What is the actual free will humans have?

[untermensche]

Because it is obvious. You cannot observe that you have free will, yet you feel that you have it.
Thus it is just a subjective feeling.

When I know that if I do "something" with my mind my arm will move that is not just a feeling.

It is knowing something as well as anything can be known.

How do you observe that? When I move my arm I definitely do not observe that ”I will my arm to be moved”. i only observe that I move my arm and that it feels like it is what I want.

You observe it to. Everybody that moves knows this. They know that if the do "something" in their minds the arm will move and if they don't do that "something" the arm will not move.

The question for science is what is that "something"?

Not to pretend it is nothing.

- - - Updated - - -

free will is a subjective phenomenon or experience.

So you were forced to write that?

And you know that how?

If one takes a subjective view, yes I was forced to write that.

The only reason for my statement was to reconcile a sequence of events into cause and effect relationships.

That observation came as a result of observation and experiment.

The important question is how do you know?

And there is no experiment that explains anything about what you do in your mind when you decide to write or not write something.

 

[untermensche]

free will is a subjective phenomenon or experience.

So you were forced to write that?

And you know that how?

Nobody talking about force. The issue is the process of cognition as carried out by a functional brain. It being this process that forms and generates both you and your experiences.....

And your consciousness does "something" to move your arm.

You can explained nothing about it because you understand no aspect of it beyond the subjective. You have no objective understanding of what that necessary "something" required to move the arm is.

 

[fromderinside]

How do you observe that? When I move my arm I definitely do not observe that ”I will my arm to be moved”. i only observe that I move my arm and that it feels like it is what I want.

You observe it to. Everybody that moves knows this. They know that if the do "something" in their minds the arm will move and if they don't do that "something" the arm will not move.

The question for science is what is that "something"?

Not to pretend it is nothing.

- - - Updated - - -

free will is a subjective phenomenon or experience.

So you were forced to write that?

And you know that how?

If one takes a subjective view, yes I was forced to write that.

The only reason for my statement was to reconcile a sequence of events into cause and effect relationships.

That observation came as a result of observation and experiment.

The important question is how do you know?

And there is no experiment that explains anything about what you do in your mind when you decide to write or not write something.

The subjective is dependent on objective operations. Those operations are integrative across history of species social behavior which some say is progressive over its evolution. T. C. Schnierla observes, as do others, species tend to become more complex over generations resulting in them developing levels of integrative social behavior. I believe Crick also held such views when he constructed his minimal NS organization for consciousness construct. So it's not a matter of how, but when and under what conditions does one become conscious to the level of self construct necessary for consciousness. Others have suggested there is minimum NS required for any species to develop self consciousness from which one can produce self aware subjective experience. The how is in the complexity of behavior permitted by attaining sufficient levels of social behavior integrated through its evolution of minimum elements of brain processors (memory, association, sensation, control, and social expression).

My view is the human has sufficiently integrated NS to take advantage of this theater in the brain to produce self aware conscious sentences from states of sensory and internally monitored activity as subjective thought which is the experience. It's a bit like the recordings, I was getting back in the day, demonstrating integrative effects across levels of the brain at each physical level I recorded.

 

[untermensche]

The subject has subjective experience, yes.

And yes this all came about by evolution.

That in no way means we understand anything about what is going on beyond subjective experience.

So again, when you take the time to form all these thoughts, what is doing it and why does it care?

 

[fromderinside]

What is doing it is an organized brain continuously containing and processing substantial time and event segments. This is not to say the brain relfects some sort of purposeful design. Take memory for instance. This is a multifaceted feature of brain organization representing immediate, momentary, interval, and overall sensed and processed content with access to sense, effector, and processing and processed data. At the same timer there are holes in it's processes for which compensation or other measures need be taken in current circumstances.

It has been extensively studied as to what it does, burt still remaining are the detailed processes for storage and recovery which are probably neural chemical in nature. That the complete process hasn't been fully described and isolated suggests a multifaceted construction IAC with Schneirla's layered and integrated evolutionary behavioral nervous system outline. These results are consistent with an evolutionary layered integrated structure and function. This statement holds for nearly every life form man has studied from bacteria, to ants, to cats and dogs, to cetaceans and simians.

Please. We don't take the time. We have no choice. We necessarily continuously process internal and external information IAC with the flow of experience we reflect in our memory, decision, and action processes providing a real time social face. Take it as true that subjective generally reflects objective. That the subjective personalizes this has objective survival value.

