14
   

Free will and determinism can coexist...

 
 
Fil Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Mon 3 Jun, 2013 01:34 pm
@JLNobody,
..."owner" is a place holder, and that doesn't change anything regarding causation, when I say its "you" the one willing something I am sayings its not someone else...the question of free will is a question about influence, all our life knowledge and beliefs revolve around the idea that influence can be exercised...of course that is a two end stick no doubt...the word free is totally meaningless not just for this matter but for any matter you choose to apply the coinage...
G H
 
  1  
Reply Mon 10 Jun, 2013 01:42 pm
@jamespetts,
Quote:
jamespetts Fri 4 Apr, 2003 10:05 am ...if they are both defined correctly....

Heh. These decade-past threads will probably still be dredged-up 20 years from now. New blood should re-introduce topics rather tacking their thoughts on at the end of multi-page ancient discussions that few are going to bother to read or re-read in their entirety to see if "it has already been said". One could contend that this old material still being accessible in other than a separate, disabled archive even discourages participation. Especially when it comes to those blokes on various boards out there who refer with a URL: "Look, newcomer, we talked about this subject yata yata years ago; it was all thoroughly covered at this location." [Translation: "I want to turn this forum into a barely active ghost town, with only occasional nostalgic mumblings from a handful of its original denizens still left around, a *good ol' codgers club* rocking on the porch or playing checkers outside the store facade, gradually dying off"].
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Mon 10 Jun, 2013 01:46 pm
@Fil Albuquerque,
All biology is influenced by their biology and environment. We, as humans, are limited by our culture, language, education, family and friends, travel, communication, and our limits as humans. Politics and economics play a large part in what we call freedoms.
0 Replies
 
Fil Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Mon 10 Jun, 2013 01:48 pm
@G H,
...I still keep reading and seeing videos on free will debates each day, just yesterday I saw one of Dennett's latest videos on the matter in youtube, speaking for myself I just don't post around so often because no new arguments have shown up...
0 Replies
 
G H
 
  1  
Reply Mon 10 Jun, 2013 02:24 pm
@jamespetts,
Quote:
. . . My definition of "free will", which I suggest be considered the most correct, is that any given mind is able to make decisions to promulgate its will, free of interference by the wills of other minds. That essentially makes "free will" a usable, social concept, rather than a definitionally meaningless construct.

To indulge in the popular pretense that you might still be around after posting this in 2003...

If the expression is to have any significance in the context of a natural world, I actually somewhat agree. Your brain/body is what is evaluating data, engaging in decision-making, and outputting conclusions / actions. The bloody damned rest of the "cosmos" and its regulating habits which is overarching over you certainly isn't performing those processes. Whereas a true, grand puppetmaster has to do both the thinking and the string-pulling for its wooden-headed creations -- the latter indeed have their governance outside themselves, are in a heteronomic situation.

But your "interference from other minds" is an irrelevant consideration. Even if a gun is held to your chest and you are forced to comply, it is still you that must apprehend the situation and make the decision. Pressing the barrel of a weapon against a scarecrow yields no mental outcome and neither a complying nor a rebellious body response; the stuffed anthropomorph lacks any structural organization for being an interested, autonomous acting, and conclusion-generating agent.
0 Replies
 
Fil Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Mon 10 Jun, 2013 07:45 pm
Free will debates would probably never happened was it the case we just spoke of will which would be enough to assert the exact same things and reconcile both views with some ease...the all problem is with the damn word free to which I never found any practical use...
0 Replies
 
ptispope
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 Dec, 2013 02:24 am
@perception,
I sincerely believe that the problem is language when the attempt is made to conceptualize abstract activity. Consider this: do humans do what they do, or will humans do what they will do? I believe that the measurement of time is a human agreement, and I also believe that consequence is a product of the combination of any given set of conditions that determines an outcome. "In order" for humans to do what they "will" do, they must first do now. The act of doing "nothing" does not exist, since there is no such thing as "no thing"(except in LANGUAGE.) Our attempts at communicating go only as far as the language we use to reconcile the breach between one mind and another. Those are my ground rules.
Now, when it comes to the topic of free will, consider this: have you ever heard of the phrase, "Failure to thrive"? That means, for all intents and purposes, a physically capable baby born moments ago effectively chooses to not tolerate life. Now, what definitively selfless newborn in its right mind would choose to not do the necessary in order to "thrive"? That says to me that the power of our free will is so present and existent that it is innate.
Fil Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 Dec, 2013 11:24 am
@jamespetts,
Choices by definition imply that in any given X situation you could have done otherwise independently of the conditions you are presented with, determinism on the contrary clearly states that the outcome must be fixed even when unpredictable due to the role complexity itself plays for framing a correct predictive outcome. It inescapably follows from the exposed that both concepts are at odds with each other when we set politics n prejudice aside from the equation. Bluntly put to my view soft determinism reflects nothing but the worst possible example of politics interfering with clear reasoning. Nonetheless there is a point on which I can agree with the OP, as indeed, the kind of common sense use people speak off and bother about with the wording, the coinage, "free will", does not in fact exist...but the point is, it does not follow from there that because it doesn't exist we must invent one from straw men and fallacy so to satisfy the establishment.
Bottom line decisions result and are constrained by hereditary, social, cultural, and situational factors on witch awareness operates as the passive outcome of the computing processes set in motion and not the other way around. No amount of conservative pseudo debating against the infallible logical conclusions on the implications of determinism can change its nature.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 Dec, 2013 01:22 pm
@ptispope,
"Survival" is instinctive in all newborns.
0 Replies
 
