|
4896744
Small Town Girl


Registered: 03/06/10
Posts: 5,128
Loc: United States
Last seen: 11 years, 8 months
|
The Idea Of Free Will Is Ludicrous
#14306723 - 04/17/11 02:28 PM (12 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
The idea of free will is nonsensical because it would require input beyond that of the structure of your brain caused by DNA and past experiences.
-------------------- Live your Life!
|
Silversoul
Rhizome


Registered: 01/01/05
Posts: 23,576
Loc: The Barricades
|
Re: The Idea Of Free Will Is Ludicrous [Re: 4896744]
#14306834 - 04/17/11 02:48 PM (12 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Not really. There is such a thing as emergence. Biology and experience come together to create an emergent structure called the self. The self can be subject to multiple influences and impulses with contradictory choices. For example, you may crave a piece of chocolate cake, but also be worrying about your weight. You can either indulge in your immediate desire for the cake, or commit to your diet and abstain. That is what's called a choice(and I'd argue that the latter is more of a choice than the former). When our desires do not conflict and we have a clear preference, then there isn't really any will involved. But when we are faced with a choice between fulfilling one desire or another, then we have to use our willpower, particularly when it comes to choosing between instant gratification(cake) or long-term goals(weight loss). The very fact that we are able to set long-term goals and fulfill them is all the proof we need of the existence of will(whether you call it "free" or not is little more than a game of semantics).
QED
--------------------
|
DieCommie

Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
|
Re: The Idea Of Free Will Is Ludicrous [Re: Silversoul] 2
#14306891 - 04/17/11 02:58 PM (12 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
whether you call it "free" or not is little more than a game of semantics
That sounds like a bold claim. Whether or not it is 'free' is the heart of the issue. Virtually nobody disputes the existence of will.
|
DieCommie

Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
|
Re: The Idea Of Free Will Is Ludicrous [Re: 4896744]
#14306929 - 04/17/11 03:04 PM (12 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
iThink said: The idea of free will is nonsensical because it would require input beyond that of the structure of your brain caused by DNA and past experiences.
That makes sense if you believe that consciousness can be reduced to an effect of its basic constitutes. A reductionist view with bottom up causality is an understandable position to hold, as such views have consistently grown and encroached on more holistic or top down causation views. But, it still remains an assumption and it would be conjecture to proclaim that all emergent properties can be described with respect to their basic constituents alone, or that no strong emergent properties exist.
|
Silversoul
Rhizome


Registered: 01/01/05
Posts: 23,576
Loc: The Barricades
|
Re: The Idea Of Free Will Is Ludicrous [Re: DieCommie]
#14306971 - 04/17/11 03:12 PM (12 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
DieCommie said:
Quote:
whether you call it "free" or not is little more than a game of semantics
That sounds like a bold claim. Whether or not it is 'free' is the heart of the issue. Virtually nobody disputes the existence of will.
If there is will, and it can overcome impulse, then there is choice. To me, that is enough to consider it "free." Others demand some greater, more transcendent definition of freedom which I find to be a pointless exercise.
--------------------
|
DieCommie

Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
|
Re: The Idea Of Free Will Is Ludicrous [Re: Silversoul]
#14306996 - 04/17/11 03:16 PM (12 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
If there is will, and it can overcome impulse, then there is choice. To me, that is enough to consider it "free." Others demand some greater, more transcendent definition of freedom which I find to be a pointless exercise.
Sure, but consider your premise is of the form "If A and B then C" not "If A then B then C". 'A' alone is not sufficient for free will, free will requires A and B. That is, you can define will such that it cannot overcome impulse and that would be 'unfree' will.
|
NetDiver
Wandering Mindfuck


Registered: 08/24/09
Posts: 6,024
Loc: Everywhere and Nowhere
Last seen: 1 year, 6 months
|
Re: The Idea Of Free Will Is Ludicrous [Re: 4896744]
#14307109 - 04/17/11 03:34 PM (12 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
iThink said: The idea of free will is nonsensical because it would require input beyond that of the structure of your brain caused by DNA and past experiences.
The idea of determinism is equally nonsensical, because the Universe itself is apparently without a first cause.
|
DieCommie

Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
|
Re: The Idea Of Free Will Is Ludicrous [Re: NetDiver]
#14307116 - 04/17/11 03:36 PM (12 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
But how is that relevant? A lack of determinism does not imply free will. Lack of determinism is necessary but not sufficient for free will.
|
Silversoul
Rhizome


Registered: 01/01/05
Posts: 23,576
Loc: The Barricades
|
Re: The Idea Of Free Will Is Ludicrous [Re: DieCommie]
#14307133 - 04/17/11 03:38 PM (12 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
DieCommie said:
Quote:
If there is will, and it can overcome impulse, then there is choice. To me, that is enough to consider it "free." Others demand some greater, more transcendent definition of freedom which I find to be a pointless exercise.
Sure, but consider your premise is of the form "If A and B then C" not "If A then B then C". 'A' alone is not sufficient for free will, free will requires A and B. That is, you can define will such that it cannot overcome impulse and that would be 'unfree' will.
That doesn't make sense. How can there be will and have it not be capable of overcoming impulse? That seems pretty axiomatic to the very concept of will.
--------------------
|
DieCommie

Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
|
Re: The Idea Of Free Will Is Ludicrous [Re: Silversoul]
#14307154 - 04/17/11 03:42 PM (12 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Well, you prefaced it that way - not me. 
I can certainly fathom will which cannot overcome impulse. Will has more to do with intent than capability. Free will is where capability comes into play.
|
NetDiver
Wandering Mindfuck


