A simple explanation of free will.

[ryan]

You are such a waste of my time. Go troll somewhere else.

As i said before: i'm not trolling, i'm totally sincere. On yor side though: your failure to actually read the articles you link to should be a warning sign.

Okay, in any case, I am all Juma'ed out. Maybe you can find someone else to troll or annoy or whatever you want to call it.

 

[ryan]

Well that is not really the input that I am talking about. I argue that QM might be a fundamental part of the process of decision making.

Ok. There is no way, from what I've been told of reality, that particles are not a fundamental part of the decision making process. Whether or not they influence it is another question altogether.

Don't put too much assurance in an area that they don't know much about, especially one that is in the middle of a major change.

 

[DBT]

Ryan, simply giving a link to a line of research that's in its infant stage, still being highly speculative, doesn't support your proposition.

You only asked for an example.

The problem is, you didn't give an example. You gave a link to what is relatively new line of inquiry. This is not evidence that consciousness and decision making has been, or can be, explained using Quantum Equations.

You have referred to Roger Penrose, but he is proposing objective wave collapse caused by gravity:

''The equations of quantum mechanics do a fantastic job describing the behavior of particles in an atom smasher, the nuclear reactions that make the sun shine, and the chemical processes that underlie biology. For Penrose, that is not nearly enough. “Quantum mechanics gives us wonderful predictions and experimental confirmations for small-scale scenarios, but it gives us nonsense at ordinary scales,” he says, relaxed now that a receptionist has assured him of his car’s safety. “If you just follow the equations, you get a mess. So you have to ask: What leads to this world?''

''He has an answer, which, if correct, will lead to the first quantum theory that makes as much sense for people as for particles. Penrose believes he has identified the secret that keeps the quantum genie tightly bottled up in the atomic world, a secret that was right in front of us all along: gravity. In his novel view, the same force that keeps us pinned to the ground also keeps us locked in a reality in which everything is tidy, unitary, and—for better and for worse—rooted in one place only.''

So if this is true, it means that the Universe is ultimately shaped and formed by gravity, stars, galaxies, planets....

There are processes in decision making that cannot be explained accurately with CM but can be with QM. This is a whole area of research that I have posted links about. I only propose that it is possible.

Precisely what processes? You still haven't given an example. A link is not sufficient. Give a quote from a reputable source to a study that demonstrates your claim.

 

[bilby]

It has already been pointed out to you that this does not constitute an argument at all.

ANYTHING 'might' be.

Literally ANYTHING.

"X might be part of Y" is not an argument of any kind; it is a cypher; an empty statement that gives only the illusion of saying anything at all.

Oh shut up, this is not like saying that a ghost might be in your home.

No. It is like saying a ghost might be in my brain

This is about questioning a vastly unknown area that is microscopic, complicated, shown to exist in other parts of the brain, accepted by a small but increasing number of scientists and ultimately rests on QM. Am I going out on a limb - no - I am not.

Yes, you are.

What the hell is so crazy about this? Are you sure that you want to be certain about this too?

The crazy bit is the massive gulf between the stuff you keep insisting on (QM is part of the explanation for the structure and function of brains) - which is not in dispute; and the conclusion you leap to from that platform (QM uncertainty enables freedom of will) - which is batshit crazy.

Uncertainty - quantum or otherwise - is just noise. A decision is made by processing a variety of inputs, perhaps through multiple iterations; all of the inputs for each iteration are either:

1) External - the raw input from sense organs (these raw inputs are not influenced by the desires of the person whose brain is doing the processing);
2) Internal - these are the results of previous processing iterations; and/or are retrievals of earlier results from memory; or
3) Random - noise that is not architecturally part of either 1 or 2 - this includes erroneous, unexpected and uncommanded inputs.

These inputs are combined to produce an output or outputs, which may form inputs for a new iteration, or may be commands sent to motor neurons, or may be new memories for storage, or any combination of those things.

Quantum uncertainty effects are part of 3. 'Will', if it exists, has to be part of 2. Insofar as randomness effects the Internal inputs to a new iteration, it can only do so in an undirected way; any directed process is not random.

Minds cannot direct quantum effects. To suggest that they can is batshit crazy woo.

If all the mind does is 1 and 2, then you have complete determinism. By adding 3, you can introduce uncertainty - but that uncertainty cannot be directed or willed in any way. "Free will" has a lot of definitions, but 'determinism plus uncontrolled randomness' is not one of them.

