The Science and Mechanics of Free Will

[Kharakov]

No, the brain is the sole decision maker. The word 'person' is a general reference to the whole brain/mind/body/organism activity.... ... The brain is not something that 'you' as a disembodied Entity/Director control. Our conscious experience of agency is an illusion formed by the disconnect between conscious experience and its underlying production mechanism/activity, of which consciousness is not conscious of. There lies the source of our illusion of separateness of me 'having a brain' instead of the reality being ''the experience of the conscious activity of a brain.''

It might look like the collective unconscious is doing something when you Google something, specific servers are activated and accessed, the information is propagated through the network, then you "think it" when the information is on your screen.

Your brain gathers information to present to your consciousness, and has on some level the ability to predict your consciousness's response as well, just like Google and FB analytics can predict things you are thinking about and string together posts (in your FB feed) based on your past activities, or provide you with links that are relevant to your past activity and preferences.

The ability to predict and prepare for paths that a consciousness might follow does not equate to controlling the consciousness, it equates to getting ahead of the consciousness in order to do the best you can for it.

 

[untermensche]

We don't make decisions with our brain.

We make decisions with our minds.

The mind and the brain are not the same thing just like the processor and the image on the screen are not the same thing in a computer.

 

[Juma]

Why do you say that? It was you that started this by totally ignoring my point.

I didn't reply, so you call me stupid? If you have to be aggressive, at least make it more clear why. I just saw "Stupid" for no apparent reason.

If two posts, explaining it to you, isnt enough then why would another one be?

 

[Juma]

We don't make decisions with our brain.

We make decisions with our minds.

The mind and the brain are not the same thing just like the processor and the image on the screen are not the same thing in a computer.

(The image on the screen is in YOUR mind. Its just a bunch of colored dots.)

the mind is the processing of the brain, exactly as the executing program is the processing of the computer. They are both information processes.

 

[untermensche]

We don't make decisions with our brain.

We make decisions with our minds.

The mind and the brain are not the same thing just like the processor and the image on the screen are not the same thing in a computer.

(The image on the screen is in YOUR mind. Its just a bunch of colored dots.)

the mind is the processing of the brain, exactly as the executing program is the processing of the computer. They are both information processes.

Nobody has a clue what the mind is beyond something apparently done by the brain.

But if the mind is a mechanism then of course free decisions are possible.

 

[fromderinside]

Getting back to whether time is relevant ryan. What would be the look of free will if all that remained was this then than with this and that being both spatial? I'm pretty sure the temporal uncertainty you depend upon from QM would go away and just become a spatial uncertainty. In other words "when" would be meaningless.

Nice point, that static, rousseau.

This is a huge issue. There are many kinds of ideas about it, but it is still a philosophical issue. I am not sure what you want me to say about it.

Well you introduced a thread where you speak of mechanics of free will so I presumed, wrongly, you had some natural science with which to back up you assertion of a free will mechanics.

Now you revert to philosophy as defense when I talk of a physics without time even though I'm currently reading a book by a physicist who presents his case for a timeless physics.

Either the crows have come to roost, so to speak, for your assertion, or, you are just mucking around with speculations having very little connection to physics.

From what I've read on this thread the latter seems very likely.

So either incorporate a timeless element in your mucking or come clean and just tell us you have no idea about what you are talking.

Seems to me King this thread is closed.

 

[fast]

We don't make decisions with our brain.

We make decisions with our minds.

The mind and the brain are not the same thing just like the processor and the image on the screen are not the same thing in a computer.

We won't make decisions without a brain, so we make decisions with a brain.

 

[untermensche]

We don't make decisions with our brain.

We make decisions with our minds.

The mind and the brain are not the same thing just like the processor and the image on the screen are not the same thing in a computer.

We won't make decisions without a brain, so we make decisions with a brain.

I use my mind.

I weigh options and make choices with my mind.

The brain is just something that creates the thing I use to make choices with.

