What is free will?

@cicerone imposter,

Quote:

Because all of the particles are always in flux, there's no possibility of predicting any future outcome.

This may be true. Since it might be impossible to get a snapshot of all the particle positions and velocities. And that snapshot would act like the initial conditions of an n-body like problem. So you might be right there. But not being able to predict the future doesn't really say anything about whether the world is determined or not.

We could not anticipate the 3-body problem from the video without a computer bigger than the one that was originally used. That's if we could get the snapshot. So we are already behind in the race, since we do not have the benefit of knowing where stuff is and how fast its moving.

Quote:

It's not a matter of n-body factors; it's about future unpredictability of what the particles will do. The earth goes through climate change; we couldn't predict this winter and summers weather patterns only 12 months ago.

It's about more than just one thing. It's about being faster than the largest computer that can ever exist - the universe. It's about crunching numbers using machines that are made out of the things you are doing the number crunching about. It may be an impossible task to make exact predictions for these reasons.

Quote:

There's no way to predict the flux/change.

There actually are mathematical ways to predict the way things change. Velocity is the rate at which positions change. Acceleration is the rate at which velocities change. These rates of change are known as derivatives. And you can keep taking derivatives to find new ways the particles change in time. Once you know the positions in time you can find any rate of change. All you have to do is take a derivative. So if we had the equations for an n-body problem we could predict where the particles would be and how those positions, and the derivatives would change with time.

But for the other reasons I think you are right. It might be impossible to completely predict a complex outcome like the weather 6 months from now.

1 Reply

@tomr,

Those things that fall under the study of physics, humans can measure many of the natural phenomenon that we can observe. It's those things that can't be duplicated that creates the problem to find solutions.

It's somewhat similar to economics. Trying to forecast short-term and long-term economic conditions are almost impossible, because what is measured is always in flux.

Even expert economists can't agree on how the US economy will perform the rest of this year and next year.

You wrote,

Quote:

But not being able to predict the future doesn't really say anything about whether the world is determined or not.

I think this is the issue that most can't agree with, and it falls into philosophical debate.

I'm one of those who believe nature is not predetermined, and evolves based on the conditions under which one lives for all life forms.

0 Replies

@tomr,

You're right of course. Nobody inside the universe can predict the universe, for to do so, he would need to compute his own knowledge and therefore his own computations ahead of their time. So he would need not only to be ahead of the universe - impossible for reasons you described well - but ahead of himself too.

And you can't even say 'forget about the predicter, consider him outside of the domain to be predicted'. A guy cannot predict the universe and not brag or do something about it... thus changing it.

As an aside, I believe this actually already happened: Marx predicted the future somewhat but he had to try and speed up the revolution. The capitalists got wiser at the game and next thing you know you had social democracies in developed capitalist economies and revolutions only in the most under-developed and unread of places like Russia or China. Exactly the opposite of what Marx had predicted...

The only person who could compute the future must therefore be outside the universe... God could, theoretically, if He existed and bothered enough. Therefore determinism is a metaphysical question.

0 Replies

@Olivier5,

Olivier5 wrote:

I never understood why so many people believed in determinism... Seems so unlikely to be true to me. Imagine: the whole story of the whole universe since the dawn of time till the end of time pre-scripted???? That's a LOT of script...

No need for a script... if a collection of causes and conditions are present then the effect must arise... it has no choice... even if we can't predict ahead of time what the effect will be... therefore we are one of those interconnected causes or conditions so we have no independent free will.... and no independent influence... knowing that is liberating... because we don't swim against the current... reality has positive qualities we just need to allow them to manifest by giving up the belief that somehow are illusory free will is superior.

1 Reply

@igm,

Quote:

No need for a script... if a collection of causes and conditions are present then the effect must arise... it has no choice... even if we can't predict ahead of time what the effect will be... therefore we are one of those interconnected causes or conditions so we have no independent free will....

Therefore your ideas about determinism are predetermined?

I know it's liberating, à la Spinoza, but it doesn't make it true, nor even likely.

1 Reply

@JLNobody,

JLNobody wrote:

Igm, I do think of my life as a complex narrative...

I understand what a complex narrative is in literature.... but can you give an example of what you mean in the context of a person's life?

Meditation could well be about allowing 'reality' to manifest and trusting that it's positive qualities are enough to live a life worth living (by taking the qualities of meditation into everyday life) ... so allowing it to manifest without trying to impose on it, the notion of an independent entity with an independent free will.

0 Replies

@Olivier5,

Olivier5 wrote:

Quote:
No need for a script... if a collection of causes and conditions are present then the effect must arise... it has no choice... even if we can't predict ahead of time what the effect will be... therefore we are one of those interconnected causes or conditions so we have no independent free will....