 

[DBT]

Makes no difference to the issue of free will, or regulative control of physical laws and conditions, when in fact you cannot control the conditions and events during the course of 'your' dream...when it is the dream that has control of you.

The difference is total. If we are immersed in a totally unthinking universe then we have no reciprocal relationship with it.

The problem being, there is no evidence that universe is thinking.

The other problem being, the universe as it is and as it functions and evolves is not subject to your will or my will. Not being subject to my will, your will or our combined will, the laws and principles of the universe are not a matter of will, yet alone free will.

If we exist within a greater mind then the world around us doesn't cause us to be, the mind that directs the world does. Obviously the mind behind the world may choose to give us a degree of free choice...a mindless world can never do that.

Decision making within the brain is well enough understood to describe it as a rational process performed by neural network information processing.

'
When it comes to the human brain, even the simplest of acts can be counter-intuitive and deceptively complicated. For example, try stretching your arm.
Nerves in the limb send messages back to your brain, but the subjective experience you have of stretching isn't due to these signals. The feeling that you willed your arm into motion, and the realisation that you moved it at all, are both the result of an area at the back of your brain called the posterior parietal cortex. This region helped to produce the intention to move, and predicted what the movement would feel like, all before you twitched a single muscle.

Michel Desmurget and a team of French neuroscientists arrived at this conclusion by stimulating the brains of seven people with electrodes, while they underwent brain surgery under local anaesthetic. When Desmurget stimulated the parietal cortex, the patients felt a strong desire to move their arms, hands, feet or lips, although they never actually did. Stronger currents cast a powerful illusion, convincing the patients that they had actually moved, even though recordings of electrical activity in their muscles said otherwise.

But when Desmurget stimulated a different region - the premotor cortex - he found the opposite effect. The patients moved their hands, arms or mouths without realising it. One of them flexed his left wrist, fingers and elbow and rotated his forearm, but was completely unaware of it. When his surgeons asked if he felt anything, he said no. Higher currents evoked stronger movements, but still the patients remained blissfully unaware that their limbs and lips were budging.''


Pattern recognition/prediction;
''Neuroscientists have repeatedly pointed out that pattern recognition represents the key to understanding cognition in humans. Pattern recognition also forms the very basis by which we predict future events, i e. we are literally forced to make assumptions concerning outcomes,and we do so by relying on sequences of events experienced in the past.

Huettel et al. point out that their study identifies the role various regions of prefrontal cortex play in moment-to-moment processing of mental events in order to make predictions about future events. Thus implicit predictive models are formed which need to be continuously updated, the disruption of sequence''

 

[ryan]

You only asked for an example.

The problem is, you didn't give an example. You gave a link to what is relatively new line of inquiry. This is not evidence that consciousness and decision making has been, or can be, explained using Quantum Equations.

The latter link that I gave you has links to 10 published papers about quantum cognition; here's one of the them, http://mypage.iu.edu/~jbusemey/QD.pdf .

You have referred to Roger Penrose, but he is proposing objective wave collapse caused by gravity:

''The equations of quantum mechanics do a fantastic job describing the behavior of particles in an atom smasher, the nuclear reactions that make the sun shine, and the chemical processes that underlie biology. For Penrose, that is not nearly enough. “Quantum mechanics gives us wonderful predictions and experimental confirmations for small-scale scenarios, but it gives us nonsense at ordinary scales,” he says, relaxed now that a receptionist has assured him of his car’s safety. “If you just follow the equations, you get a mess. So you have to ask: What leads to this world?''

''He has an answer, which, if correct, will lead to the first quantum theory that makes as much sense for people as for particles. Penrose believes he has identified the secret that keeps the quantum genie tightly bottled up in the atomic world, a secret that was right in front of us all along: gravity. In his novel view, the same force that keeps us pinned to the ground also keeps us locked in a reality in which everything is tidy, unitary, and—for better and for worse—rooted in one place only.''

So if this is true, it means that the Universe is ultimately shaped and formed by gravity, stars, galaxies, planets....

When did I refer to this?

 

[ryan]

The crazy bit is the massive gulf between the stuff you keep insisting on (QM is part of the explanation for the structure and function of brains) - which is not in dispute;

Who isn't in dispute of this. It sure seems to be in dispute with everyone else I am talking to on this forum.

and the conclusion you leap to from that platform (QM uncertainty enables freedom of will) - which is batshit crazy.

