Is free-will an illusion?

@FBM,

Quote:

I respect your position; it is the majority one, by far.

But remember, a position is not strong because of its popularity (argumentum ad populum). As others have pointed out, these debates have been going on for centuries. Within these discussions are multiple threads and multiple concepts. Half the time the arguments with one another are fallacious simply because there has been misunderstanding of a position taken. In the quest to find the truth there will always be dissenters.

There has been somewhat loose agreement on what people mean when they talk about freewill, but there has been extreme variation regarding determinism (nomological, fatalism, compatibilism) and very different logical arguments being made (e.g., accounts from physics, quantum mechanics, neurology, biology, evolution, behavioral science).

Some people have taken the position that these questions are unknowable, but to address the topic we must have a non-physical representation of something to explain why we do what we do. It may very well be that none of us have hit upon the correct explanation, but I doubt very highly that anyone would with the attitude that the questions are too big or are unsolvable.

If Copernicus buckled under the pressure of those who opposed his view of heliocentrism, then what might we think today about our galaxy?

1 Reply

@Briancrc,

Briancrc wrote:

Quote:
I respect your position; it is the majority one, by far.

But remember, a position is not strong because of its popularity (argumentum ad populum).

Absolutely. On the other hand, if you're the only one in the family who believes that there's an invisible dragon in the basement... Wink

Quote:

As others have pointed out, these debates have been going on for centuries. Within these discussions are multiple threads and multiple concepts. Half the time the arguments with one another are fallacious simply because there has been misunderstanding of a position taken. In the quest to find the truth there will always be dissenters.

There has been somewhat loose agreement on what people mean when they talk about freewill, but there has been extreme variation regarding determinism (nomological, fatalism, compatibilism) and very different logical arguments being made (e.g., accounts from physics, quantum mechanics, neurology, biology, evolution, behavioral science).

Some people have taken the position that these questions are unknowable, but to address the topic we must have a non-physical representation of something to explain why we do what we do. It may very well be that none of us have hit upon the correct explanation, but I doubt very highly that anyone would with the attitude that the questions are too big or are unsolvable.

If Copernicus buckled under the pressure of those who opposed his view of heliocentrism, then what might we think today about our galaxy?

It's the dogmatic skeptics who claim(ed) that knowledge is/was unattainable. I'm not sure. But looking at the experimental evidence juxtaposed with the purely a priori reasoning, I find the experimental evidence to be currently more compelling. That could always change, of course.

As for a strict definition of free will, I'm still waiting for Oliver to supply the one he wants to work with.

1 Reply

@FBM,

Quote:

Absolutely. On the other hand, if you're the only one in the family who believes that there's an invisible dragon in the basement.

It's real I tell you!!!

1 Reply

@Briancrc,

You were the last one I would've suspected!

0 Replies

@Olivier5,

Olivier5 wrote:

I'll try and come up with a definition.

I propose the following definition of "agency":

The capacity of a sentient and self-aware being (often a human being, but could be another animal, or a machine) to further its goals – however these goals may be set – by representing its environment and itself within it, imagining a series of behavioral options and their likely results, and comparing these to select an optimal line of action for itself.

This would typically involve the capacities to:
1) explore/perceive some features of one’s environment (perception)
2) predict with some degree of precision the likely future risks and opportunities present in this environment (prediction)
3) imagine a series of potential actions or behaviors from one’s part, meant to avoid threats or grab opportunities (options listing)
4) apply a series of mental processes generally referred to as “reason” to compare or combine those potential behaviors (options analysis)
5) on this basis, select the preferred or optimal behavior (decision)
6) implement this behavior in a purposeful, goal-oriented way, adjusting/fine-tuning the behavior as may be required by subsequent changes in the environment (action)

Do we agree that this is what we are talking about? If not, what other possible definition could we use?

1 Reply

@Fil Albuquerque,

Fil Albuquerque wrote:

Why is no one talking about free willing requiring itself determinism in this pseudo debate eh ???

Try and understand undeterminism before you criticize it. For the umpteenth time, an undeterminist universe is not necessarily void of cause-to-effect relations. It is not chaos. An undeterminist universe is just like our universe: some things seem pre-determined by a cause-to-effect relationship, and others seem to emerge by chance.

It's nothing to be scared of... :-)

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

I thought we were working towards a definition of free will, not agency.

1 Reply

@FBM,

As explained, i think the term "free will" is confusing and vague. I prefer "agency" or "free choice". But if you have a precise definition of "free will", i'm all ears.

2 Replies

@Olivier5,

OK, but I'd need to know how you differentiate 'agency' and 'sense of agency' produced by a few lobes of the brain working in conjunction (posterior parietal cortex, right inferior parietal lobe/temporoparietal junction, etc).

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

Olivier5 wrote:

...But if you have a precise definition of "free will", i'm all ears.

Nothing elaborate. Just a standard dictionary definition:

free will
noun
1.
the power of acting without the constraint of necessity or fate; the ability to act at one's own discretion.
synonyms: self-determination, freedom of choice, autonomy, liberty, independence

1 Reply

@FBM,

"Freedom of choice" is exactly what I am talking about. The capacity to base our choices upon a rational examination of our options and their likely results. To me, if we have that, we are "free", in the sense that we are not forced to choose one option against our best judgement. In this view, the human mind has a role to play in decision making, comparing options using observation, understanding, logic, etc.

1 Reply

@FBM,

Quote:

I'd need to know how you differentiate 'agency' and 'sense of agency' produced by a few lobes of the brain working in conjunction (posterior parietal cortex, right inferior parietal lobe/temporoparietal junction, etc).

