Is free-will an illusion?

@ughaibu,

Quote:

Bear in mind that Tomr is abusing the term determinism. As explained here:

Bear also in mind that I jokingly took up your bogus coin argument and your tone and people took me more serious than they would you. I talked about pulling dimes out of my dickhole and they took it as a legitimate argument for free will or against determinism or whatever you think it is supposed to do. You complain about definitions too much. What I mean by determinism is clear. If I talk about a determined system and you have a problem I can then explain what I mean in detail without using the word determined. And I have done just that in previous posts. Just for you: A determined system translates to mean an isolated system that when under analysis and observation shows invariable consistency in following rules that once known can be used to predict that system. NO one can observe determinism in any other way. You want this to be about larger ideas than people can concieve so there is no argument. Even if we use only your specific definition about determinism as only a global thesis then if true there will be evidence of it locally. And in fact there is evidence in every cubic inch of space that we as human beings have observed.

0 Replies

1 Reply

@Fil Albuquerque,

I fall undecided between Hard Determinism and Incoherentism although inclined for the last one...

3 Replies

@Fil Albuquerque,

In here I take event causation as you all know by now I dislike agency as a concept for cause, and by event causation I refer or mean to direct cause or objective immediate cause the causal efficiency in a chain of cause and never to concepts like intention or choice.

0 Replies

@Fil Albuquerque,

You mentioned quantum mechanics earlier here is a link to a youtube video that explains how these previously thought to be probabilistic events might actually fall under the domain of classical mechanics. I don't know how to show video like you do.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W9yWv5dqSKk

2 Replies

@tomr,

Just do [youtube]link[/youtube]

0 Replies

@tomr,

I am sure you will fully appreciate this thought I just had regarding the illusory effect of property of cause in agents, it is explained with our lack of further knowledge what else...so simple...that bubble of minor linear knowledge we all have and live in is the responsible for the sense of property of cause or agency that we have, the limits of awareness in what we call the "I"...thus the need of a self, a organizing point of view from a certain perspective...property of cause emerges from perspectivism and lack of further knowledge...

Note: This argument does not intend to affect efficient causation only the very concept of property as origin rather then use or passage...

1 Reply

@Fil Albuquerque,

Quote:

I fall undecided between Hard Determinism and Incoherentism although inclined for the last one...

I am about the same. I definitely fall into both categories. I believe the world is completely determined and I do not think we really know what we are talking about when we talk about free will.

0 Replies

@Fil Albuquerque,

Quote:

I am sure you will fully appreciate this thought I just had regarding the illusory effect of property of cause in agents, it is explained with our lack of further knowledge what else...so simple...that bubble of minor linear knowledge we all have and live in is the responsible for the sense of property of cause or agency that we have, the limits of awareness in what we call the "I"...thus the need of a self, a organizing point of view from a certain perspective...property of cause emerges from perspectivism and lack of further knowledge...

Yes I do. I like the idea of self as an organizing point for our limited knowledge. It makes me wonder at how these mental phenomena exist as structures in the brain. I wonder what it will be like 20 years(this is an underestimate- an attempt at humor) from now when they are teaching students about the exact circuits of the brain that result in there own awareness. And the path ways that cause what choices they make.

0 Replies

@dalehileman,

Quote:

Could a third party who really understands this stuff, please step in

Glad to oblige, Dale.

The truth of the matter is that none of these people know for sure the true nature of Reality...nor of its components.

Free will MAY exist...exactly as it appears.

All of what we consider reality MAY be an illusion...and nothing, including free will exists in any meaningful sense of the word.

What we consider reality MAY actually exist exactly the way we perceive it...and still free will still MAY NOT exist.

The problem here is not the many possible correct answers...the problem is that some want to present guesses as something more than guesses.

2 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

The truth of the matter is that none of these people know for sure the true nature of Reality...nor of its components.

There are very few things that we know for sure. I know that grass is green. When I see grass and compare it to the color of other things I associate with the word green. So by definition of green, grass is green.(Not at all times and not all grass, but the specific grass that I am talking about is green)

The only things that we know for sure are self defined relationships. We know pain hurts, or that 1+1=2.

