Do we have free will?

[MJinZ]

Do we have free will?

That's a good question, but a more fundamental one relates to determinism.

For example. You come to fork in the road. You are not sure where you wish to go.

Uncertainty leads you to use a random generator. A perfect random generator. It will choose left or right, 50/50. Perfectly.

And so you use it to make your decision.

And thus determinism has been broken, because by probability, you could have had an equal chance of going left or right.

As to the matter of free will, consider that it was indeed YOUR WILL to leave your destiny to probability.

 

[DrPizza]

"I, at any rate, am convinced that God does not throw dice."

-Einstein

Who spent the rest of his life unsuccessfully trying to prove that point.

 

[magomago]

eh some things i think we do, some things i think we don't

 

[KIAman]

Considering we can only be certain of reality as we currently experience it, yes, we have free will.

The only way to disprove this is to have an outside observer.

Everything else is hypothetical mumbo jumbo.

 

[actuarial]

It's hard to believe in free will and not believe in God. By that, I mean that our 'decisions' as we perceive them are just an aggregation of movements of the building blocks that we are made up of.

 

[MJinZ]

It's hard to believe in free will and not believe in God. By that, I mean that our 'decisions' as we perceive them are just an aggregation of movements of the building blocks that we are made up of.

Well, actually, if you want to believe in God, then you can use Free Will as an excuse, or vice-versa.

 

[SlitheryDee]

It's hard to believe in free will and not believe in God. By that, I mean that our 'decisions' as we perceive them are just an aggregation of movements of the building blocks that we are made up of.

Actually I find it harder to believe in God and free will simultaneously. God is all knowing, so he knows or is capable of knowing what you are going to do with absolute certainty. If God knows the exact thing you are going to do, then that is the only thing it is possible for you to do. If not then God isn't all knowing and is therefor not God.

 

[MJinZ]

Actually I find it harder to believe in God and free will simultaneously. God is all knowing, so he knows or is capable of knowing what you are going to do with absolute certainty. If God knows the exact thing you are going to do, then that is the only thing it is possible for you to do. If not then God isn't all knowing and is therefor not God.

That's a pretty stupid definition of God.

Why can't God just be a dumbass. But still pwnz us all?

 

[dabuddha]

Yes we don't

 

[JEDIYoda]

Wasn`t Free Will a hippie punk ass rock group from the 60's??

 

[MagnusTheBrewer]

Actually I find it harder to believe in God and free will simultaneously. God is all knowing, so he knows or is capable of knowing what you are going to do with absolute certainty. If God knows the exact thing you are going to do, then that is the only thing it is possible for you to do. If not then God isn't all knowing and is therefor not God.

Except you left out one thing. God gave us free will. Thanks for demonstrating the fallacy of logical conclusion from incorrect precepts though.

 

[KIAman]

Actually I find it harder to believe in God and free will simultaneously. God is all knowing, so he knows or is capable of knowing what you are going to do with absolute certainty. If God knows the exact thing you are going to do, then that is the only thing it is possible for you to do. If not then God isn't all knowing and is therefor not God.

The very definition of God allows this type of assumed paradox. You are defining God as being finite and assigning false human limitations.

 

[actuarial]

Actually I find it harder to believe in God and free will simultaneously. God is all knowing, so he knows or is capable of knowing what you are going to do with absolute certainty. If God knows the exact thing you are going to do, then that is the only thing it is possible for you to do. If not then God isn't all knowing and is therefor not God.

But how do you reconcile the notion that a collection of cells can make decisions which are not determined by the independent actions of the cells themselves? And if your movements are just the sum of choices pre-programmed into individual cells, do we actually have free will?

What I was implying is that free will requires a soul (or something close to the definition of a soul).

 

[JEDIYoda]

Actually I find it harder to believe in God and free will simultaneously. God is all knowing, so he knows or is capable of knowing what you are going to do with absolute certainty. If God knows the exact thing you are going to do, then that is the only thing it is possible for you to do. If not then God isn't all knowing and is therefor not God.

Why just because you know something is going to happen doe NOT mean that you have in any way manipulated the out come by interfering in what is going to happen.

I`m sorry but there are other more important things than a God manipulating which flavor of KY Jelly you choose at the local pharmacy....

 

[moshquerade]

Free WILLY!

 

[AyashiKaibutsu]

He also called quantum entanglement "spooky action at a distance", so I wouldn't consider him the ultimate authority here.

