What is the actual free will humans have?

[bilby]

...Experience is physical activity induced, determined, controlled, and moderated by brain processes....

Is the ability to experience an electrical phenomena or a quantum phenomena, since you claim to know what it is?

Everything (possibly excepting gravity) is a quantum phenomenon. But the level of detail required to describe a conscious system is too coarse for quantum effects to be important; the classical approximation is good enough, as it is for most systems above the submicroscopic scale.

In humans, it's electro-chemical, rather than purely electrical. There's no way of knowing whether it also could arise in other physical systems, but it would seem unlikely that it could not.

We know what brains are made of; And we know that experience is a phenomenon of working brains (in the same way that speed is a phenomenon of moving objects - speed is clearly a real phenomenon, and equally clearly cannot helpfully be separated from the physical object to which it applies).

This theory (physicalism) is the only serious contender; It's vanishingly improbable that it will turn out to be wrong, but of course, it's "just" a theory - it hasn't been proved.

 

[untermensche]

But the level of detail required to describe a conscious system is too coarse for quantum effects to be important....

Describe a conscious system.

A system that knows it is conscious not merely behaves as if it could be.

What level of detail is necessary to describe it?

 

[fromderinside]

Experience runs from subglottal activity to speech, body language, facial expression and muscle prep, hormone induced activity, auditory, visual, somaesthetic, and vestibular activity, through to generating fine and large body activities and position recordings, and much more. Memories are recovered ind introduced into perceptual activity and integrated with all this activity into that thing we use to experience. Only part of which is expressed after the fact as consciousness. The mind is the whole schmear from neural processes to physical experiences.

Experience is not as you characterize it. It is not a subjective view with cause as a focal point. That is reporting of experience by the biased editor in charge of the face saving liar trying to get along.

Let's be clear. Experience is what the being does at the behest of the nervous system. And some of that experience is the basis for the self serving face saving conscious liar you've been touting.

 

[bilby]

But the level of detail required to describe a conscious system is too coarse for quantum effects to be important....

Describe a conscious system.

Me.

A system that knows it is conscious not merely behaves as if it could be.

What level of detail is necessary to describe it?

As above.

 

[fromderinside]

This theory (physicalism) is the only serious contender; It's vanishingly improbable that it will turn out to be wrong, but of course, it's "just" a theory - it hasn't been proved.

HI. 5!

 

[untermensche]

Me.

Do you see this as an explanation of anything?

How do you think you can make claims about the nature of the system if this is all you can say about it?

 

[untermensche]

Experience runs from subglottal activity to speech, body language, facial expression and muscle prep, hormone induced activity, auditory, visual, somaesthetic, and vestibular activity, through to generating fine and large body activities and position recordings, and much more. Memories are recovered ind introduced into perceptual activity and integrated with all this activity into that thing we use to experience. Only part of which is expressed after the fact as consciousness. The mind is the whole schmear from neural processes to physical experiences.

Experience is not as you characterize it. It is not a subjective view with cause as a focal point. That is reporting of experience by the biased editor in charge of the face saving liar trying to get along.

Let's be clear. Experience is what the being does at the behest of the nervous system. And some of that experience is the basis for the self serving face saving conscious liar you've been touting.

Experience is something consciousness has.

To have an experience is a phenomena that has no explanation.

To have an experience is not a thing made up of cells. It is an ability not an object. It is a subject.

It is not a brain. An object made up of cells. Not a subject.

 

[bilby]

Me.

Do you see this as an explanation of anything?

How do you think you can make claims about the nature of the system if this is all you can say about it?

I never suggested that it was ALL I could say about it.

It is the simplest adequate description of a conscious system - of the ONLY conscious system that I can be sure knows it is conscious, not merely behaves as if it could be.

I answered your question, in full, according to the restrictions you defined. If it wasn't what you intended to ask, then that's not my problem.

 

[untermensche]

Me.

Do you see this as an explanation of anything?

How do you think you can make claims about the nature of the system if this is all you can say about it?

I never suggested that it was ALL I could say about it.

It is the simplest adequate description of a conscious system - of the ONLY conscious system that I can be sure knows it is conscious, not merely behaves as if it could be.

I answered your question, in full, according to the restrictions you defined. If it wasn't what you intended to ask, then that's not my problem.

It is not a description of any system.

It is merely pointing to something that has a functioning system of some kind.

I have not described how my television works by pointing to it.

 

[bilby]

I never suggested that it was ALL I could say about it.

It is the simplest adequate description of a conscious system - of the ONLY conscious system that I can be sure knows it is conscious, not merely behaves as if it could be.

I answered your question, in full, according to the restrictions you defined. If it wasn't what you intended to ask, then that's not my problem.

