number is deterministic in the strict sense.

Now even if things can't be determined at all, because of some kind of true randomness somewhere, then free will does not exist either, since you can't control randomness.

Sometimes also people I talk to confuse free will and freedom of acting your will.

Anyway, I do not believe in free will. I'm not sure it makes my life any worse since I still thrive to make it better (life drive). Does that make any sense

Belief in free will, at its worse, encourages blame (you made the wrong choices!), guilt (I made the wrong choices!) and arrogance (I made the right choices!). It seems linked to our need for justice.

Acknowledging the absence of free will on the other hand poses problem to society. No free will and child molesters aren't really responsible anymore. It's difficult to tell who should go in jail. What about morality? If you don't make any free choice, then there is no right or wrong decision. I'm not too good at politics, I don't know if a system without repression is feasible. But currently at least by law if not philosophically, responsibility is relatively rigorously defined. The law varies from one state to another though. It's very artificially defined for our needs, like justice, protection. I'm kinda ok with that. I don't think that child molesters or rapists chose to become this or that. Or that just before it happens they could have changed their minds because they were free to do so. I'd still agree to some artificial settings that state they are responsible for it and do something about it to help them change their mind (and protect me). But I still don't believe in free will.

I don't know, it's like God, I can't decide to believe in God or not. I tried, but faith doesn't work that way obviously. Contrariwise to the God in the story above, I find it difficult to deliberately delude myself (I don't mean to be pejorative here, I wish I could have faith sometimes, it seems to help some). That's why I don't think I have free will as such.

Anyway I'm curious about arguments around that topic!