It wouldn't make sense for me to find both descending and ascending information acting at every level in the central NS if information were discretely conscious only in each explicit moment. Nor would it make sense to suggest that responding discretely to a given tone reflects the net outcome of processing, awareness and consciousness, going on in that dimension at the time of report.

 

[untermensche]

What is doing it is an organized brain continuously containing and processing substantial time and event segments.

I can organize ideas with my will, and so can you.

I decide which ideas to accept and reject.

And I decide based on the ideas themselves not because of some biological reflex.

I've only said it a thousand times but since you have never actually worked with humans it does not register with you.

Reflexive behavior is not purposeful.

You don't seem to understand that.

 

[fromderinside]

What is doing it is an organized brain continuously containing and processing substantial time and event segments.

I can organize ideas with my will, and so can you.

I decide which ideas to accept and reject.

And I decide based on the ideas themselves not because of some biological reflex.

I've only said it a thousand times but since you have never actually worked with humans it does not register with you.

Reflexive behavior is not purposeful.

You don't seem to understand that.

First let's put to rest your claim I never worked with humans. Working with humans that don't really work as humans is not a recommendation for one/s knowledge. Working with humans would be better would be better if one worked to understand human behavior with normal, usually motivated,humans, in well defined and controlled experiments which I have done most of my adult life.

Second one needs to understand and show that understanding. That would be one works with humans to design tools they can use to get things done such as win wars using objective and repeatable methodology. That is approach is the history for the last 20 years of my professional life.

I understand and reject your claims since you only dealt with the subjective aspect of those humans with which you worked around in some other professional's service. Your claim to expertise is just completely bogus.

Yours are one off, phenomenal, observations of of persons who are symptomatic of poor human behavior.

Personal claims are worthless when there are objective finding supported claims that can be replicated by other researchers. Your bloviation appears symptomatic of one suffering feelings of inferiority when confronted by professionals who actual work to produce objective understanding of behavior.

So what are the substance of your claims?
You claim by personal report are completely without merit. So much for your argument for free will and deciding in general.
Finally you have produced nothing other than you phenomenal claims to support reflex is not at the base of your decisions.

BTW. If reflex provides better outcomes than no outcome or bad outcome and it is there as a result of evolution it is purposeful as a result of fitness.

So let's see your 1001th repetition of your unsupported claim.

 

[untermensche]

What I mean by work with humans is work with humans who have suffered brain damage and have lost or have diminished conscious control over their body.

You don't understand how primitive reflexes surface when control is damaged.

You don't understand that reflexive movement in skeletal muscle is not purposeful or functional. It cannot hunt or even eat.

 

[DBT]

What is doing it is an organized brain continuously containing and processing substantial time and event segments.

I can organize ideas with my will, and so can you.

The brain and its underlying activity of acquiring and processing information, representing some of this in conscious form, is 'organizing' both you and what you call your will.

I decide which ideas to accept and reject.

'Your' brain decides which ideas to accept or reject and represents it in conscious form.

And I decide based on the ideas themselves not because of some biological reflex.

Incredibly neural networks are not there for show. They have functions. You have no independence from what the brain is doing. If it fails, you have no agency because agency is always related to the brain. First sensory inputs, distribution, processing , integration (memory function) then conscious experience...

 

[DBT]

Nobody talking about force. The issue is the process of cognition as carried out by a functional brain. It being this process that forms and generates both you and your experiences.....

And your consciousness does "something" to move your arm.

The brain being responsible for both motor actions and conscious experience of these actions, it is not consciousness itself that sends signals to muscle groups. I have already provided references to numerous studies on motor action initiation.

You can explained nothing about it because you understand no aspect of it beyond the subjective. You have no objective understanding of what that necessary "something" required to move the arm is.

Nonsense, there has been a lot of work done on motor action and related brain functions...starting with electrical stimulation of muscles back in the 19th century...

 

[fromderinside]

Eyup. Your 1001th incantation of the same old squawk

What I mean by work with humans is work with humans who have suffered brain damage and have lost or have diminished conscious control over their body.

... and you take your phenomenal data from them which is about the same as what one gains by reading floor sweepings by being a floor sweeper at a zoo.

You don't understand how primitive reflexes surface when control is damaged.

Such as you see are usually not primitive reflexes. rather they are distorted actions because of improper (distorted, missing, changed) signals due to damaged and incomplete sources. Those aren't usually 'hidden' at all.

You don't understand that reflexive movement in skeletal muscle is not purposeful or functional. It cannot hunt or even eat.