It is not a description of any system.

It is merely pointing to something that has a functioning system of some kind.

I have not described how my television works by pointing to it.

You are not a television.

 

[untermensche]

You do not understand what systems make consciousness possible.

Pointing to a consciousness explains nothing about any system.

 

[Bronzeage]

Suppose there is a God and there is a heaven, in the Judaeo Christian Islamic sense of both. This will be a shock to quite a few people, but suppose beyond that, when a person dies, they appear at the gates of Heaven and can see inside. It's everything they were told it would be. Now, each person is asked a question, "Do you want to come inside?"

Does a human being, as they exist on this planet have the power to choose to enter, or refuse?

 

[humbleman]

Isn't that a bit like saying that the only constraints on a car are the road, traffic lights, wind, rain, etc?

What about what's under the bonnet?

There's a sense of free will which applies to humans as agents. An agent in this case will be the whole person. It would make no sense to look into the brain or even part of the brain.

I'm sure we all have constraints hardwired into our brains. I could jump from the tenth floor but I don't. And, except in extreme circumstances, I could not jump even if I wanted to. Yet we would all accept that I'm really free to jump.
EB

Free will in humans are in hold by several circumstances.

Without those circumstances you can freely say' "no, I don't want to go to your anniversary party" rather than inventing other reasons excusing yourself.

Free will is not a doctrinal thing, not a brain hard wiring and neither a political or social stuff. It is just you, the one who will subject yourself to the circumstances or the one who will overcome.

Free will is individual, not a class of people or a legions or multitudes. Free will is like a domesticated bear. You are so confident with the animal that you rest over the body of the bear until, suddenly, without a reason, the beast stands up, gives you a lap and bite your face and pull your jaw with its strong teeth. Free will is like fear, happiness, attention, and more. You think you can control it, but there are circumstances acting which will modify it.

 

[fromderinside]

Experience runs from subglottal activity to speech, body language, facial expression and muscle prep, hormone induced activity, auditory, visual, somaesthetic, and vestibular activity, through to generating fine and large body activities and position recordings, and much more. Memories are recovered ind introduced into perceptual activity and integrated with all this activity into that thing we use to experience. Only part of which is expressed after the fact as consciousness. The mind is the whole schmear from neural processes to physical experiences.

Experience is not as you characterize it. It is not a subjective view with cause as a focal point. That is reporting of experience by the biased editor in charge of the face saving liar trying to get along.

Let's be clear. Experience is what the being does at the behest of the nervous system. And some of that experience is the basis for the self serving face saving conscious liar you've been touting.

Experience is something consciousness has.

To have an experience is a phenomena that has no explanation.

To have an experience is not a thing made up of cells. It is an ability not an object. It is a subject.

It is not a brain. An object made up of cells. Not a subject.

I leave my post to see your problem with what is experience.

Mirror cesses recognize experience and they recognize other having that experience. Mirror cells facilitate generating physical activity as reaction to observed experience and regenerating them when similar reactions are observed. The participate in generating and recognizing specific physical experience which is a particular group of physical activities appropriate to whatever these cells respond.

This sets the stage for my contention that experience is physical activity by an individual. Clearly the above shows that cells recognize experience and are instrumental in generating specific behaviors to the the same experience by others.

The experiments demonstrating the above which I have presented to you before objectively settle experience is physical behavior by a person induced and controlled by cells in the nervous system.

Now you want to claim, in spite of evidence, that experience is a property of consciousness. I addressed this in my post above by pointing out that parsimony is satisfied by a consciousness that made up of selective experiences after the fact with an orientation of self interest and finding those experiences that provide sufficient defence of one's situation with construction of selective cause self. So rather than experience being a property it is the sea from which consciousness selcte bits and pieces to preserve the situation of one's self. Consciousness , is as I said, made of of some experience with a biased objective.

again I said nothing about experience or consciousness being made up of nervous system cells. That is your strawman,

You cannot deny that physical activity makes up experience. That that activity is the product of cells is an entirely different matter, one that has been objectively settled. Even you point to the arm being lifted above the head as as a mediated experience. How you construct your argument is wrong but the activity of moiving the arm aove ther head is a significant part of the experience of moving the arm above the head.

Your belief based litany is getting a bit tattered, is becoming very obviously a mantra. Such is evident when you throw out argument that is not at issue.

 

[DBT]

Experience, like sensing, involves physical context like facial expression, muscle tightening, and changes in metabolic indices. If you had read I pointed out mirror cells read state and signal state state setting, experience. Mind is made up of physical content, experience.

Obviously you didn't spend even a second reading my post.

Last try to reach what seems to be a hopelessly obtuse poster.

You simply want to make your point even if it is totally irrelevant.