Fil Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Thu 19 Dec, 2013 12:19 pm
I am starting to like this guy more n more I bet Fresco and the mind gang will love him to :

0 Replies
 
K1Barin
 
  1  
Reply Wed 1 Jan, 2014 04:13 pm
Choice or determinism are themselves two things to CHOOSE from. When choice or determinism is an issue to argue and reason and try to convince the other side to accept, there must be some choice (between choice and determinism) in the listener. So one’s rational choice is Choice itself.

So what is your choice, choice or determinism?

Kayvan Barin
0 Replies
 
Romeo Fabulini
 
  1  
Reply Wed 1 Jan, 2014 04:27 pm
Speaking of time, there's this entertaining Twilight Zone episode called 'Cradle of Darkness' that explores the theme that no matter what a time-traveller to the past may do- no matter how drastic-, subsequent historic events will still happen.
A german-speaking woman is sent back to 1889 to get a job as housekeeper in the Hitler household with the intention of killing the newborn baby Hitler, thereby preventing WW2 from happening..
Full 21 minute episode-

cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Wed 1 Jan, 2014 06:54 pm
@Romeo Fabulini,
The Kid had a different plot to it; the kid turns out to be himself when he was young. Cute movie with interesting plot.
0 Replies
 
Razzleg
 
  1  
Reply Thu 2 Jan, 2014 12:37 am
@Fil Albuquerque,
Fil Albuquerque wrote:

Choices by definition imply that in any given X situation you could have done otherwise independently of the conditions you are presented with...


You would have to make a real effort to be more wrong, Fil. Relativity implies that both "potentiality" and "possibility" are not just ancient logical functions, but factors that must be considered by physicists. "Choices" represent, if anything, an agent's reaction to conditions that limits the field(s) of "possibility".

There's an "old school" straw-man version of "free-will" that allows determinists to describe it as a form of wish-fulfillment, but the fact of the matter is that, far from fulfilling wishes, the phenomenon that the concept of "free-will" describes can be represented as a learning curve performed by relatively "autonomous" individuals.

Fil Albuquerque wrote:
...decisions result and are constrained by hereditary, social, cultural, and situational factors on witch awareness operates as the passive outcome of the computing processes set in motion and not the other way around. No amount of conservative pseudo debating against the infallible logical conclusions on the implications of determinism can change its nature.


i agree with you in many ways: decision-making is a complicated process, involving heredity, social position, cultural values, and the situation entities find themselves in together. You devalue "awareness", or self-consciousness, as an "after-thought", but i think that it is not "just" an effect -- it, too, is a component of the process, although not a dominant one. i do think of decision-making, not as constrained, by the limits you describe, but as informed and enabled by them. (Of course, "choosing" does not occur in a vacuum.)

Determinism may be a "logical" position (from a certain POV), but, nonetheless, a determinist view-point is no more likely to yield predictable results than that of a free-will advocate. The fact of the matter is that the future is more complicated than either "free-will" or determinism can describe.

"Cause and effect" is a simple physical equation designed by scientists to facilitate laboratory experiments. And the "causal" systems, that science observes, do not represent, or and/do not describe, a domino effect, but do describe the inter-activity of the bodies involved in them. Within certain limits, self-regulation does occur within "causal systems", and thus "free-will" does have a certain basis in them.

Your objection that the debate about FW v. D represents, even if in FW's favor, a conservative agenda, only implies that the debate itself is not only value-laden, but conservative, by its very nature. However, which is more likely to be co-opted to support the status quo: choice, that represents change, or determinism, which stands for "the inevitable, innocuous future".
Fil Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Sat 4 Jan, 2014 10:05 pm
@Razzleg,
What is there to "potentiality" and possibility" other then pure guess work Razzleg ?
What is there when you consider to the full the almost infinite minutia of the clockwork of the world ?
You think you know anything about cause and effect because you have done some readings on a few old papers that try to trash it down ?...
There is nothing to cause and effect other then the order of events and the geometry within that order. The perfect symmetry and proportion of before and after. The balance and form in which change changes nothing as it revolves within itself with no escape...
Do you think you understand freedom or that freedom is desirable ?
Freedom is worse then vacuum ! Worse then falling within falling...freedom its a black hole that devours itself ! A promise of illusion...vain human hope...
There is no space left for freedom as freedom is an absolute that belongs to no one, that no one can master or tame...
...its funny you speak of freedom as a form to claim human independence...
...as in freedom there is no order, nor autonomy...no proportion where human reason can fit or fit with...
...potentiality, possibility...all guess work about what is not know to detail...
If this n that I could this n that people stubbornly insist...there is nothing we know about this n that more then we know about the surface of an ocean...
...what we desire, we are build to desire...what we crave n look for, we are build to look for it, like blinds seeking light...what we chose, is nothing other then making path to destiny and ratio...
If you have any respect for Geometry (you might include roughness in there to) you damn well know Razzleg there is no such thing as free will...
Free will is nothing but a pathetic obscure meaningless pseudo concept rapping human illusion within the great grinding processes of the world...
Ants we are, ants we live as, and ants we die...
Perhaps you dream of a drop of water streaming up the river...I rather not, I have made peace with eternity !
Razzleg
 