You don't know that the actions demonstrated by such patients are probably not relfexes at all. Reflexes are as I posted.

Silly armature.

BTW consciousness can't hunt or eat either. reflex is action in response to input. Conscious is no more than a state.

 

[untermensche]

Eyup. Your 1001th incantation of the same old squawk



... and you take your phenomenal data from them which is about the same as what one gains by reading floor sweepings by being a floor sweeper at a zoo.



Such as you see are usually not primitive reflexes. rather they are distorted actions because of improper (distorted, missing, changed) signals due to damaged and incomplete sources. Those aren't usually 'hidden' at all.

You don't understand that reflexive movement in skeletal muscle is not purposeful or functional. It cannot hunt or even eat.

You don't know that the actions demonstrated by such patients are probably not relfexes at all. Reflexes are as I posted.

Silly armature.

BTW consciousness can't hunt or eat either. reflex is action in response to input. Conscious is no more than a state.

So this is all you have?

Complete ignorance to what happens when a person loses conscious control after brain damage.

You probably have no idea what it means for a primitive reflex to resurface.

You probably have no idea what reflexes are present during human development.

You probably have never even seen somebody try to move after a stroke. Your ignorance is very deep.

And it includes ignorance to the fact that reflexive movement is not productive or functional or of much use.

If you think it is prove it. Show me somebody doing something productive with reflexive movement.

 

[fromderinside]

Let's take the Babinski reflex. This is a test used by emergency care workers to test the level of brain disabling after an accident. I saw it once when we responded to an motorcycle accident near Silver Lake district of LA. the driver had been thrown across the street and down about 30 yards by a red light violating sedan, His feet had been exposed by the force of the accident. The  Babinski reflex is common in newborns but almost never demonstrated in adults without sever brain trauma. Rather than flexing all toes the big toe points up from the sole and the other toes spread out. As I noted above this is not a traditional reflex such as involuntary leg lift to near knee cap tap which is purely locally elicited. It is a response reflecting sever CNS damage, probable loss of cortical function with at least some midbrain disabling as well.

Newborns have very rudimentary CNS PNS integration. Ergo the test or expression in adult humans is diagnostic indicating severe CNS brain damage in adults.

As for reflexes not serving purpose you are completely wrong there. Consider the value and purpose of these auditory based reflexes: Orienting reflex, Acoustic reflex and auditory induced startle response.

Folk science isn't science. You need to get used to repeating that comment to yourself before you use some on these threads.

 

[untermensche]

The Babisky is a primitive reflex that can re-surface after brain damage and conscious control is diminished.

It is a non-functional movement.

 

[bilby]

Ok now I think I've changed my mind. I think I'd rather keep talking to untermensche.

I am afraid that you are wrong.

But I don't expect you to take my word for it. Just don't say I didn't warn you.

 

[DBT]

The Babisky is a primitive reflex that can re-surface after brain damage and conscious control is diminished.

It is a non-functional movement.

The whole damn wiring of the brain has evolved to respond to sensory stimuli. That is what senses are for, to acquire information for the neural architecture to process and respond according to its multiple functions carried out by modular systems, fore-brain, mid- brain, brain stem/hind brain and numerous structures in between, each with a role to play and each contributing to the whole; a mental map of environment and self as a means of interaction - which is brain agency.

 

[untermensche]

Ok now I think I've changed my mind. I think I'd rather keep talking to untermensche.

I am afraid that you are wrong.

But I don't expect you to take my word for it. Just don't say I didn't warn you.

I don't suffer fools very well.

That should be understood.

 

[untermensche]

The Babisky is a primitive reflex that can re-surface after brain damage and conscious control is diminished.

It is a non-functional movement.

The whole damn wiring of the brain has evolved to respond to sensory stimuli. That is what senses are for, to acquire information for the neural architecture to process and respond according to its multiple functions carried out by modular systems, fore-brain, mid- brain, brain stem/hind brain and numerous structures in between, each with a role to play and each contributing to the whole; a mental map of environment and self as a means of interaction - which is brain agency.

The "wiring" of the brain is to say it has wires.

It does not.

 

[beero1000]

Ok now I think I've changed my mind. I think I'd rather keep talking to untermensche.

I am afraid that you are wrong.

But I don't expect you to take my word for it. Just don't say I didn't warn you.

I don't suffer fools very well.

That should be understood.

It should be, but then you'd have a real existential crisis on your hands...

 

[fast]

What's the distinction between caused and determined?