prove free will doesn't exist

@xrickandmorty,

There is no known proof either for or against having free will. Each individual has their own belief on it.

0 Replies

@xrickandmorty,

I prove that free will does exist by choosing to not respond to this thread

QED.

1 Reply

@xrickandmorty,

xrickandmorty wrote:

prove free will does not exist through logical proofs.

Prove that is does.

0 Replies

@xrickandmorty,

xrickandmorty wrote:

prove free will does not exist through logical proofs.

Prove to us that you're NOT cheating on your homework with this question.

0 Replies

@maxdancona,

Free will is an illusion.
Everything is set because everything interacts in certain way; for proof, if something did not it wouldn't be interacting with anything. The ways something interacts is not changeable because is somethings properties cannot change it can't, and if something can its its property to be able to being the effect of a cause. The amount of directions exist, limits the amount of ways something can interact with something else and cause that object to move in a different direction. Therefore, everything has a prior cause which causes the present causes to occur, hence everything is set based off the prior causes.

randomness does not exist because everything needs a cause, because without a cause nothing is causing x to occur. Without that there is no reason for x to occur without the cause to occur before x.

2 Replies

@xrickandmorty,

xrickandmorty wrote:

Free will is an illusion.
Everything is set because everything interacts in certain way; for proof, if something did not it wouldn't be interacting with anything. The ways something interacts is not changeable because is somethings properties cannot change it can't, and if something can its its property to be able to being the effect of a cause. The amount of directions exist, limits the amount of ways something can interact with something else and cause that object to move in a different direction. Therefore, everything has a prior cause which causes the present causes to occur, hence everything is set based off the prior causes.

randomness does not exist because everything needs a cause, because without a cause nothing is causing x to occur. Without that there is no reason for x to occur without the cause to occur before x.

You are right, but why can't the complex interactions of causes that result in decision-making and intentional action be called, 'free will?'

I.e. why do we even have the idea that some realm of possibilities exists that is 'free,' if the universe is deterministic? If we're not aware of how a given process is determined, e.g. because the mind's complexity is beyond our grasp/control, then by 'free,' we could actually mean, 'free of intentional control,' i.e. we cannot intentionally control the mind's processes of decision-making except by external coercion, etc.

It would be impossible for science/engineering to progress to the point where mental processes could be steered by external technologies in such a way that we experience our puppeted minds as if it were our own 'free will,' There is something about our experience of mental autonomy that makes us feel free, and it is probably because brain function is beyond external control.

So while 'free will' is determined by subconscious brain activity, we experience it as 'free' because it occurs autonomously. If you choose to abide the law, for example, you experience peace in that your decision to abide feels autonomous, but if you seek to break the law and experience stress of anticipation that you'll be caught and punished, then you experience your mental autonomy in a state of coercion and that steers you toward abiding the law; but of course as long as you perceive your free-will as being abridged by the threat of punishment, you will react emotionally against the coercion, and that emotional reaction impedes your experience of having freedom.

2 Replies

@livinglava,

The result of the complex decision you made was caused by something else because nothing occurs without the cause. Cause and effect are deterministic because one specifically causes another, or the differences between each cause allow cause the causes to cause specific different effects; the way the causes are cannot be changed unless that is the way the cause is.

People can conceptualize free will not because they experienced it but because the concept is a combination of emotions and logical process's that combined somehow are defined as the opposite of determinism in a way that can be conceptualized. Before I determined everything is predetermined I thought that way, but do not know weather others have that definition of just do not understand the concept.

1 Reply

@livinglava,

Everything has a value and something that does not have a value is a type of value. You could call a free will which is randomness a value, but everything has a cause. Something is caused has a specific effect, and cannot be caused by randomness because a cause is causing the randomness to cause it and so on in an infinite conceptual loop, leaving no end what can never change.

0 Replies

I've got the proof right at the tip of my tongue but I can't seem to write it out.

1 Reply

@hightor,

for what?

0 Replies

@xrickandmorty,

You are giving a perfect explanation as to why I disagree with you.

0 Replies

@xrickandmorty,

xrickandmorty wrote:

The result of the complex decision you made was caused by something else because nothing occurs without the cause. Cause and effect are deterministic because one specifically causes another, or the differences between each cause allow cause the causes to cause specific different effects; the way the causes are cannot be changed unless that is the way the cause is.

People can conceptualize free will not because they experienced it but because the concept is a combination of emotions and logical process's that combined somehow are defined as the opposite of determinism in a way that can be conceptualized. Before I determined everything is predetermined I thought that way, but do not know weather others have that definition of just do not understand the concept.

Think about a squirrel that jumps on a branch and causes it to crack, but then it doesn't break off and fall until a strong gust of wind blows it.

Neither the squirrel nor the gust of wind were sufficient causes in themselves to make the branch fall, and if either had happened before the other, the outcome might have been different.

So processes in the brain might be similar, where interactions between different processes result in decisions, but those decisions are determined until the interaction occurs.

It is still a process of determination, but not one that could be predicted before the complex processes that led to the interaction occur. E.g. you can't predict the squirrel's behavior or when exactly the wind-strength will be strong enough to blow down the cracked branch; you only know that different factors can combine to result in certain decisions/actions, which wouldn't occur if they didn't all align in the sequence that resulted in the decision/action.

1 Reply

@livinglava,

True, but even if you are not able to predict something does not mean the process what not predetermined. For example, two things producing an interaction was a result of the interaction which was the result of an interaction. Regardless of how everything is interacting, logically it is interacting in a certain way and because everything is interacting in a certain way everything is determined.

1 Reply

@xrickandmorty,

xrickandmorty wrote:

True, but even if you are not able to predict something does not mean the process what not predetermined. For example, two things producing an interaction was a result of the interaction which was the result of an interaction. Regardless of how everything is interacting, logically it is interacting in a certain way and because everything is interacting in a certain way everything is determined.

Ok, but what I'm saying is that you can have processes who determinacy is dependent on complexities within sub-constituents that interact at each stage of determination.

So think about your decision to open an umbrella. Part of the decision is based on whether you remembered to bring your umbrella that day, or if you are the type of person who just leaves in the morning without checking the forecast. Then, whether the rain falls or blows over is dependent on various factors. Then, are you a person who waits until you are almost getting soaked to open your umbrella, or the type who opens it at the first sign of droplets?

All these interacting factors have extremely complex constituent causal processes, and they all have to interact at a given moment in a certain way for a given decision to be made.

So can you really say that everything was written in stone since the beginning of time, or does determination happen as the present is en route to becoming the future, i.e. as a result of interactions forming new conditions that in turn interact to form other new conditions, and so forth?

0 Replies

prove free will doesn't exist

Quick Links

My Account

able2know