The point is not about beliefs it's about how having one particular belief without any sort of reasoning somehow advances the idea that free will or predestination exist. I might as well say because God said free will exists so it does, I think that's the point that he was trying to make.
Free Will
- Thread starter Souron
- Start date
The point is not about beliefs it's about how having one particular belief without any sort of reasoning somehow advances the idea that free will or predestination exist. I might as well say because God said free will exists so it does, I think that's the point that he was trying to make.
Bozo Erectus
Master Baker
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2003
- Messages
- 22,389
You cant 'prove' that free will exists or doesnt, any more than you can prove either way if God exists. Ultimately it comes down to what one believes. People who are more comfortable with what they perceive to be facts, as opposed to beliefs, or feelings, will always have a problem grappling with this sort of discussion.
Sid, I must admit I havent got the foggiest clue what the above sentence means
You cant 'prove' that free will exists or doesnt, any more than you can prove either way if God exists. Ultimately it comes down to what one believes. People who are more comfortable with what they perceive to be facts, as opposed to beliefs, or feelings, will always have a problem grappling with this sort of discussion.
Sid, I must admit I havent got the foggiest clue what the above sentence means
If your going to make an argument it's probably better to steer clear of beliefs such as does God exist, I believe that or in my own personal version of reality it does, or God said so, all this opens up is the question does God exist, or in your case, does Bozo's waking dream of reality/belief of reality exist, is it true? Completely pointless question, thus expressing your view and beliefs in a sort of matter of fact way as you did, is not really answering anything, ie you might as well ask does God exist, which whilst a productive area of debate is ultimately not going to reveal anything. Thus hand waving metaphysical hocus pocus clap trap should be advanced in the spirit of pure personal opinion, not as if it's some sort of profound insight, which it probably isn't.
It does come down to what you believe, but fanciful opinions aren't really very convincing are they?
Bozo Erectus
Master Baker
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2003
- Messages
- 22,389
Sid, you dont get it. This isnt a discussion about the atomic weight of strontium. Thats something that can be determined, proved. Free will cannot be proved or disproved. This isnt a scientific discussion. Scientific principles dont apply.
No I get it, it's just that saying predeterminism exists because faries control the destiny of man is hardly going to be very convincing, in a philosophical issue it's best to steer clear of entirely fanciful conclusions as no one get's it? At least if you want to make anyone not dismiss your rhetoric as away with the fairies. Bozo believes x, therefore predeterminism does exist, OOOOOOOKKKAAAAAY.
The flying Spaghetti monster created a midgit and a mountain and a tree and then on the fourth day he rested, he then sat back and said the midget should have a mate, because I can't be arsed to look out for him 24/7? hmm maybe he needs a friend? Thus female midgets came into existence on the fourth day. Then they ate of the forbidden secret bolognaise sauce, and FSM had to invent the world so he could fling them off the mountain, at this point the midgits became ashamed, and free will came into existence as divinely bestowed by the FSM's noodly appendage, And the rest is history therefore I think since the great metapasta himself has given me free will, vis a vis de facto parmesan it must exist, dya see what I mean, fine if you want to advance some mystical BS but not if you want to make any real point other than to yourself? That's what he meant by arm waving hocus pocus fairy summoning blah blah.
brennan
Argumentative Brit
Computers are not configured to develop a 'consciousness', the same as the glass you used as an example earlier. At the moment the only physical construct we know of that appears to show consciousness as an emergent property is animal brains.
The brain is an astonishingly complex device: given our understanding of Chaos theory, it is fairly obvious, I think, that such a device would be influenced heavily by any quantum effects that are constituent to it. If 'free will' is the ability to make a choice at random then I suspect that quantum interactions within the brain make that possible.
Bozo Erectus
Master Baker
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2003
- Messages
- 22,389
No I get it, it's just that saying predeterminism exists because faries control the destiny of man is hardly going to be very convincing, in a philosophical issue it's best to steer clear of entirely fanciful conclusions as no one get's it? At least if you want to make anyone not dismiss your rhetoric as away with the fairies. Bozo believes x, therefore predeterminism does exist, OOOOOOOKKKAAAAAY.
