There is no such thing as free will: Philosophy Forums

Philosophy Forums » General Philosophy » There is no such thing as free will » There is no such thing as free will

There is no such thing as free will

mway
Professor

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 07, 2009

Total Topics: 14
Total Posts: 509

Posted 08/27/09 - 08:10 PM:	#31
Free will has nothing to do with determinism. Free will implies a seperation of 'you' from the rest of the universe. Until someone can show some evidence of this duality, then it makes the same sense to assume the lack of free will, as it does to assume the lack of a deity.
Lame is to Wav, as the Brain is to Reality.

Scrivener
Aspirant

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Aug 14, 2009

Total Topics: 7
Total Posts: 43

Posted 08/27/09 - 10:33 PM:	#32
mway wrote: Free will has nothing to do with determinism. Free will implies a seperation of 'you' from the rest of the universe. Until someone can show some evidence of this duality, then it makes the same sense to assume the lack of free will, as it does to assume the lack of a deity. This is an over simplification. Empirical studies have shown healthy humans can make true random number sequences. True random number sequences are not probabilistic and are completely unpredictable. Therefore if the will is governed by the principal that thought precedes action, then human beings are capable of randomly determined will. Randomly determined will is in essence freedom of will unless there is an unknown mechanism behind true randomness. This is what Einstein et al believed and the EPR paradox is a speculative theory of quantum mechanics that proposes this unknown mechanism is yet to be discovered. To quote Einstein "I don't believe God plays dice." So unless true randomness is a misconception; humans beings are capable of freedom of will. The extent to which they exercise it is a completely different matter.

mway
Professor

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 07, 2009

Total Topics: 14
Total Posts: 509

Posted 08/27/09 - 10:42 PM:	#33
You, like everyone else seem to keep missing the point. Free will has nothing to do with determinism, or randomness. These topics either show that the universe runs with some sort of causality or it doesn't. Once again, for an individual human being to make a free willed choice, means that they must in some way be seperate from the rest of the universe, otherwise it is the universe that is making the decision (whether it be causal or random).
Lame is to Wav, as the Brain is to Reality.

unenlightened
everything is...

Usergroup: Administrators
Joined: Aug 10, 2007
Location: Wales

Total Topics: 36
Total Posts: 3286

Posted 08/28/09 - 12:53 AM:	#34
On the other hand, if they are not separate, then one cannot really say that the one decides and the other does not.
...most of our actions are the result of the past, or according to a future ideal. That's not action, that is just conformity. J Krishnamurti "Philosophy, to the Philistine, is an evolutionary process, watched over by some sort of brisk dynamic Providence, and culminating in the supreme insight of modern thought." John Cowper Powys

Eternal Confusion
Initiate

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Aug 28, 2009

Total Topics: 1
Total Posts: 2

Posted 08/28/09 - 06:45 AM:	#35
I'm enslaved by needs, motivated by desires and finally, trapped in habits.

asgebison
Initiate

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jul 22, 2009

Total Topics: 0
Total Posts: 10

Posted 08/31/09 - 03:35 PM:	#36
Personally, I don't see a difference between the words will and free will. Free will is based on our feelings and thoughts on something as well as our consciousness, and just as long as I can choose, I am free because it is me. Nothing can really take that away, just as long as I have a choice. If a person were to put a gun to my head, I would still be free. When we try to find free will, we take away the will altogether when it is free all along. We are still all in the great world of causes, however our wills are also able to do something and try to make a difference. It is pretty amazing and also confusing in a way. I could do alot of things or just try to do them, but whether I would is the question here.