 

[fast]

We won't make decisions without a brain, so we make decisions with a brain.

I use my mind.

I weigh options and make choices with my mind.

The brain is just something that creates the thing I use to make choices with.

I don't disagree that we use our minds. I'm just not wanting to discount any notion that there is at the very least an indirect use of our brains.

 

[untermensche]

I use my mind.

I weigh options and make choices with my mind.

The brain is just something that creates the thing I use to make choices with.

I don't disagree that we use our minds. I'm just not wanting to discount any notion that there is at the very least an indirect use of our brains.

If we use our mind and not our brain then to understand anything we first have to fully understand what a mind is.

 

[ryan]

This is a huge issue. There are many kinds of ideas about it, but it is still a philosophical issue. I am not sure what you want me to say about it.

Well you introduced a thread where you speak of mechanics of free will so I presumed, wrongly, you had some natural science with which to back up you assertion of a free will mechanics.

Now you revert to philosophy as defense when I talk of a physics without time even though I'm currently reading a book by a physicist who presents his case for a timeless physics.

But then there is also a very large and accomplished community of physicists who believe that time exists and has a direction. Science may solve it eventually, but until then all we have to go on is philosophy.

Either the crows have come to roost, so to speak, for your assertion, or, you are just mucking around with speculations having very little connection to physics.

From what I've read on this thread the latter seems very likely.

So either incorporate a timeless element in your mucking or come clean and just tell us you have no idea about what you are talking.

Seems to me King this thread is closed.

This is like saying: the apple did not take 5 seconds to hit the ground because there is a new theory that time doesn't exist. It's just as ridiculous to bring it up in this thread.

 

[ryan]

I don't disagree that we use our minds. I'm just not wanting to discount any notion that there is at the very least an indirect use of our brains.

If we use our mind and not our brain then to understand anything we first have to fully understand what a mind is.

Why does this have to be about the mind? Do you think that scientists are looking for the mind? What is the mind to you? Do you believe that it is something other than a process in the brain?

 

[untermensche]

If we use our mind and not our brain then to understand anything we first have to fully understand what a mind is.

Why does this have to be about the mind? Do you think that scientists are looking for the mind? What is the mind to you? Do you believe that it is something other than a process in the brain?

We make decisions with our minds.

It is the mechanism we use.

The only way to know if decisions are "free" is to know what the mind is and how it makes decisions.

 

[ryan]

Why does this have to be about the mind? Do you think that scientists are looking for the mind? What is the mind to you? Do you believe that it is something other than a process in the brain?

We make decisions with our minds.

It is the mechanism we use.

The only way to know if decisions are "free" is to know what the mind is and how it makes decisions.

Earlier you said, "The objective activity that gives rise to subjective experience". But here you seem to be saying that the mind initiates the mechanism.

Assuming that the mind does in fact arise from the physical inner workings of the brain, do you believe that there is a one-to-one correlation from every physical state in the brain to every mental state, where the mind is not the physical state that it arises from (parallelism)? In other words, for every physical state that the brain can be in, do you believe there is a unique mental state?

 

[untermensche]

We make decisions with our minds.

It is the mechanism we use.

The only way to know if decisions are "free" is to know what the mind is and how it makes decisions.

Earlier you said, "The objective activity that gives rise to subjective experience". But here you seem to be saying that the mind initiates the mechanism.

Assuming that the mind does in fact arise from the physical inner workings of the brain, do you believe that there is a one-to-one correlation from every physical state in the brain to every mental state, where the mind is not the physical state that it arises from (parallelism)? In other words, for every physical state that the brain can be in, do you believe there is a unique mental state?

I am saying I don't know what is going on beyond I "will" for my arm to go up and it does.

It sure seems like my mind is in control.

 

[ryan]

Earlier you said, "The objective activity that gives rise to subjective experience". But here you seem to be saying that the mind initiates the mechanism.