The flying Spaghetti monster created a midgit and a mountain and a tree and then on the fourth day he rested, he then sat back and said the midget should have a mate, because I can't be arsed to look out for him 24/7? hmm maybe he needs a friend? Thus female midgets came into existence on the fourth day. Then they ate of the forbidden secret bolognaise sauce, and FSM had to invent the world so he could fling them off the mountain, at this point the midgits became ashamed, and free will came into existence as divinely bestowed by the FSM's noodly appendage, And the rest is history therefore I think since the great metapasta himself has given me free will, vis a vis de facto parmesan it must exist, dya see what I mean, fine if you want to advance some mystical BS but not if you want to make any real point other than to yourself? That's what he meant by arm waving hocus pocus fairy summoning blah blah.
Im not proselytizing!
The thread poster invited people to discuss their views on free will. This is what Ive done, period. If my beliefs throw people into kanipshins, theres nothing I can do about it.Just let me get one thing straight so Im sure I know what we're talking about here: Do you believe that free will is something that can be proved or disproved, with some sort of equation or something like that?
Im not proselytizing!
Just let me get one thing straight so Im sure I know what we're talking about here: Do you believe that free will is something that can be proved or disproved, with some sort of equation or something like that?
You should of made it clear it was very much IYO and not that you were trying to suggest that predeterminism was an argument by your religion.
I said that it can't be proved or disproved way back on page 5/6/7 or so.
EDIT: just a misunderstanding, let's leave it at that.
Ayatollah So
the spoof'll set you free
Unless the movie is a documentary. In which case they really do.
Unless the brain specifically evolved control mechanisms to avoid randomness in animals' behaviors. After all, animals which randomly eat poisonous berries and mushrooms, or randomly mate with animals of the wrong species, have a sad yet ultimately beneficial tendency not to leave many descendants.
warpus
Sommerswerd asked me to change this
punkbass2000
Des An artiste
brennan
Argumentative Brit
...and how many animals of the wrong species have you randomly tried to mate with recently?Evolved controls over the particularly odd sounding behaviour you suggest do not necessarily rule out all 'randomness'.
Ayatollah So
the spoof'll set you free
That the laws of nature are such that, together with a complete description of the way things are at any given time, they logically imply a complete and unique description of everything at all later times. It's also common (but not part of the definition) for a deterministic theory plus a complete description of one time to logically imply a description of all earlier times as well. Linky.
Note that in the linked article, the last author mentioned (Hoefer) is the author of the article. And what he has to say there is very apropos.
Fugitive Sisyphus
Escape Artist
Deterministic universe:
Nondeterministic universe:
I don't see how either model shows freewill.
Code:
if (x > 5) {
PutOnRightSock();
} else {
PutOnLeftSock();
}Nondeterministic universe:
Code:
if (x > 4 + rand() % 2) {
PutOnRightSock();
} else {
PutOnLeftSock();
}I don't see how either model shows freewill.
brennan
Argumentative Brit
In the deterministic model the initial conditions (value of x) totally determine which sock is put on first. In the second a random 'choice' is made - a result that cannot be determined from the initial parameters. If that choice is made by a conscious entity or 'will' then that entity has showed 'free' will.
Fugitive Sisyphus
Escape Artist
Emphesis by me.
There is no evidence that this randomness is caused by free will. In fact, if free will is random, it is hardly free will.
Bozo Erectus
Master Baker
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2003
- Messages
- 22,389
Great, I dont get too much agreement around hereI generally agree with your reasoning, except we do have free will.
Ive been trying to reconcile free will with the 'playable' universe. It would seem to exclude the possibility of free will.
brennan
Argumentative Brit
It has no 'causation' - it is a fundamental property of consciousness, it is 'built in' so to speak.
They are not just random but completely unkowable and thus chaotic in the truest sense of the world, absolutely nothing is certain in the universe at the funemental level. See the description of Quantum Mechanics if you like on google, I have linked them previously.
Ayatollah So
the spoof'll set you free
Not necessarily, true. But there are some considerations which suggest that it might be easier for evolution to hit on a thoroughly deterministic solution, rather than a deterministic-for-life-and-death-decisions, yet random-for-arbitrary-decisions, solution.
Say you're designing the steering system for a car. You want there to be a deterministic relationship between the position of the steering wheel, and the angle of the front wheels, when it matters. But it's OK if the relationship is random at times when it doesn't matter where the wheels are pointing, like when the car is parked.
Even though it's possible to design a car that way, it's not very economical. It's easier and cheaper to just use the same deterministic system at all times. This way your car needs only 1 rack and 1 pinion, etc.
Similarly, evolution could, theoretically, use two different decisionmaking methods in the organism - but why bother?
