Is free will a lie?

[[DHT]Osiris]

Are you saying people have proven it is non-deterministic in a way that if we had 2 identical universes that evolved the exact same way and then ran the exact same test in the exact same place at the exact same time we would end up with 2 different outcomes? That seems unlikely to me as we don't have access to multiple universes just like ours at the moment in order to test it.

Yes. Slightly esoteric branches will also posit that both universes exist at the same time, you're only observing one of them.

And that's my whole point here, that just because we are unable to determine what will happen doesn't mean that it is impossible to determine what would happen given infinite knowledge beforehand. We are unable to determine what will happen because we are unable to observe everything that goes into that result.

Then you're back to faith/religion.

 

[dank69]

Yes. Slightly esoteric branches will also posit that both universes exist at the same time, you're only observing one of them.

But other people are observing both?

Then you're back to faith/religion.

Again, I'm not saying how things are, I'm discussing how things might be. You are the one who seems to be saying things are a certain way and that the possibilities I propose absolutely cannot be.

 

[Shmee]

Interesting concept/question, but TLDR. I will say that we are right to be discussing quantum mechanics. Obviously human consciousness and choice is something we don't fully understand, but it is affected by the world around us, as well as the chemistry in our brain, and probably to some degree at the subatomic level within that chemistry. And our current understanding is that quantum mechanics is very chance/probability based, and outcome is not able to be predetermined.

Anyway, this doesn't really even answer if we have true free will, at least not to me, there is just so much we don't understand. And remember, in science, it is very hard to develop theories on some of these things, as we just can't run experiments to test hypotheses on some stuff. Furthermore, it's fine to have religion as well as science, we have to understand that some things are not within the realm of science, but at the same time remember that holy texts are not to be taken as science textbooks. At least to me, they have different purposes.

 

[William Gaatjes]

Stanford scientist, after decades of study, concludes: We don’t have free will

You may think you chose to read this, but Stanford scientist Robert Sapolsky would disagree. He says virtually all human behavior is beyond our conscious control.

www.latimes.com

This sounds like an interesting read.

If i may be so bold.
We all see the world through the pair of spectacles that we ourselves made through our learning and experiences.
And therefore we may be limited to see the world through that pair of spectacles.

I always found it interesting that polymaths because of the diverse interests and the broad knowledge, seem to have more than one pair of spectacles and seem to just swap one for the other as they seem fit. Sometimes just wearing them all at once.
We all know the saying to make children laugh and look at you awkwardly :
"
A person with a pair of spectacles on is smart. That is a rule in life.

Therefore if i wear multiple pair of spectacles at the same time, i am even more smarter...
"

In other words and my own humble opinion.
Freewill is initially a choice made on noise as input. And as we get older it is experience and noise. We choose constantly between experiences (fixed behavior) and we choose based on noise (random behavior).
Where noise is just noise or recombining data which only has loose similarities AKA turning on creativity. And we limit creativity by choice through boundaries to stay reasonable and sensible.
The chosen limitation prevents that we are being thrown into a psychiatric hospital pumped full with chemicals , where the doctors have no idea how the chemicals work but they make money of it.
Of course, this does not have to be our own experience. We also learn from the outside world... Another huge amount of (initially noise AKA chaos) variables.

if you want to know what is noise neurologically seen : Try sensory deprivation.
And avoid the drug experiments. Do not attack me, but anecdotal information seems to be that drugs to get smarter is the reason for memory segmentation in processor architectures long ago...

When artificial intelligence can do : "Eureka !" . It really works autonomously but we should also be scared of it...

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

But other people are observing both?

Not that I'm aware of, I've never seen a position that it would be possible to observe more than one slice of an infinite reality at once.

 

[Muse]

Anyone who thinks free will a lie clearly has little in the way of will power.

 

[Mai72]

Interesting concept/question, but TLDR. I will say that we are right to be discussing quantum mechanics. Obviously human consciousness and choice is something we don't fully understand, but it is affected by the world around us, as well as the chemistry in our brain, and probably to some degree at the subatomic level within that chemistry. And our current understanding is that quantum mechanics is very chance/probability based, and outcome is not able to be predetermined.

