0
   

Is free will an illusion?

 
 
hue-man
 
Reply Thu 8 Jan, 2009 11:14 am
New findings in Neurology

Is Free Will an Illusion? | Wired Science from Wired.com
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 4,501 • Replies: 70
No top replies

 
xris
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Jan, 2009 01:43 pm
@hue-man,
The greatest neurologists cant fathom consciousness so deciding if we have free will or not will come somewhere after we have sussed consciousness.Prove the mind is not observing these actions by the brain??
hue-man
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Jan, 2009 05:00 pm
@xris,
xris wrote:
The greatest neurologists cant fathom consciousness so deciding if we have free will or not will come somewhere after we have sussed consciousness.Prove the mind is not observing these actions by the brain??


If brain science cannot fathom consciousness then what do you think we give a concrete answer to what consciousness is? Only science can give us an objective, positive answer as to what the nature of consciousness really is.

What makes you believe that the mind is separate from the brain? As far as I'm concerned, the mind and the brain are the same thing. The mind is just the word used for the processes going on in your brain. I think we make the problem of consciousness more difficult than it needs to be. I believe that consciousness is mostly, if not entirely, a result of the sensory system and the brain.

There are medical examples that indicate that the brain does not transcend itself.

Also, I don't know if you've read the article, but if you haven't, please do?
Kielicious
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Jan, 2009 05:32 pm
@hue-man,
hue-man wrote:
If brain science cannot fathom consciousness then what do you think we give a concrete answer to what consciousness is? Only science can give us an objective, positive answer as to what the nature of consciousness really is.

What makes you believe that the mind is separate from the brain? As far as I'm concerned, the mind and the brain are the same thing. The mind is just the word used for the processes going on in your brain. I think we make the problem of consciousness more difficult than it needs to be. I believe that consciousness is mostly, if not entirely, a result of the sensory system and the brain.

There are medical examples that indicate that the brain does not transcend itself.

Also, I don't know if you've read the article, but if you haven't, please do?



I think youre taking his post out of context.

He didnt say the mind exists independently from the brain; if he did imply that then more power to you. But rather it seemed he was saying that we must first understand consciousness altogether before we jump to conclusions about free-will in the mind/body dilemma.
Didymos Thomas
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Jan, 2009 05:35 pm
@hue-man,
Didn't Locke point out that the question of the freedom of will is irrelevant and that the real question is "is man free?"

Free will may be illusion, but that does not mean that man has no control over his actions.
hue-man
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Jan, 2009 05:49 pm
@Didymos Thomas,
Didymos Thomas wrote:
Didn't Locke point out that the question of the freedom of will is irrelevant and that the real question is "is man free?"

Free will may be illusion, but that does not mean that man has no control over his actions.


Man only has control over his actions if one keeps in the mind that the brain is the man.
0 Replies
 
hue-man
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Jan, 2009 05:52 pm
@Kielicious,
Kielicious wrote:
I think youre taking his post out of context.

He didnt say the mind exists independently from the brain; if he did imply that then more power to you. But rather it seemed he was saying that we must first understand consciousness altogether before we jump to conclusions about free-will in the mind/body dilemma.


He said to "prove that the mind is not observing the brain", which implies that he believes that the mind may be independent from the brain, and whether he stated for the sake of discussion or not, I responded.
Didymos Thomas
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Jan, 2009 06:12 pm
@hue-man,
hue-man wrote:
Man only has control over his actions if one keeps in the mind that the brain is the man.


Actually, man also has conscious control over his actions: as Libet's experiments demonstrate, the brain unconsciously initiates action, and before the action is carried out man has the conscious ability to not carry through with the action.
hue-man
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Jan, 2009 06:18 pm
@Didymos Thomas,
Didymos Thomas wrote:
Actually, man also has conscious control over his actions: as Libet's experiments demonstrate, the brain unconsciously initiates action, and before the action is carried out man has the conscious ability to not carry through with the action.