I don't think anyone has an ultimate authority to reference here, and real or not quantum entanglement is spooky action at a distance : p

 

[SlitheryDee]

Except you left out one thing. God gave us free will. Thanks for demonstrating the fallacy of logical conclusion from incorrect precepts though.

My point is that he didn't give us free will. His existence precludes free will. Of course, he may just be really really powerful, but not ALL powerful in the sense that he knows everything about everything everywhere. In that last case free will isn't something he has to give.

 

[AyashiKaibutsu]

Do we have free will?

That's a good question, but a more fundamental one relates to determinism.

For example. You come to fork in the road. You are not sure where you wish to go.

Uncertainty leads you to use a random generator. A perfect random generator. It will choose left or right, 50/50. Perfectly.

And so you use it to make your decision.

And thus determinism has been broken, because by probability, you could have had an equal chance of going left or right.

As to the matter of free will, consider that it was indeed YOUR WILL to leave your destiny to probability.

Where are you getting this "perfect" random generator from? Just because you don't know the outcome doesn't mean it was really random. There's lots of things we use to get "good enough" random, but nothing we use to generate randomness is a real random generator; they all have predetermined outcomes. I could entertain that the brain is capable of it, but I won't assume it with what I know.

 

[flexy]

Do we have free will?

That's a good question, but a more fundamental one relates to determinism.

For example. You come to fork in the road. You are not sure where you wish to go.

Uncertainty leads you to use a random generator. A perfect random generator. It will choose left or right, 50/50. Perfectly.

And so you use it to make your decision.

And thus determinism has been broken, because by probability, you could have had an equal chance of going left or right.

As to the matter of free will, consider that it was indeed YOUR WILL to leave your destiny to probability.

there is no such thing as "true random"...no matter how the dice falls, it will be a result of causalities. You could "easily" backtrack why it landed on what color.

Determinism hasn't been broken at all.

 

[MJinZ]

Where are you getting this "perfect" random generator from? Just because you don't know the outcome doesn't mean it was really random. There's lots of things we use to get "good enough" random, but nothing we use to generate randomness is a real random generator; they all have predetermined outcomes. I could entertain that the brain is capable of it, but I won't assume it with what I know.

You don't think a perfect random generator is possible? Think again.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Random_number_generation

 

[GhettoPeanut]

Mel Gibson gave us all FREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEDDDDDOOOOOOOOOOOOOOMMMMMMMMMM

 

[AyashiKaibutsu]

You don't think a perfect random generator is possible? Think again.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Random_number_generation

Nothing in there describes a perfect random generator, but nice try assuming wikipedia had the answer. When you throw a pair of dice you apply certain forces to it, it interacts with the air and the surface it strikes causes what results in the bouncing from the collision. It's a good enough and for practical purposes a true random generator, but it's not perfect; again just because you don't know the outcome doesn't mean it was truely random given the same preconditions. True random generators count on you not knowing/not having control of the preconditions.

 

[MJinZ]

Nothing in there describes a perfect random generator, but nice try assuming wikipedia had the answer. When you throw a pair of dice you apply certain forces to it, it interacts with the air and the surface it strikes causes what results in the bouncing from the collision. It's a good enough and for practical purposes a true random generator, but it's not perfect; again just because you don't know the outcome doesn't mean it was truely random given the same preconditions. True random generators count on you not knowing/not having control of the preconditions.

Quantum Physics. Have you taken it?

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20393558

 

[AyashiKaibutsu]

Quantum Physics. Have you taken it?

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20393558

A good start, but you have to make some connection between quantum physics and will and/or the outcome of events on a macro scale now. Also you still have the problem that given the same set of circumstances the same outcome won't occur. Simply saying it's impossible to observe the circumstances isn't sufficient, which is what resorting to quantum physics will usually result in; you'll note even in the arcticle listed there's a small degree of nonconfidence in the numbers they generate.

 

[MJinZ]

A good start, but you have to make some connection between quantum physics and will and/or the outcome of events on a macro scale now. Also you still have the problem that given the same set of circumstances the same outcome won't occur. Simply saying it's impossible to observe the circumstances isn't sufficient, which is what resorting to quantum physics will usually result in; you'll note even in the arcticle listed there's a small degree of nonconfidence in the numbers they generate.

The current theory is that at the quantum level, true randomness occurs where only probabilities are specified.

It is not at all a stretch to perfect a random number generator using quantum mechanics.

Really, all of these ideas of determinism and free will comes down what you believe about the Universe's randomness.