Assuming that the mind does in fact arise from the physical inner workings of the brain, do you believe that there is a one-to-one correlation from every physical state in the brain to every mental state, where the mind is not the physical state that it arises from (parallelism)? In other words, for every physical state that the brain can be in, do you believe there is a unique mental state?

I am saying I don't know what is going on beyond I "will" for my arm to go up and it does.

It sure seems like my mind is in control.

Uh oh, I have a feeling DBT is going to have something to say about that.

But don't worry, I have the solution to free will, and it is purely scientific.

 

[DBT]

In that case any form of processor able to choose options on a given set of criteria/requirements has 'free will'

In my experience Google search is pretty good at predicting my intended search based on the first few words I type, providing options that match my requirements before I finish typing my request.

So based on that ability to predict and decide, Google search algorithms have more 'free will' than many of the people I've met.

Does that processor have a mind and is it able to make choices based on ideas in that mind?

What is 'mind' if not the activity of the brain as an information processor presenting some of its processing activity in conscious form, the bits that are relevant to response.

Just making choices does not demonstrate you have a mind.

That's right. Simple organisms can make decisions but don't necessarily have a 'mind' in the sense of more complex organisms even though they may be conscious of their environment.

Even that depends on how 'mind' is being defined.

The mind is the mechanism humans make choices with.

No, the neural networks of the brain and their information processing activity is the mechanism of both decision making, mind and self awareness.

When one understands what the mind is they will know if choices are restrained in some way or "free".

Choices are always shaped and formed by the information condition of the network (not being a choice) at any given moment regardless of being constrained, restrained or coerced

 

[DBT]

I am saying I don't know what is going on beyond I "will" for my arm to go up and it does.

It sure seems like my mind is in control.

Uh oh, I have a feeling DBT is going to have something to say about that.

But don't worry, I have the solution to free will, and it is purely scientific.

That's right I have something to say.

And that is: As the 'mind' is something that the brains is doing, shaping and forming, it is not the mind that is doing anything but the activity of the brain. The state of the hardware, the brain, being reflected in the expression of the mind.

Proven by, as I have already described, failure of connectivity, structural or chemical changes, etc, which manifest as breakdowns in the conscious mind.

 

[untermensche]

What is 'mind' if not the activity of the brain as an information processor presenting some of its processing activity in conscious form, the bits that are relevant to response.

I have no idea what "mind" is. And neither do you.

It seems to be related to some activity of the brain, but what activity is unknown.

But the activity of the brain seems to be a slave to the mind.

I "will" my arm to raise and it does. Every time.

No, the neural networks of the brain and their information processing activity is the mechanism of both decision making, mind and self awareness.

No. My mind tells my arm to move. My mind is the mechanism of action. Whatever a mind is.

Maybe it has something to do with neurons. That seems likely.

 

[DBT]

It's a necessary organ that makes it possible for us to make decisions.

The point was, there is no conscious 'us' - self awareness, thought, deliberation, decision making, etc - without the whole shebang being produced by a functional brain. A lot of the remark by several posters are implying duality. There is no evidence to support duality.

Much, not everything.

Yes. But what we are aware of, including self, self awareness, self identity, self thinking thoughts and making decisions is being produced by underlying activity while it is being experienced. A glitch in the backstage production and 'you' as a conscious entity feeling in control, able to think, breaks down.

That sounds like a stretch. I wonder the degree to which language muddles the interpretation of the results.

Depends on the type of decision being made, as with Libet, 500 milliseconds is about the starting point. Reflex actions are much faster of course, somewhere around 120 millisecond response, just offhand.

First, that stuff about an illusion is enough for me to disagree. I'm okay (but barely) with that disconnect stuff. That last part, well, you did it again ... speaking of consciousness as if itself can or cannot be conscious of something. I consider that a category error.

No, conscious perception does not include its own production mechanisms, inputs, processing, memory correlation, etc, all of which are all necessary for conscious perception, recognition and thought.