What is the philosophical debate called that argues whether or not we have a will?

HeXploiT

Diamond Member
Jun 11, 2004
4,359
1
76
What is the philosophical debate called that argues whether or not we have a will?

To freshen your memory...

Since we are subject to the laws of physics it is impossible that we have a will. For if our entire body including our thoughts are made simply from molecules governed by the laws of momentum & mass etc...then how can we possibly "choose" to change the course of those molecules if they must follow the laws of physics?

Anyone remember what this debate is named?
 

NanoStuff

Banned
Mar 23, 2006
2,981
1
0
There's no more debate, modern reasoning has concluded pretty much what you described, there is no free will as such. Determinism is usually the term used to describe it, although that's not entirely accurate because there are also indeterministic factors that could alter our behavior which we likewise have no 'free' control over. I would call it plain causality.
 

HeXploiT

Diamond Member
Jun 11, 2004
4,359
1
76
Originally posted by: DrPizza
determinism

I think "flawed" is another valid answer :p ;)
(based on quantum mechanics)

For those of us that are rusty in the quantum mechanics field maybe you can delineate a little.

I hope this doesn't have to do with the uncertainty principle.
 

HeXploiT

Diamond Member
Jun 11, 2004
4,359
1
76
Originally posted by: NanoStuff
There's no more debate, modern reasoning has concluded pretty much what you described, there is no free will as such. Determinism is usually the term used to describe it, although that's not entirely accurate because there are also indeterministic factors that could alter our behavior which we likewise have no 'free' control over. I would call it plain causality.

So you believe that we have no will?

To be very simplistic...you don't think the idea that we have no will is absolutely preposterous?
(Even though science clearly shows that we have none...but we'll put that aside for now)
 

oiprocs

Diamond Member
Jun 20, 2001
3,780
2
0
Are there any good/recommended books on determinism? I had never heard of it up to this point. Seems quite fascinating. I don't necessarily believe in every subject I find fascinating, but I definitely enjoy reading about them.
 

HeXploiT

Diamond Member
Jun 11, 2004
4,359
1
76
Originally posted by: shaytahn
Are there any good/recommended books on determinism? I had never heard of it up to this point. Seems quite fascinating. I don't necessarily believe in every subject I find fascinating, but I definitely enjoy reading about them.

Don't know of a good book but it's such a straight forward subject that even wiki has plenty of good info.
Really it's quite profound. In my opinion it is the most powerful scientific evidence pointing to the idea that there really is an almighty God that rules our world and who's power superceeds the laws of physics.
Not all scientists will draw this same conclusion that i have but all will tell you this idea is perplexing unless they are fully convinced beyond the shadow of a doubt that free will simply does not exist. Definetely worth reading about. It might change how you see the world.
 

NanoStuff

Banned
Mar 23, 2006
2,981
1
0
Originally posted by: Perry404
So you believe that we have no will?

To be very simplistic...you don't think the idea that we have no will is absolutely preposterous?
(Even though science clearly shows that we have none...but we'll put that aside for now)
It doesn't matter what I or anyone else believes on the matter. It's conclusive that we don't have it whether I like it or not, which makes a personal opinion on the matter irrelevant. But if you ask me if I care, not at all, the fact doesn't affect the way I would go about life.

As far finding it preposterous, no. It makes perfect sense once you understand it and realize that there is no conceivable way that such 'free will' could possibly exist for any creature in the universe. It's free will that's preposterous, suggesting that we somehow have non-physical control over our own state of mind.
 

NanoStuff

Banned
Mar 23, 2006
2,981
1
0
Originally posted by: NanoStuff
Originally posted by: Perry404
So you believe that we have no will?

To be very simplistic...you don't think the idea that we have no will is absolutely preposterous?
(Even though science clearly shows that we have none...but we'll put that aside for now)
It doesn't matter what I or anyone else believes on the matter. It's conclusive that we don't have it whether I like it or not, which makes a personal opinion on the matter irrelevant. But if you ask me if I care, not at all, the fact doesn't affect the way I would go about life.

As far finding it preposterous, no. It makes perfect sense once you understand it and realize that there is no conceivable way that such 'free will' could possibly exist for any creature in the universe. It's free will that's preposterous, suggesting that we somehow have non-physical control over our own state of mind.