Anyway, this doesn't really even answer if we have true free will, at least not to me, there is just so much we don't understand. And remember, in science, it is very hard to develop theories on some of these things, as we just can't run experiments to test hypotheses on some stuff. Furthermore, it's fine to have religion as well as science, we have to understand that some things are not within the realm of science, but at the same time remember that holy texts are not to be taken as science textbooks. At least to me, they have different purposes.

Religion and science can't coexist, because as we understand more about the universe via science it makes religion become smaller and smaller. Think back to ancient times. Whenerver there was a storm, they thought it was the gods. Lightening was from Zeus. Violent storms like tornadoes or hurricanes were punishment from the gods. And so, as science matured we found the answers. Natural events aren't fromt he gods. They are natural events that take place for natural reasons that we can observe and replicate in the lab. And so, religion was our first attempt at science, and it was a horrible one at that. The Miller-Urey experiement of the early 1960s was the first of its kind to replicate early life on this earth. We have found the building blocks of life on meteroites. We have most of the answers to how life formed. We have 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8,9 and 10. We just need to find the answers to 4 and 6. God or the idea of god is becoming incresingly smaller and smaller. The god of the gaps. I feel that science will eventually find the answers to why and how life formed. No god needed.

Holy text, if you want to call them that, were written by primitive men thousands of years ago. Funny how its always a man, but anyway it just showcases how people thought back then. They were highly superstitious. I look at the bible, the holy quran, the poly cannon, etc. All those ancient books written by superstitious men who at the time were trying to make sense of the world.

 

[dank69]

Anyone who thinks free will a lie clearly has little in the way of will power.

Willpower like anything else is still a biological process in the brain.

 

[dank69]

Religion and science can't coexist, because as we understand more about the universe via science it makes religion become smaller and smaller. Think back to ancient times. Whenerver there was a storm, they thought it was the gods. Lightening was from Zeus. Violent storms like tornadoes or hurricanes were punishment from the gods. And so, as science matured we found the answers. Natural events aren't fromt he gods. They are natural events that take place for natural reasons that we can observe and replicate in the lab. And so, religion was our first attempt at science, and it was a horrible one at that. The Miller-Urey experiement of the early 1960s was the first of its kind to replicate early life on this earth. We have found the building blocks of life on meteroites. We have most of the answers to how life formed. We have 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8,9 and 10. We just need to find the answers to 4 and 6. God or the idea of god is becoming incresingly smaller and smaller. The god of the gaps. I feel that science will eventually find the answers to why and how life formed. No god needed.

Holy text, if you want to call them that, were written by primitive men thousands of years ago. Funny how its always a man, but anyway it just showcases how people thought back then. They were highly superstitious. I look at the bible, the holy quran, the poly cannon, etc. All those ancient books written by superstitious men who at the time were trying to make sense of the world.

Faith-based religions and science are polar opposites. Faith is the belief in the unknowable and science is the process of figuring out what can be known. They still coexist in the world at the moment, and religious people can and do advance our scientific knowledge. There will likely always be plenty of unknowns no matter how advanced we become as a civilization.

 

[spacejamz]

If you choose not to decide
You still have made a choice

 

[Muse]

Willpower like anything else is still a biological process in the brain.

And you are saying?

 

[Muse]

Faith-based religions and science are polar opposites. Faith is the belief in the unknowable and science is the process of figuring out what can be known. They still coexist in the world at the moment, and religious people can and do advance our scientific knowledge. There will likely always be plenty of unknowns no matter how advanced we become as a civilization.

"Whatever you think, it's more than that, more than that..." - Incredible String Band

 

[Muse]

Prove what, that I can make a decision about something not decided by my genes? You can't prove a negative. It's still illogical to suggest that everything we do is predestined though.

"There is absolutely no inevitability as long as there is a willingness to contemplate what is happening." - The Medium is the Message

 

[dank69]

And you are saying?

The same thing I've said throughout this thread: it's possible and even likely that every thought and choice we make is just a physical reaction to stimuli. We feel like we control it but in reality things might not have been able to be any other way in this universe.

 

[Muse]

Hey, baby, it's YOUR thing... do watcha wanna do!

 

[Muse]

The same thing I've said throughout this thread: it's possible and even likely that every thought and choice we make is just a physical reaction to stimuli. We feel like we control it but in reality things might not have been able to be any other way in this universe.

Dude, don't get hung up on philosophical concepts. There's tons of ways you can fake yourself out, but who's the loser?