Not sure I understand this. This sense of agency can very well be produced by the brain. In fact it is, IMO... My take is that the brain produces the mind, but unlike pure materialists, I consider that the mind is produced FOR A REASON, TO PERFORM CERTAIN TASKS (e.g. representation, imagination, logic) that could NOT be performed without the mind. In other words, the mind is not an epiphenomenon, a useless by-product of brain activity. Rather, it is the brain's main function to produce the mind, so that the mind can do the stuff it can do.

0 Replies

@Olivier5,

Yes, I understand your position. However, if the conscious experience of making that decision were preceeded by subconscious processes beyond our awareness and control, as the experiments done to date suggest, then it would seem that what we perceive to be conscious choices are actually predetermined at least to some extent by subliminal brain activity.

True, the whole decision-making process occurs within the individual - no one is saying that decisions aren't made - but neuroscience gives us good reason to doubt that they are as free as we perceive them to be.

I'd really be interested in seeing some experimental data to the contrary, if you can find some. I'm really not that into just swapping opinions back-and-forth.

2 Replies

@FBM,

I can prove my take with day-to-day experience. It's not hard to do and we don;t need an RMI. If you tell your kid to wash his hands before dinner, and he does so, it stands to reason that your order, produced by your mind and expressed in symbolic language, was understood by your kid's mind, thought about a bit and then obeyed. You haven't sent your kid any neuronal or electric command... You have just told him "wash your hands", which is a stream of concepts with a meaning, i.e. it is a conscious thought. And that conscious thought has shaped your kids' decision making. Therefore it is possible for thoughts to shape decision making....

Quote:

if the conscious experience of making that decision were preceeded by subconscious processes beyond our awareness and control

Not necessarily. Awareness always comes after the event it is aware of. E.g. if you perceive a threat (a car is rushing in your direction), your awareness of the perception will come something like 0.2 seconds after the perception itself. In other words, awareness is like any sense: it takes some time.

So if a decision is taken by the mind, the awareness that a decision was taken will probably come a short time after the decision itself. It cannot be otherwise: Information always takes some time to travel and be processed. There doesn't seem to be much instantaneous information transfer in this universe, therefore it would be irrational to expect that awareness of X happens at the same time as X.

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

Quote:

An undeterminist universe is just like our universe: some things seem pre-determined by a cause-to-effect relationship, and others seem to emerge by chance.

You don't seem to get it, Ollie. There are two, and ONLY two, possible scenarios:

1. Absolute and strict determinism where each and every event of each and every possible kind are absolutely PREDETERMINED, and

2. Absolute and utter chaos where there is absolutely NO predictability. A rock may suddenly transform itself into a dinosaur, for example, without rhyme or reason, by pure chance and accident.

One or the other--take your pick. Either way, "free will" is not possible.

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

Olivier5 wrote:

I can prove my take with day-to-day experience. It's not hard to do and we don;t need an RMI. If you tell your kid to wash his hands before dinner, and he does so, it stands to reason that your order, produced by your mind and expressed in symbolic language, was understood by your kid's mind, thought about a bit and then obeyed. You haven't sent your kid any neuronal or electric command... You have just told him "wash your hands", which is a stream of concepts with a meaning, i.e. it is a conscious thought. And that conscious thought has shaped your kids' decision making. Therefore it is possible for thoughts to shape decision making....

How is a subjective anecdote proof? You have no idea what went on in your subliminal mind in the seconds before any of those decisions.

Quote:

Not necessarily. Awareness always comes after the event it is aware of. E.g. if you perceive a threat (a car is rushing in your direction), your awareness of the perception will come something like 0.2 seconds after the perception itself. In other words, awareness is like any sense: it takes some time.

So if a decision is taken by the mind, the awareness that a decision was taken will probably come a short time after the decision itself. It cannot be otherwise: Information always takes some time to travel and be processed. There doesn't seem to be much instantaneous information transfer in this universe, therefore it would be irrational to expect that awareness of X happens at the same time as X.

You seem to be admitting that decisions are made subconsciously. Am I reading that right?

1 Reply

@FBM,

Quote:

However, if the conscious experience of making that decision were preceeded by subconscious processes beyond our awareness and control, as the experiments done to date suggest

Yet another vague reference to "subconscious processes" and the attribution of some unwarranted significance them, eh?

As has been cited, neuroscientific "experiments," have shown that "processes" involved in Libet's "readiness potential" (RP) are NOT synonymous with "having made a decision." Yet, some still insist on treating them as synonyms.

And of course, as Ollie has noted, a time gap between the occurrence of an event and subjective "processing" of the information conveyed by that event will always exist. So what?

But the whole thing begs the question anyway. If, after you tell me to reach out and touch my computer screen, I actually do so, and if "I" did not make that decision, then who/what did? The brain? Was the "the brain" forced to do it?

0 Replies

@layman,

....he does not understand mechanics...you are wasting your time...

1 Reply

@Fil Albuquerque,

Quote:

....he does not understand mechanics...you are wasting your time...

That post was tongue in cheek, Fil. I don't accept that false dichotomy either.

1 Reply

@layman,

Its not false at all...you either take "chaos", random "emergence", or a perfect correlation of patterns which we conveniently coined causality or determinism within our perception frame of reference regarding the "flow" of spacetime...in any case as you well know AGENCY requires determinism or you lose authorship over your willing and actions.
You probably one of those adepts of the "poljtical" miss mash they called soft determinism...

...personally I feel the need to be more honest with myself no matter the implications to our society and classical legal organization...as I see it from my pov we live in a barbaric era.

1 Reply

Is free-will an illusion?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know