Originally posted by: Perry404
In my opinion it is the most powerful scientific evidence pointing to the idea that there really is an almighty God that rules our world and who's power superceeds the laws of physics.
What, the lack of free will? Can't see how you jumped to that conclusion. If anything, it would be the opposite that would suggest that.
 

HeXploiT

Diamond Member
Jun 11, 2004
4,359
1
76
Originally posted by: NanoStuff
Originally posted by: Perry404
So you believe that we have no will?

To be very simplistic...you don't think the idea that we have no will is absolutely preposterous?
(Even though science clearly shows that we have none...but we'll put that aside for now)
It doesn't matter what I or anyone else believes on the matter. It's conclusive that we don't have it whether I like it or not, which makes a personal opinion on the matter irrelevant. But if you ask me if I care, not at all, the fact doesn't affect the way I would go about life.

As far finding it preposterous, no. It makes perfect sense once you understand it and realize that there is no conceivable way that such 'free will' could possibly exist for any creature in the universe. It's free will that's preposterous, suggesting that we somehow have non-physical control over our own state of mind.

Actually there is one idea that can explain free will.
That is the idea that there is an omnipotent God is behind the scenes.

Of course it is obvious that this is not based on upon scientific principles.
 

HeXploiT

Diamond Member
Jun 11, 2004
4,359
1
76
NanoStuff --because i can strip off my cloths, do a headstand, sing the alphabet backwards all while yodeling.
Do you actually believe that if i did that right at this moment it is because it was predestined?

Logic and common sense(other scientific tools) tell me that conclusion is silly.
 

NanoStuff

Banned
Mar 23, 2006
2,981
1
0
Originally posted by: Perry404
Actually there is one idea that can explain free will.
That is the idea that there is an omnipotent God is behind the scenes.

Of course it is obvious that this is not based on upon scientific principles.
Not even that. Even a non-physical mind would have to be causal, and the effect would have to have been caused. If you suggest there was no cause, there could have been no mind that created the effect. You could say god causes us to do things, but that's certainly not free-will.

And you're right, it's not based upon scientific principles, so it doesn't matter :)
 

NanoStuff

Banned
Mar 23, 2006
2,981
1
0
Originally posted by: Perry404
NanoStuff --because i can strip off my cloths, do a headstand, sing the alphabet backwards all while yodeling.
Do you actually believe that if i did that right at this moment it is because it was predestined?
It might not have been predestined because it's difficult to say how much quantum uncertainty diminishes determinism on this scale over a certain period of time. This is something that would require a vastly capable computer to figure out. It would be fair to say that if such an event occurs, preceding events made it likely to occur. The key here is to keep in mind that those preceding events were not controlled through free will much like the events they caused. It would have made no difference how determined they were to occur, you're just as helpless against deterministic factors as you are against indeterministic factors.

Originally posted by: DaveSimmons
> God giveth teh free will
God uses leet speek? Teh awesum :)
 

HeXploiT

Diamond Member
Jun 11, 2004
4,359
1
76
Originally posted by: NanoStuff
Originally posted by: Perry404
NanoStuff --because i can strip off my cloths, do a headstand, sing the alphabet backwards all while yodeling.
Do you actually believe that if i did that right at this moment it is because it was predestined?
It might not have been predestined because it's difficult to say how much quantum uncertainty diminishes determinism on this scale over a certain period of time. This is something that would require a vastly capable computer to figure out. It would be fair to say that if such an event occurs, preceding events made it likely to occur. The key here is to keep in mind that those preceding events were not controlled through free will much like the events they caused. It would have made no difference how determined they were to occur, you're just as helpless against deterministic factors as you are against indeterministic factors.

Originally posted by: DaveSimmons
> God giveth teh free will
God uses leet speek? Teh awesum :)

The uncertainty principle is too often misinterpreted. It does not state that actions are occurring that very or that randomness has anything to do with the process. The uncertainty principle simply states that when we attempt to observe an interaction we cause interference in the process therefor some things are uncertain to our observations due to our interference.

At least this is how i understand it. Please correct me if I am wrong.
 

HeXploiT

Diamond Member
Jun 11, 2004
4,359
1
76
Originally posted by: DaveSimmons
> God giveth teh free will

God doesn't equal free will for some schools of thought, then we have predestination and (divine) determinism

Either of the other ideas seem logical to me. This one defies logic on all counts imho.
Why would God create a universe that is completely and totally predestined?
It's just not logical on any level.
 