Therefore your ideas about determinism are predetermined?

I know it's liberating, à la Spinoza, but it doesn't make it true, nor even likely.

You have to give an example of free will... I'm saying the evidence shows that nothing is independent and so everything is influence by everything else...

.. if one stops the train of thoughts... thoughts again arise after a short time uninvited and they are the cause of the next thoughts, actions and emotions which in turn give rise to the next thoughts, actions and emotions... ad infinitum.

Those who meditate have stumbled across how to let go of thoughts and allow reality to takeover along with its positive innate qualities... a much wiser guide.

2 Replies

[youtube]http://m.youtube.com/results?q=determinism%20vs%20free%20will%20atheist&search_sort=relevance&search_type=search_all&uploaded=&oq=determinism%20vs%20free%20will%20atheist&gs_l=youtube-reduced.3...26431.30772.0.31767.8.8.0.0.0.0.114.704.6j2.8.0...0.0...1ac.1.5.youtube-reduced.lJ2UcDMOHFI[/youtube]

1 Reply

@Fil Albuquerque,

0 Replies

Now after presenting the classical compatibilistic view in favour of free will, in the next video with Sam Harris I present that which is to my perspective a far more clearer more encompassing compelling argument against free will and why it is deeply incoherent:

(As you may have noticed impartially both videos portray antagonistic views of well known atheist spokesman's)

3 Replies

@Fil Albuquerque,

Pay special attention to 27.50 min. onward into the talk...

0 Replies

@igm,

Just because things are interlinked doesn't imply they are pre-determined. Determinism is a huge assumption to make, one that is not provable, nor particularly useful... It's a pure belief, IMO quite unreasonnable. In fact, the most materialustic versions of this belief negate the very possibility of reason.

1 Reply

@igm,

You wrote,

Quote:

.. if one stops the train of thoughts... thoughts again arise after a short time uninvited and they are the cause of the next thoughts, actions and emotions which in turn give rise to the next thoughts, actions and emotions... ad infinitum.

And there are billions of those "train of thoughts" that diverge into multiples of ways that can't be predetermined or accounted for by any human.

Not even within the same village, family, or peers.

Do you know what you'll be doing a week from today at the same time? How about in 12-months?

You couldn't possibly know. Where's the pre-determination?

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

On the contrary reason implies an order n cause n effect are in place, not randomness...the problem here is with "property" of reason...

2 Replies

@Fil Albuquerque,

You wrote,

Quote:

On the contrary reason implies an order n cause n effect are in place, not randomness...the problem here is with "property" of reason...

Is convoluted and meaningless. Explain what you're trying to say in plain English. Since when is "reason = property?" Reason is subjective to the actor.

0 Replies

@Fil Albuquerque,

Reason implies SOME amount of cause and effect but it does not exclude SOME amount of randomness.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

You permanently keep confusing having or not having predictive knowledge on something with something being causal relational...the fact that a to complex calculation is hard or impossible to make as nothing to do with things being or not being determined...rather the only needed argument is that causes give rise to effects which is at the very foundational assumption of SCIENCE...in fact the very own free will advocates must acknowledged determinism as the cause of your actions must be in your brain's will, hence the contradiction cause then one asks the question why to stop there on your willing and why not go back to the external causes on why you will what you will...so please Cic pay attention an address the arguments instead of confusing them...forward knowledge being complex has nothing to say on whether determinism is or is no true !

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

Randomness in fact destroys the very notion of free will once if there is randomness your will is not the cause of your actions n behaviour...

1 Reply

@Fil Albuquerque,

You still haven't proven "determinism to be true." You're making the statement, but your explanations for it is your personal assumptions.

Most of us understand that all living things are limited by their genes and environment. Beyond those limits which includes survival and evolutionary changes, it has the freedom to "roam" wherever they please.

For anything to be predetermined, somebody must be able to describe what any individual will do in the future beyond the constraints I've described earlier.

Quote:

Definition of PREDETERMINATION

1: the act of predetermining : the state of being predetermined: as
a : the ordaining of events beforehand
b : a fixing or settling in advance
2: a purpose formed beforehand

Even I don't know what I'll be doing tomorrow. One thing that I'll be doing that may be call pre-determined is that I'll post something on a2k, but I don't know the time of day that'll happen.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

Its an assumption is not to be proved...in fact if time is not a fundamental feature of the Universe and ALL TIMES coexist determinism is not true but still you don't have free will cause your history already exists to the full (all space/times coexist)...so as I see it (n most scientists also) there is simply no logical scenario where free will makes any sense...

1 Reply

What is free will?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know