I have explained this many times. Each time it was a reasonable explanation.

 

[bilby]

Who isn't in dispute of this. It sure seems to be in dispute with everyone else I am talking to on this forum.

and the conclusion you leap to from that platform (QM uncertainty enables freedom of will) - which is batshit crazy.

I have explained this many times. Each time it was a reasonable explanation.

I beg to differ.

 

[apeman]

The difference is total. If we are immersed in a totally unthinking universe then we have no reciprocal relationship with it.

The problem being, there is no evidence that universe is thinking.

The other problem being, the universe as it is and as it functions and evolves is not subject to your will or my will. Not being subject to my will, your will or our combined will, the laws and principles of the universe are not a matter of will, yet alone free will.

If we exist within a greater mind then the world around us doesn't cause us to be, the mind that directs the world does. Obviously the mind behind the world may choose to give us a degree of free choice...a mindless world can never do that.

Decision making within the brain is well enough understood to describe it as a rational process performed by neural network information processing.

'
When it comes to the human brain, even the simplest of acts can be counter-intuitive and deceptively complicated. For example, try stretching your arm.
Nerves in the limb send messages back to your brain, but the subjective experience you have of stretching isn't due to these signals. The feeling that you willed your arm into motion, and the realisation that you moved it at all, are both the result of an area at the back of your brain called the posterior parietal cortex. This region helped to produce the intention to move, and predicted what the movement would feel like, all before you twitched a single muscle.

Michel Desmurget and a team of French neuroscientists arrived at this conclusion by stimulating the brains of seven people with electrodes, while they underwent brain surgery under local anaesthetic. When Desmurget stimulated the parietal cortex, the patients felt a strong desire to move their arms, hands, feet or lips, although they never actually did. Stronger currents cast a powerful illusion, convincing the patients that they had actually moved, even though recordings of electrical activity in their muscles said otherwise.

But when Desmurget stimulated a different region - the premotor cortex - he found the opposite effect. The patients moved their hands, arms or mouths without realising it. One of them flexed his left wrist, fingers and elbow and rotated his forearm, but was completely unaware of it. When his surgeons asked if he felt anything, he said no. Higher currents evoked stronger movements, but still the patients remained blissfully unaware that their limbs and lips were budging.''


Pattern recognition/prediction;
''Neuroscientists have repeatedly pointed out that pattern recognition represents the key to understanding cognition in humans. Pattern recognition also forms the very basis by which we predict future events, i e. we are literally forced to make assumptions concerning outcomes,and we do so by relying on sequences of events experienced in the past.

Huettel et al. point out that their study identifies the role various regions of prefrontal cortex play in moment-to-moment processing of mental events in order to make predictions about future events. Thus implicit predictive models are formed which need to be continuously updated, the disruption of sequence''

Three things...

1, What is the evidences that the universe is not the product of thought?

2, The laws of nature are not subject to my or your will...but our wills can clearly manipulate the laws of nature...that's how we invent useful things that would not otherwise exist. We can create within the laws of nature...kind of like how a chess player can create a strategy within the laws of the game...the strategy still requires the will of the player even though he is restricted by the laws of the game. In a sense you are almost right insofar as the creativity of the player is utterly dependent upon the existence of the laws of chess ...however the laws of chess do not force the particular strategy .

3, The correlation between actions on the brain and the thoughts that seem to emanate from that brain need be nothing more than correlation...it in no way proves causation ... and in fact the correlation theory is simpler. That this is a dream like experience is simpler than believing an expanding universe unthinkingly creates a thing called a brain that offers no survival advantage to the atoms that comprise it.

 

[DBT]

The problem is, you didn't give an example. You gave a link to what is relatively new line of inquiry. This is not evidence that consciousness and decision making has been, or can be, explained using Quantum Equations.

The latter link that I gave you has links to 10 published papers about quantum cognition; here's one of the them, http://mypage.iu.edu/~jbusemey/QD.pdf .

You have referred to Roger Penrose, but he is proposing objective wave collapse caused by gravity:

''The equations of quantum mechanics do a fantastic job describing the behavior of particles in an atom smasher, the nuclear reactions that make the sun shine, and the chemical processes that underlie biology. For Penrose, that is not nearly enough. “Quantum mechanics gives us wonderful predictions and experimental confirmations for small-scale scenarios, but it gives us nonsense at ordinary scales,” he says, relaxed now that a receptionist has assured him of his car’s safety. “If you just follow the equations, you get a mess. So you have to ask: What leads to this world?''