The mind is something experienced.

It is not made up of cells.

It cannot possibly be the same thing as the brain, a thing composed of living cells. That is impossible.

I've already pointed out that something rather than nothing, as you claim, is understood about brain function in relation to consciousness. I have provided numerous quotes and links to case studies and experiments to support what I say, but you habitually brush all of this aside only to repeat your familiar lines of denial ...

 

[untermensche]

Experience, like sensing, involves physical context like facial expression, muscle tightening, and changes in metabolic indices. If you had read I pointed out mirror cells read state and signal state state setting, experience. Mind is made up of physical content, experience.

Obviously you didn't spend even a second reading my post.

Last try to reach what seems to be a hopelessly obtuse poster.

You simply want to make your point even if it is totally irrelevant.

The mind is something experienced.

It is not made up of cells.

It cannot possibly be the same thing as the brain, a thing composed of living cells. That is impossible.

I've already pointed out that something rather than nothing, as you claim, is understood about brain function in relation to consciousness. I have provided numerous quotes and links to case studies and experiments to support what I say, but you habitually brush all of this aside only to repeat your familiar lines of denial ...

You cannot study anything unless you know what it is.

Is the ability to experience an electrical effect?

Is it a quantum effect?

How do you study something without even knowing what it is?

 

[DBT]

I've already pointed out that something rather than nothing, as you claim, is understood about brain function in relation to consciousness. I have provided numerous quotes and links to case studies and experiments to support what I say, but you habitually brush all of this aside only to repeat your familiar lines of denial ...

You cannot study anything unless you know what it is.

Is the ability to experience an electrical effect?

Is it a quantum effect?

How do you study something without even knowing what it is?

We know what a brain is and have more than a fair idea of its role and function....plus we experience consciousness on a daily basis, which we are able to describe and compare with the experiences of others. This is something. This is not ''nothing is known'' as you have claimed.

 

[untermensche]

I've already pointed out that something rather than nothing, as you claim, is understood about brain function in relation to consciousness. I have provided numerous quotes and links to case studies and experiments to support what I say, but you habitually brush all of this aside only to repeat your familiar lines of denial ...

You cannot study anything unless you know what it is.

Is the ability to experience an electrical effect?

Is it a quantum effect?

How do you study something without even knowing what it is?

We know what a brain is and have more than a fair idea of its role and function....plus we experience consciousness on a daily basis, which we are able to describe and compare with the experiences of others. This is something. This is not ''nothing is known'' as you have claimed.

Is it an electrical effect or a quantum effect?

Either would be influenced by introducing an artificial current.

Which is it?

If you do not know that you do not know what the ability to experience is.

You cannot study something unless you at least know what it is.

We could study the effects of gravity but could not begin to understand gravity until we understood it was an invisible "force". An invisible "force" that was causing things to fall towards the earth. An idea totally rejected by many in Newton's day.

 

[DBT]

We know what a brain is and have more than a fair idea of its role and function....plus we experience consciousness on a daily basis, which we are able to describe and compare with the experiences of others. This is something. This is not ''nothing is known'' as you have claimed.

Is it an electrical effect or a quantum effect?

Either would be influenced by introducing an artificial current.

Which is it?

If you do not know that you do not know what the ability to experience is.

You cannot study something unless you at least know what it is.

We could study the effects of gravity but could not begin to understand gravity until we understood it was an invisible "force". An invisible "force" that was causing things to fall towards the earth. An idea totally rejected by many in Newton's day.

You are shifting the focus from what is understood to what is not understood. Nobody is claiming that everything is understood, only that something is understood....in contrast to your claim that nothing is understood, a misleading and false claim.

 

[untermensche]

We know what a brain is and have more than a fair idea of its role and function....plus we experience consciousness on a daily basis, which we are able to describe and compare with the experiences of others. This is something. This is not ''nothing is known'' as you have claimed.

Is it an electrical effect or a quantum effect?

Either would be influenced by introducing an artificial current.

Which is it?

If you do not know that you do not know what the ability to experience is.

You cannot study something unless you at least know what it is.

We could study the effects of gravity but could not begin to understand gravity until we understood it was an invisible "force". An invisible "force" that was causing things to fall towards the earth. An idea totally rejected by many in Newton's day.

You are shifting the focus from what is understood to what is not understood. Nobody is claiming that everything is understood, only that something is understood....in contrast to your claim that nothing is understood, a misleading and false claim.

Is the ability to have a conscious experience an electrical effect of brain activity or is it a quantum effect of brain activity?

If this cannot be answered then consciousness cannot be studied objectively at all. You cannot study something until you know what it is.

All that can be studied are the subjective effects associated with consciousness. The subjective experience of having one.