On Mar 8, 8:54 pm, "darwinist"
gmail.com> wrote:> On Mar 9, 2:12 pm, "Aaron"
hotmail.com> wrote:
> [...]
>
>
>
>
>>>>> Our will may be causally determined (or may not), but putting time and
>>>> effort into our choices, makes a difference to those choices, and no
>>>> amount of knowledge about physics or psychology, will ever reduce our
>>>> decisions to inevitability, as far as the person deciding is
>>>> concerned.
>
>>> That is not a bad discussion. Now you just have to realize that if the system
>>> is in principle unpredictable, then the claim that it is "fundamentally
>>> deterministic" is either false or meaningless.- Hide quoted text -
>
>>> - Show quoted text -
>
>> I pretty much read this thread. I admit I am confused. This is how I
>> feel about free will. Can someone point out why it is not so cut and
>> dry as this?
>
>> (1) Free will is the ability to decide what actions to take (2) Making
>> a decision involves a consious process of thought
>> (3) Thoughts do not arise from anything, rather they happen, one leading to the next.
>
> What about any person's first thought of the day, or of their life? Do
> other thoughts lead to those ones? What about thoughts on a new
> subject (e.g. thoughts about something you have experienced, seen,
> heard for the first time)? It seems to me that thoughts can't just
> come from other thoughts, since they are - at least sometimes - new.
>
>> (4) Thus, since we do not control what thoughts we have, we do not control what actions we take and do not have free will.
>
> Does an elephant control it's trunk. Does a computer control the
> hardware plugged into it? What do you mean by control? I am serious.
> If you say we can't control our thoughts, then what qualifies as
> control?
>
> I might want to write something and then consciously think of a way to
> phrase that sentence. Is that controlling my thoughts? What if I want
> to add something up in my head, and then do so; or I try to imagine
> what to buy someone for their birthday, and I've actually set aside
> some time and do this. Is that controlling my thoughts?
>
> In relation to your point (2), it seems that these are conscious
> activities which involve the processing of thought. Are we not making
> decisions of our own design in such a case?
>
I'm responding to you guys with one post here, just to avoid making a
conversation go into to many forks.
"Freedom" is totally different. If you are tied to a chair, then
feedom is dimished. The set of possible actions becomes decreases.
I do not have a definition of "free will" because it a concept which
does not make any sense to me.
You wake up on desolate road with no memeory of hoe you got there.
The sun is rising and you see what appear to be your own footprints
coming from one direction. All horizons are a blank, just desert
sand.
The morning is cold and your body shakes. You get a pain in your
stomach and find your hands touching it. Your mouth is dry and you
smack your lips.
After a few minutes you start to walk towards the rising sun.
---
So in the scenario, the person wakes up, moves around, has a couple
reflex reactions to sensory input, and then contemplates the
situation, and then starts embarking on one of the perceived choices
available.
There may have been a thought process like:
"Whoa I'm in the desert, and I don't know how I got here I am thirsty
and hungry and I will surely die if I just sit here. The footprints
seem to indicate that I was headed in a direction earlier, so I think
I will continue in that direction as opposed to going back. I
certainly will not go off the road, as it looks like nothing is out
there."
I submit that the thought process which is a part of the decision
making process is the result of a system at work.
It does not matter if that system is deterministic or not.
The system spends some time processing the situation and formulating a
plan.
Then the system implements the plan by sending messages to the motor
neurons.
The fact that the system is AWARE of itself does not mean anything at
all.
This is why I don't really think about free will. The really
interesting thing to me is how the system obtains awareness, which of
course I feel right now, and so does everyone else.
The implications of believing in free will or not believing in it do
not seem very significant to me. In one case you look at being aware
of your thought process and descision making as something called "free
will" and in the other case, like me, you simply believe there is
nothing to indicate anything more is going on that awareness of the
system.
Really, nobody can "choose to have a thought". It is a paradox
because a choice is, in fact, also a thought.
Awareness is the special thing though. I "feel i am here" and that
is something I do not understand. I do not have any knowledge tht
tells me humans cannot create mechanisms which also feel awareness.
Computers are not the only things which perform calculations.
Then there is creative thought and innovation. I think curiousity can
break down to a mechanism. Inputs are analyzed and it is an advantage
for the system to notice cause and effect, and also to be curious.
Finally, what is someones actual definition of "free will"? If it is
along the lines of "I ask you to pick a number 1 or 2 and you have the
free will to choose which you want" then I do not agree it should be
recognized as free will. You simply are aware of your thoughts which
lead to saying the number.
Sorry this got long and maybe I repeated myself. I'm interested in
this only because I spend most of my life thinking I had this thing
called free will and then all of a sudden it hit me that free will is
not even a rational concept. For me, this was an interesting
realization.
>
>
>> I'm not saying I'm correct on this, I just haven't been able to find a
>> rebuttle that I can understand.
>
>> Thanks,
>> Aaron- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