NanoStuff

Banned
Mar 23, 2006
2,981
1
0
Originally posted by: Perry404
The uncertainty principle is too often misinterpreted. It does not state that actions are occurring that very or that randomness has anything to do with the process.
It does actually. If not explicitly, it is a direct observation of quantum probability. If the observation was deterministic, the effect of the observation could effectively be algorithmically compensated for to determine pre-observation state, which cannot be done. Randomness is there.
 

DrPizza

Administrator Elite Member Goat Whisperer
Mar 5, 2001
49,601
166
111
www.slatebrookfarm.com
No, I wasn't referring to Heisenberg's uncertainty principle. Look for references to Einstein's famous quote (and why he didn't like quantum mechanics): "God doesn't play dice with the universe." Yes he does. :)
 

Dumac

Diamond Member
Dec 31, 2005
9,391
1
0
Originally posted by: Perry404
So you believe that we have no will?

To be very simplistic...you don't think the idea that we have no will is absolutely preposterous?
(Even though science clearly shows that we have none...but we'll put that aside for now)

I find the idea of free will ridiculous. However, I also believe that most who would defend the concept do not completely understand the implications or alternatives.
 

91TTZ

Lifer
Jan 31, 2005
14,374
1
0
Originally posted by: Perry404
What is the philosophical debate called that argues whether or not we have a will?

To freshen your memory...

Since we are subject to the laws of physics it is impossible that we have a will. For if our entire body including our thoughts are made simply from molecules governed by the laws of momentum & mass etc...then how can we possibly "choose" to change the course of those molecules if they must follow the laws of physics?


This is pretty bad reasoning. Just because some scholars have thought themselves into a corner and can't figure their way out of it doesn't mean that we don't have free will.

Sure, our actions are confined by the laws of physics. But that doesn't mean that we can't choose how to act within those confines. I cannot choose to levitate, but I can choose to walk. I cannot walk on water, but I can walk on land where I choose. I can choose to walk off a cliff, but I choose not do because I know I'll fall.

In other words, it's like a painting on a canvas. You only have so many colors to choose from and you can only put those colors on so many places on that canvas, but that doesn't stop you from painting beautiful pictures that haven't been painted before.
 

piasabird

Lifer
Feb 6, 2002
17,168
60
91
Free Will is a flawed concept.

We can not choose who we are born to because we come from our parents. So we dont have totally free will. My church instead refers to this as a Moral Agency. Morals are the concepts of right and wrong or more correctly what is acceptable behaviour for the society or culture we live in. When you go to the store you can choose to pick up some gum and put it in your pocket and leave without paying, or you can go to the front counter pay for it and then leave. Different forces may guide you to make what you consider is the right choice. However, if you know there are security cameras, your choice may not be totally free. Still you can make a bad choice and get arrested. So maybe your choice has a religious reason like the ten commandments, or a civil reason like it is against the law, or a physical reason like you dont want to be hassled by the police. This brings up the concept of Conscience and what the hell is that anyway?

The Brain is a very complex piece of machinery. It uses Sodium and Potasium to control release of chemicals to control us. Still we think we are in charge. Are we truly more than the sum of our parts or are we just flawed robots?

You might look for answers in things like some of the experiments like Poplovs Dogs using conditioned responses. Where dogs are conditioned to take action based on stimuli. However, why do some people not respond to society's conditioned responses? I say we can implement our own choices through intelligence using our upper reasoning. What made the first person turn grain into wine? Was it a mere accident? We made the Atom Bomb. Were we forced to do this through some chain of unstoppable probabilities?
 

DrPizza

Administrator Elite Member Goat Whisperer
Mar 5, 2001
49,601
166
111
www.slatebrookfarm.com
I really don't want to turn this into a P&N type of thread. However, I want to point out that religion is not necessary to have moral values. It doesn't take laws to have a sense of what's right and what's wrong. I'm sure you realize that, but you seemed to reduce your argument of choices of behavior to religious or legal reasons.


Anyways, to help destroy your concept of causality, here are some sources worth reading
this one discusses about midway through the article, one of the neatest experiments to ever screw with people's minds and intuition.

here is another decent article (I'm not really trying hard to find excellent articles though.

Actually though, this is probably one of the best discussions on determinism that I've seen: Stanford