 

[dank69]

Dude, don't get hung up on philosophical concepts. There's tons of ways you can fake yourself out, but who's the loser?

Okay, but like, this is a thread on a very philosophical topic.

 

[Mai72]

Faith-based religions and science are polar opposites. Faith is the belief in the unknowable and science is the process of figuring out what can be known. They still coexist in the world at the moment, and religious people can and do advance our scientific knowledge. There will likely always be plenty of unknowns no matter how advanced we become as a civilization.

Maybe. Currently yes, we can't prove or disprove god. We may never be able to prove or disprove ghost. genies, gods, spirits, an afterlife, reincarnation, etc. Those things may forever be unfalsifiable. Or maybe not. Who knows what science will come up with 3000 years from now? If we had lived during ancient times, we would had thought that air travel would never happen. And yet, we are able to travel outside of America with little effort.

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

Maybe. Currently yes, we can't prove or disprove god. We may never be able to prove or disprove ghost. genies, gods, spirits, an afterlife, reincarnation, etc. Those things may forever be unfalsifiable. Or maybe not. Who knows what science will come up with 3000 years from now? If we had lived during ancient times, we would had thought that air travel would never happen. And yet, we are able to travel outside of America with little effort.

At least in that case you've got examples from the real world, they saw birds and probably figured 'i bet I can do that'. A great example though would be material sciences, genetics, or radiation. Aluminum would literally be a magic material to the Romans. Genetics and radiation are basically wizardry to anyone prior to like 1900.

 

[dank69]

Explained better than I ever could:

It also addresses random quantum events.

 

[Mai72]

At least in that case you've got examples from the real world, they saw birds and probably figured 'i bet I can do that'. A great example though would be material sciences, genetics, or radiation. Aluminum would literally be a magic material to the Romans. Genetics and radiation are basically wizardry to anyone prior to like 1900.

Good point. Watching birds in flight 2000 years ago, there was probably that one person who imagined people being able to fly in the future. I always imagineed what it would be like to go back to ancient times with a smart phone. You'd probably end up dead. The people who lived back then would be going nuts over the phone since they wouldn't have anything to compare it too. No reference. And so, they'd think the phone was magical or from satan.

 

[Mai72]

Explained better than I ever could:

It also addresses random quantum events.

I was just watching that same video a few days ago. Very interesting point of view.

 

[Muse]

Free agents : how evolution gave us free will​

by Mitchell, Kevin J.​

Summary​

An evolutionary case for the existence of free will

Scientists are learning more and more about how brain activity controls behavior and how neural circuits weigh alternatives and initiate actions. As we probe ever deeper into the mechanics of decision making, many conclude that agency--or free will--is an illusion. In Free Agents, leading neuroscientist Kevin Mitchell presents a wealth of evidence to the contrary, arguing that we are not mere machines responding to physical forces but agents acting with purpose.

Traversing billions of years of evolution, Mitchell tells the remarkable story of how living beings capable of choice arose from lifeless matter. He explains how the emergence of nervous systems provided a means to learn about the world, granting sentient animals the capacity to model, predict, and simulate. Mitchell reveals how these faculties reached their peak in humans with our abilities to imagine and to be introspective, to reason in the moment, and to shape our possible futures through the exercise of our individual agency. Mitchell's argument has important implications--for how we understand decision making, for how our individual agency can be enhanced or infringed, for how we think about collective agency in the face of global crises, and for how we consider the limitations and future of artificial intelligence.

An astonishing journey of discovery, Free Agents offers a new framework for understanding how, across a billion years of Earth history, life evolved the power to choose, and why it matters.

 

[Muse]

Good point. Watching birds in flight 2000 years ago, there was probably that one person who imagined people being able to fly in the future. I always imagineed what it would be like to go back to ancient times with a smart phone. You'd probably end up dead. The people who lived back then would be going nuts over the phone since they wouldn't have anything to compare it too. No reference. And so, they'd think the phone was magical or from satan.

I've had lots of those kinds of fantasies, not about smartphones, though. So many other things that if "magically" placed sometime long before they came into existence would be bombshells. I try to stay away from time travel fantasies, actually, in particular in my exposure to art forms (e.g. movies and books). To me, time travel is not legitimate in the worlds of science fiction and is almost always a waste of time. Indulging your own time travel fantasies is another matter, however. Still, arguably a waste of time.