These things that we know for sure are trivial matters. I certainly do not think I know for sure the world is determined, but I look around me and make my best guess. A guess that seems to be free of contradictory assumptions.

We do know for sure there are only two scenarios that are possible with regards to freewill vs. determinism: That knowledge is either attainable or that nothing can ever be known for sure. If we assume that knowledge can be attained, then we may learn something very fruitful about what we are. But if we take the road where we assume nothing and never search out meaning, then we can never know anything unless the answers just fall into our laps.

By the way, if anyone here thinks people actually know for sure the answers to the problem of Determinism/Free Will then you probably are not fit to be discussing these topics.

Quote:

All of what we consider reality MAY be an illusion...

This MAY be a possibility looming over us. But if we do not seek knowledge and truth then we can never know if it is an actually possibility or not. One day we or something much smarter than us may be able to say with certainty whether reality is an illusion or not. But we or they will never know unless an attempt is made.

1 Reply

@tomr,

I agree with you in spades, Tomr...but I respectfully suggest you re-read the entries in this thread...and I suspect you will see that several people here are approaching this "investigative" procedure in a way that looks like a "for certain" is being offered.

Quote:

We do know for sure there are only two scenarios that are possible with regards to freewill vs. determinism: That knowledge is either attainable or that nothing can ever be known for sure. If we assume that knowledge can be attained, then we may learn something very fruitful about what we are. But if we take the road where we assume nothing and never search out meaning, then we can never know anything unless the answers just fall into our laps.

Well, you were on the path to something here, but then you veered into an unnecessary and inappropriate dichotomy, in my opinion.

You seem to be saying that we either "assume that knowledge can be attained" or that we must assume that knowledge cannot be attained and must therefore abandon any search for meaning. That tends toward the old "I'd rather be dead than red!" There are other alternatives.

We do not have "to assume" knowledge can be attained or cannot be attained. We can simply attempt to attain as much knowledge as we can...and see where that leads.

And if the answers ever "fall into our lap"...we will know that knowledge can be obtained. (I suspect we can agree that knowledge can be obtained, but in many matters, including the one being discussed here, that knowledge is very, very, very, very, very difficult to obtain...so caution should be used when commenting so as to avoid the "this is the way it has to be" syndrome that seems to pervade all discussions of Reality on A2K.

2 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Excuse me but indeed you must believe knowledge can be obtained in order to pursue any knowledge at all, it is not like I pursue knowledge without any belief in place, perhaps you just meant that assumed beliefs don't imply any kind of certainty on the matter and still may leave open space for a healthy dose of skepticism, with that I would agree...

1 Reply

@Fil Albuquerque,

Quote:

Excuse me but indeed you must believe knowledge can be obtained in order to pursue any knowledge at all, it is not like I pursue knowledge without any belief in place, perhaps you just meant that assumed beliefs don't imply any kind of certainty on the matter and still may leave open space for a healthy dose of skepticism, with that I would agree...

Fil...with all the respect in the world, I do not do any "believing."

I make assumptions, guesses, speculations, probability estimates...and when I do, I call them assumptions, guesses, speculations, probability estimates. I do not call them "beliefs"...I do not do "believing."

I do not believe knowledge (I'm talking about deep stuff, not "knowing" my name) cannot be obtained...I also do not believe knowledge can be obtained. The jury is still out...and I am not willing to guess either way.

Because I am not willing to guess knowledge can be obtained does not mean I will not test whether it can or cannot. I can pursue it...with or without a healthy dose of skepticism. But I do not have to do any believing in order to inquire about what is going on in this "reality" of ours.

2 Replies

@ughaibu,

Ugh thank you for that rundown #…..309. A little encouragement is heartily welcome in this insensate redoubt of hermeneutic miasma

Quote:

The problem for compatibilists is that, on the face of it, there are no realisable alternatives in a determined world.

Precisely, seems obvious
To me anyhow

And yes it seems absurd to assign free will as a possession only of the humanoid, it violates the general principle that nothing is entirely anything while everything is partly something else

Quote:

However, as it seems obvious to most people that we have free will,

Agreed, it's intuitional and anyway we almost have to act as if it's free

The more carefully controlled the conditions of an experiment the more consistent its result, seems to make the idea of free will vanishingly small

Quote:

You're assuming that such an experiment can be undertaken, in short you're assuming that some relevant scientist has free will.