The experiment I posted states that the brain unconsciously makes the decision before the person is aware that the decision has been made.
Didymos Thomas
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Jan, 2009 06:26 pm
@hue-man,
Yes, and Libet's experiments confirm that conclusion. Libet's experiments also indicate that after the decision has been made unconsciously by the brain, man has the conscious ability to not act as the unconscious brain directs.
Kielicious
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Jan, 2009 06:40 pm
@hue-man,
hue-man wrote:
The experiment I posted states that the brain unconsciously makes the decision before the person is aware that the decision has been made.


You must know the other results he found as well.

Look up Libet's "the power to veto"

BTW, its not really new. These studies have been around for awhile now.
Didymos Thomas
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Jan, 2009 07:13 pm
@Kielicious,
That's it - power to veto - I forgot what Libet called it.
0 Replies
 
hue-man
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Jan, 2009 07:54 pm
@Didymos Thomas,
Didymos Thomas wrote:
Yes, and Libet's experiments confirm that conclusion. Libet's experiments also indicate that after the decision has been made unconsciously by the brain, man has the conscious ability to not act as the unconscious brain directs.


OK, I'll look into it some more. Do you believe in determinism or indeterminism, and why?
Didymos Thomas
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Jan, 2009 08:01 pm
@hue-man,
Determinism is demonstrably false. Quantum mechanics, for example. So, I guess in some way I'm an indeterminist.
hue-man
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Jan, 2009 08:09 pm
@Didymos Thomas,
Didymos Thomas wrote:
Determinism is demonstrably false. Quantum mechanics, for example. So, I guess in some way I'm an indeterminist.


Please give me a better reason for why you believe determinism to be false? Please demonstrate? What does Quantum mechanics have to do with it?
Didymos Thomas
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Jan, 2009 08:12 pm
@hue-man,
The example of quantum mechanics as empirical evidence against determinism is pretty popular:
Determinism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I'm sure a google search on the matter will yield a great deal of material.
Abolitionist
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Jan, 2009 08:15 pm
@hue-man,
nothing exists freely or independently of other variables in the observable reality we create through symbolism

free-will is a term only useful in the social contract whereby we are held responsible for actions and utilize the concept of informed consent. It's purely a sociological construct - but a necessary one.
0 Replies
 
Abolitionist
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Jan, 2009 08:16 pm
@hue-man,
knowing that free-will does not truly exist means that we can focus more on the underlying causes of behavior and decision making and less on individual responsibility.

For instance : we can have compassion for those who break laws and also forgiveness. focusing on rehabilitation rather than punishment
Aedes
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Jan, 2009 08:25 pm
@Abolitionist,
Abolitionist;41335 wrote:
knowing that free-will does not truly exist means that we can focus more on the underlying causes of behavior and decision making and less on individual responsibility.
It also means that someone can go on some heinous orgy of looting and raping and claim that he had no control in the absence of free-will.
paulhanke
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Jan, 2009 08:44 pm
@hue-man,
hue-man wrote:


... here's a question - what act of free will was necessary in these experiments in order to set up a response at all? ... let's try a thought experiment:

An experimenter has three subjects, A, B, and C ... the experimenter tells A that at some point in the future he is to hit a button with his right or left hand at random; the experimenter then runs the experiment with subject A and obtains Haynes' result ... the experimenter then brings in subject B and tells her nothing; the experimenter then runs the experiment with subject B, but for some reason subject B never hits the button at all! ... the experimenter finally brings in subject C and tells him that he is to hit a button with his right or left hand at random every time the experimenter snaps her fingers; the experimenter snaps her fingers and each time subject C presses the button within a fraction of a second (not seven seconds!) ... things that make you go "hmmmmmmmmm" Wink ...
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

How can we be sure? - Discussion by Raishu-tensho
Proof of nonexistence of free will - Discussion by litewave
Destroy My Belief System, Please! - Discussion by Thomas
Star Wars in Philosophy. - Discussion by Logicus
Existence of Everything. - Discussion by Logicus
Is it better to be feared or loved? - Discussion by Black King
Paradigm shifts - Question by Cyracuz
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Is free will an illusion?
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 04/27/2024 at 11:36:40