Registered: 08/24/09
Posts: 6,024
Loc: Everywhere and Nowhere
Last seen: 1 year, 6 months
|
Re: The Idea Of Free Will Is Ludicrous [Re: DieCommie]
#14307502 - 04/17/11 04:40 PM (12 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
DieCommie said: But how is that relevant? A lack of determinism does not imply free will. Lack of determinism is necessary but not sufficient for free will.
I agree with that, I was just saying that the reasons OP provided didn't really qualify free-will as nonsensical. The fact that our experiences are composed of chemicals/DNA/whatnot isn't really adequate for rejecting free-will, which isn't really well defined in the first place.
|
OrgoneConclusion
Blue Fish Group



Registered: 04/01/07
Posts: 45,414
Loc: Under the C
|
Re: The Idea Of Free Will Is Ludicrous [Re: Silversoul]
#14307505 - 04/17/11 04:41 PM (12 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Come one SS, I have covered this many, many times already.
Please tell at what point Free Will comes in:
atom molecule compound collection of compounds (object) single-celled critter multi-celled critter fish amphibian mammal primate human
--------------------
|
NetDiver
Wandering Mindfuck


Registered: 08/24/09
Posts: 6,024
Loc: Everywhere and Nowhere
Last seen: 1 year, 6 months
|
|
At what point does the atom come in?
Okay, let's go with subatomic particles- protons, electrons, quarks.
At what point do those come in?
Maybe it's free-will all the way down.
|
OrgoneConclusion
Blue Fish Group



Registered: 04/01/07
Posts: 45,414
Loc: Under the C
|
Re: The Idea Of Free Will Is Ludicrous [Re: NetDiver]
#14307524 - 04/17/11 04:45 PM (12 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
As every hydrogen atom is indistinguishable from every other, that rules out FW at the atomic level.
--------------------
|
NetDiver
Wandering Mindfuck


Registered: 08/24/09
Posts: 6,024
Loc: Everywhere and Nowhere
Last seen: 1 year, 6 months
|
|
Well, the question of whether or not we have free-will is a dualist question to begin with, because it implies an agent somehow separate from the rest of the system.
It still seems to us like we have the ability to make decisions, though, and we have to hold people accountable for their actions.
|
Simms
Fuckwit


Registered: 11/17/08
Posts: 1,109
Loc: Somewhere in Europe
Last seen: 2 years, 6 months
|
Re: The Idea Of Free Will Is Ludicrous [Re: 4896744]
#14307565 - 04/17/11 04:55 PM (12 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
iThink said: The idea of free will is nonsensical because it would require input beyond that of the structure of your brain caused by DNA and past experiences.
And that particular thought was generated through your body reactions, biologic robotics. And this one was as well. And this one. We will never know, because knowing is determined, an illusion. Everything we will ever think and achieve is an illusion, as we are just a sequence of reactions.
I thought, then I suddenly stopped the process of thought, and saw random images running in my mind, my eyes weren't even closed. These images are always running and are completely random, everybody has these. And you can not control them. This is your subconcious. ANd you don't have control over subconcious, as control itself is conciousness, which is controlled by subconcious, therefore we don't have any control at all, and do we even have conciousness? Its all an illusion, including this thought, which is a paradox, which is also an illusion, as we are inside an illusion. World is a paradox.
--------------------
|
DieCommie

Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
|
|
Quote:
OrgoneConclusion said: Come one SS, I have covered this many, many times already.
Please tell at what point Free Will comes in:
atom molecule compound collection of compounds (object) single-celled critter multi-celled critter fish amphibian mammal primate human
If it were to come in, it would be somewhere inbetween compounds/object and multi-celled critter. There is no theory we can use to derive a multi-celled critter from a collection of compounds. Until there is, this will always be a realm in which free will could exist.
|
meatcakeman
the search for bodhisattva



Registered: 07/03/07
Posts: 8,380
Loc: el sol
Last seen: 10 years, 9 months
|
|
Quote:
OrgoneConclusion said: As every hydrogen atom is indistinguishable from every other, that rules out FW at the atomic level.
LOL
you obviously have not taken chemistry before.
-------------------- 大开眼界
 
Hasta siempre, comandante.
|
DieCommie

Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
|
Re: The Idea Of Free Will Is Ludicrous [Re: meatcakeman]
#14307667 - 04/17/11 05:13 PM (12 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Though indistinguishability is a property generally applied towards elementary particles, it can apply to composite particles as well. All hydrogen atoms are the same in that they all have the same quantum states they can occupy. They, like black holes, do not have hairdos.
|
meatcakeman
the search for bodhisattva



Registered: 07/03/07
Posts: 8,380
Loc: el sol
Last seen: 10 years, 9 months
|
Re: The Idea Of Free Will Is Ludicrous [Re: DieCommie]
#14307685 - 04/17/11 05:15 PM (12 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
DieCommie said: Though indistinguishability is a property generally applied towards elementary particles, it can apply to composite particles as well. All hydrogen atoms are the same in that they all have the same quantum states they can occupy. They, like black holes, do not have hairdos.
yes, but, as i assume you know, not all isotopes of hydrogen act the same, and neither do their subatomic particles. imo, they are all distinguishable in some way or another.
-------------------- 大开眼界
 
Hasta siempre, comandante.
|
|