I don't think that necessarily follows. Free will or not, most experimentation seems to support determinism

1 Reply

the fact that u believe coming out of nothing make ur beliefs takin the shape of nothing while anything u pretend knowin get the value of nothing at the maximum rate by ur believed eyes of nothing and through what u would feel forced to invent urself being someone as the first condition allowin u to b able to confirm knowin by forcin the object of ur knowin to b the nothing u r so u can claim smthg out of ur invented costume that looked alive at this moment

then u invent believin comin out of god a powerful perfect one, that allow u to sound alive by adorin what he does
then ur beliefs take the shape of creation powers so wills believin that any is bc someone wants it while u start seein only individuals when u are absolutely sure knowin what they want or meanin to find out what they are from what they surely want even insects and animals individual shapes

why is that so?? dont worry i know i dont need ur answer

bc u cant mean urself being unless for becomin more, ur interests in truth is only also for that, how to assure an existence fact for the surety that it would become more exponentially one day

so all ur logics use is about things ends that are always more and for ways to force things to become more
that is why u love creations as the way to multiply things so at least in shape there are more, and u feel never disgusted about the idea of creatin berk

the edge of ur invention is reached when u start to claim that truth is creation means merdas this is the end
no means forget yea sure u know but noone is interested to hear about any means, u just proved knowin by lying

just sayin, truth function is exclusively the use of objective conception being any and all existence
so what is created cannot have a mean and when u deny that by callin creations means the truth of any and all existence then u r just provin being a liar only there also u cant invent being

0 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

...the problem is that some want to present guesses as something more than guesses.

Thank you Frank for a little encouragement in this otherwise recrudescent conflation of dysphoric persiflage

0 Replies

look how u dont care about freedom unless it is a will

like u deny that u r present conscious not forced so deny knowin and seein reality of facts being free so happenin peacefully still and constant while no force is the reason
if it is not for becomin more forever or for one day glory of gettin it all, u suddenly dont know any not even urself being there now talkin by ur free energy autoresource

u prove that u r the terrorists ready to kill everythin and even urself if u cant get to heaven

0 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

You seem to be saying that we either "assume that knowledge can be attained" or that we must assume that knowledge cannot be attained and must therefore abandon any search for meaning. That tends toward the old "I'd rather be dead than red!" There are other alternatives.

This is not completely what I intended. It is more a matter of motivation to search out solutions. Which requires some direction of search. Searching out meaning without any beliefs is like trying to find what to eat without being hungry. If any alternative possibility that comes to mind can dismiss a train of thought such as: freewill may not exist because all reality may be an illusion. The problem of the search becomes exponentially difficult. General statements of doubt like these tend to impede a realistic analysis (in the sense that the analysis is within our means of conducting) and as a consquence stop any progress that might have been made otherwise.

Quote:

We do not have "to assume" knowledge can be attained or cannot be attained. We can simply attempt to attain as much knowledge as we can...and see where that leads.

You are right here. And if I did intend that absolute statement I was mistaken. But there is still a lack of motivation that comes with being in a state of perpetual dis-belief, that would seem to hinder the pursuit of knowledge.

Quote:

And if the answers ever "fall into our lap"...we will know that knowledge can be obtained. (I suspect we can agree that knowledge can be obtained, but in many matters, including the one being discussed here, that knowledge is very, very, very, very, very difficult to obtain...so caution should be used when commenting so as to avoid the "this is the way it has to be" syndrome that seems to pervade all discussions of Reality on A2K.

Agreed. And the occasional voice of caution in this regard is a good thing.

0 Replies

@dalehileman,

dalehileman wrote:

it seems absurd to assign free will as a possession only of the humanoid

Of course, but I don't know of any philosopher who does so, do you?

dalehileman wrote:

The more carefully controlled the conditions of an experiment the more consistent its result, seems to make the idea of free will vanishingly small

How?

dalehileman wrote:

Free will or not, most experimentation seems to support determinism

How?

1 Reply

Is free-will an illusion?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know