  2  
Reply Tue 7 Jan, 2014 01:49 am
@Fil Albuquerque,
Fil Albuquerque wrote:

What is there to "potentiality" and possibility" other than pure guess work, Razzleg?


Not much, aside from the evidence of time, relativity theory, quantum theory, string theory, statistical research, systems theory, anecdotal observation, and reams of philosophical papers, as well as generations of philosophers, fiction-writers, moralists, poets and scientists.

Fil Albuquerque wrote:
What is there when you consider to the full the almost infinite minutia of the clockwork of the world ?

You think you know anything about cause and effect because you have done some readings on a few old papers that try to trash it down ?...


i am a supporter of the concept of "cause and effect"; i'd never "trash it down". And i am struck by wonder when i try to observe the almost infinite minutia of the world, although i think that comparing it to a clock's works is simplifying it by a rather poor analogy. I can understand how a clock works...

Fil Albuquerque wrote:
There is nothing to cause and effect other than the order of events and the geometry within that order. The perfect symmetry and proportion of before and after. The balance and form in which change changes nothing as it revolves within itself with no escape...
Do you think you understand freedom or that freedom is desirable ?
Freedom is worse then vacuum ! Worse then falling within falling...freedom its a black hole that devours itself ! A promise of illusion...vain human hope...
There is no space left for freedom as freedom is an absolute that belongs to no one, that no one can master or tame...
...its funny you speak of freedom as a form to claim human independence...
...as in freedom there is no order, nor autonomy...no proportion where human reason can fit or fit with...
...potentiality, possibility...all guess work about what is not know to detail...
If this n that I could this n that people stubbornly insist...there is nothing we know about this n that more then we know about the surface of an ocean...
...what we desire, we are build to desire...what we crave n look for, we are build to look for it, like blinds seeking light...what we chose, is nothing other then making path to destiny and ratio...
If you have any respect for Geometry (you might include roughness in there too), you damn well know, Razzleg, there is no such thing as free will...
Free will is nothing but a pathetic obscure meaningless pseudo concept wrapping human illusion within the great grinding processes of the world...
Ants we are, ants we live as, and ants we die...
Perhaps you dream of a drop of water streaming up the river...I rather not, I have made peace with eternity !


Quite a speech...although i think a largely misplaced one. i think that you are mistakenly associating my declared endorsement of the concept of "free will" with an endorsement with cosmological anarchy. i think that our universe represents a cumulative, "cooperative" process, and that our universe is all that is. i am relatively sure that the relative autonomy of "homo sapiens" has zero impact on the cosmological order.

It seems to me that the autonomy that i ascribe to homo sapiens is a localized, potentially isolated phenomenon, that does not endanger the larger cosmos -- quite the contrary. In my view, "free will" is no more autonomous in a human being than is an immune system in one person, and the isolation it provides is almost exactly the same. An immune system does not isolate an individual within its environment, it adapts the individual to it, in so far as it is able and protects it in emergency situations. Just so "free will"...we opt for available things we think of as good when we can, and reject danger when we are able.

We are not ants. If were to be so, we would be ants and not homo sapiens. There are plenty of ants -- if the cosmos needed more of them, then our molecules would have been re-allocated. Pretending to be like ants limits our abilities, reduces our capacities, restricts our imaginations, and defeats our potential cosmic purposes.

i have never pretended that my concept of "free will" is a way to fulfill our "desires" -- i think that "free will" is a way to discover who we are.
0 Replies
 
ughaibu
 
  2  
Reply Wed 22 Jan, 2014 12:39 am
@Fil Albuquerque,
Fil Albuquerque wrote:
Free will is nothing but a pathetic obscure meaningless pseudo concept rapping human illusion within the great grinding processes of the world...
We can demonstrate freely willed actions, free will is required to conduct science, etc. Free will must be actively denied by denialists, and their denial is irreducibly based on undemonstrable dogma. The denial of free will is irrational and anti-social. This puts free will deniers, as with deniers of evolution and the rest, outside any rational discussion.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

How can we be sure? - Discussion by Raishu-tensho
Proof of nonexistence of free will - Discussion by litewave
morals and ethics, how are they different? - Question by existential potential
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
 
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 03/04/2021 at 04:56:58