swstephe
Tenured Poster

Usergroup: Moderators
Joined: Apr 20, 2006
Location: borneo island

Total Topics: 28
Total Posts: 3304

Posted 08/31/09 - 10:30 PM:	#37
Scrivener wrote: This is an over simplification. Empirical studies have shown healthy humans can make true random number sequences. True random number sequences are not probabilistic and are completely unpredictable. Therefore if the will is governed by the principal that thought precedes action, then human beings are capable of randomly determined will. I don't think you can escape the problem that easily. Randomness is a funny thing. You can't determine true randomness experimentally, so I don't know where you got your information. To say something is "true randomness" you have to make a negative existential claim: "I can find no deterministic cause which would help me to predict the next number in this sequence beyond a uniform distribution of probability". Negative existentials, (like "there are no black swans"), simply beg you to look harder, (since logic relies on everything being determinisitic). To prove true randomness, you would have to show that a deterministic cause is contradicted by its logical state. I don't think humans are random at all. If they were, (and I'll be a bit silly here, just to be brief), you would have to fire all statisticians and actuaries based on the fallacy that humans follow certain trends. Why try to predict that younger people will choose to drive faster than older people, if they are not predictable and truly random? Sending someone to jail on the assumption that they are more likely to commit crimes than someone who hasn't committed one yet would be useless. Every human being could commit a crime of any severity at any moment, (if such a choice were random). Instead, humans seem to be strongly motivated by emotional and biological processes. One experiment, where a volunteer was asked to raise either right or left hand could be manipulated by an electrode in the brain to favor one hand over the other predictably. Some physical processes are so unpredictable as to be considered "true random" for practical purposes. If randomness defines free will, then these physical processes should be even more "free", (unbound by logic and motivation), than human free will.
Ethics is the measuring of morality. Morality is the measuring of good. Good is the measuring of benefit. Benefit is the measure of values.

mutemaler
Professor

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jun 17, 2006

Total Topics: 8
Total Posts: 664

Posted 09/01/09 - 01:52 AM:	#38
mway wrote: Free will has nothing to do with determinism. Free will implies a seperation of 'you' from the rest of the universe. Until someone can show some evidence of this duality, then it makes the same sense to assume the lack of free will, as it does to assume the lack of a deity. mway wrote: You, like everyone else seem to keep missing the point. Free will has nothing to do with determinism, or randomness. These topics either show that the universe runs with some sort of causality or it doesn't. mway wrote: You, like everyone else seem to keep missing the point. Free will has nothing to do with determinism, or randomness. These topics either show that the universe runs with some sort of causality or it doesn't. Once again, for an individual human being to make a free willed choice, means that they must in some way be seperate from the rest of the universe, otherwise it is the universe that is making the decision (whether it be causal or random). I agree with the initial statement, with how this begins, in that you say free will (in the typically way it is seen) implies a separation which is not there, but not with the conclusions you draw. Because you attack this dualism on the one hand, but then seem to think nothing about assuming it yourself as a given (in the form of bi-valent logic, all of the either/or statements, as if these are somehow "transcendent truths" or "laws of nature", which are then magically inviolate, and/or binding on the universe). Not only are there other logics, but these are axiom-based, and you should be seeing it as a tool, as a way of seeing among many. And as with all tools, to be employed when it is applicable to the task at hand, and not to be used when it is not applicable to the task at hand, to a particular situation. Edited by mutemaler on 09/01/09 - 01:57 AM

DrifterOfTheSun
Aspirant

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jun 19, 2009

Total Topics: 6
Total Posts: 31

Posted 09/01/09 - 04:44 AM:	#39
mway wrote: Free will has nothing to do with determinism. Free will implies a seperation of 'you' from the rest of the universe. Until someone can show some evidence of this duality, then it makes the same sense to assume the lack of free will, as it does to assume the lack of a deity. Oh, come on! Determinism MEANS no free will, plus Electrons do not move according to Newton’s mechanics so here.
Before starting an argument, do some research, it might be proven it is right/wrong

WW_III_ANGRY
All knowing prick

Usergroup: Members
Joined: May 06, 2008

Total Topics: 1
Total Posts: 97

Posted 09/01/09 - 10:53 AM:	#40
mway wrote: You, like everyone else seem to keep missing the point. Free will has nothing to do with determinism, or randomness. These topics either show that the universe runs with some sort of causality or it doesn't. Once again, for an individual human being to make a free willed choice, means that they must in some way be seperate from the rest of the universe, otherwise it is the universe that is making the decision (whether it be causal or random). Your explanation implies it something to do with determinism; I am not the universe. The universe is not a conscious entity and doesn't make choices, I am a distinct entity within the universe.

Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Sorry, you don't have permission to post. Log in, or register if you haven't yet.