''He has an answer, which, if correct, will lead to the first quantum theory that makes as much sense for people as for particles. Penrose believes he has identified the secret that keeps the quantum genie tightly bottled up in the atomic world, a secret that was right in front of us all along: gravity. In his novel view, the same force that keeps us pinned to the ground also keeps us locked in a reality in which everything is tidy, unitary, and—for better and for worse—rooted in one place only.''

So if this is true, it means that the Universe is ultimately shaped and formed by gravity, stars, galaxies, planets....

When did I refer to this?

It relates the issue of agency, quantum processes and the role of consciousness in terms of wave collapse. Do the groundwork work and look for the connection.

My question for you is: if uncontrolled elements act upon your (brains) cognitive processes, effecting non -chosen changes, and you yourself (brain) have no regulative control of what is happening at quantum scale...your thoughts and your actions being shaped and formed by non-willed quantum activity and non-willed changes to (brain) cognition, why exactly do you call this 'free will?'

 

[ryan]

The latter link that I gave you has links to 10 published papers about quantum cognition; here's one of the them, http://mypage.iu.edu/~jbusemey/QD.pdf .

You have referred to Roger Penrose, but he is proposing objective wave collapse caused by gravity:

''The equations of quantum mechanics do a fantastic job describing the behavior of particles in an atom smasher, the nuclear reactions that make the sun shine, and the chemical processes that underlie biology. For Penrose, that is not nearly enough. “Quantum mechanics gives us wonderful predictions and experimental confirmations for small-scale scenarios, but it gives us nonsense at ordinary scales,” he says, relaxed now that a receptionist has assured him of his car’s safety. “If you just follow the equations, you get a mess. So you have to ask: What leads to this world?''

''He has an answer, which, if correct, will lead to the first quantum theory that makes as much sense for people as for particles. Penrose believes he has identified the secret that keeps the quantum genie tightly bottled up in the atomic world, a secret that was right in front of us all along: gravity. In his novel view, the same force that keeps us pinned to the ground also keeps us locked in a reality in which everything is tidy, unitary, and—for better and for worse—rooted in one place only.''

So if this is true, it means that the Universe is ultimately shaped and formed by gravity, stars, galaxies, planets....

When did I refer to this?

It relates the issue of agency, quantum processes and the role of consciousness in terms of wave collapse. Do the groundwork work and look for the connection.

Then why does gravity collapse the wave function where it does, possibly an element of human free will?

My question for you is: if uncontrolled elements act upon your (brains) cognitive processes, effecting non -chosen changes, and you yourself (brain) have no regulative control of what is happening at quantum scale...your thoughts and your actions being shaped and formed by non-willed quantum activity and non-willed changes to (brain) cognition, why exactly do you call this 'free will?'

You still want to take the thoughts and actions outside of QM. Suppose QM acts on our thoughts and actions in a random way, the thoughts and actions still would have some freedom from QM of their own.

 

[DBT]

The problem being, there is no evidence that universe is thinking.

The other problem being, the universe as it is and as it functions and evolves is not subject to your will or my will. Not being subject to my will, your will or our combined will, the laws and principles of the universe are not a matter of will, yet alone free will.

If we exist within a greater mind then the world around us doesn't cause us to be, the mind that directs the world does. Obviously the mind behind the world may choose to give us a degree of free choice...a mindless world can never do that.

Decision making within the brain is well enough understood to describe it as a rational process performed by neural network information processing.

'
When it comes to the human brain, even the simplest of acts can be counter-intuitive and deceptively complicated. For example, try stretching your arm.
Nerves in the limb send messages back to your brain, but the subjective experience you have of stretching isn't due to these signals. The feeling that you willed your arm into motion, and the realisation that you moved it at all, are both the result of an area at the back of your brain called the posterior parietal cortex. This region helped to produce the intention to move, and predicted what the movement would feel like, all before you twitched a single muscle.

Michel Desmurget and a team of French neuroscientists arrived at this conclusion by stimulating the brains of seven people with electrodes, while they underwent brain surgery under local anaesthetic. When Desmurget stimulated the parietal cortex, the patients felt a strong desire to move their arms, hands, feet or lips, although they never actually did. Stronger currents cast a powerful illusion, convincing the patients that they had actually moved, even though recordings of electrical activity in their muscles said otherwise.

But when Desmurget stimulated a different region - the premotor cortex - he found the opposite effect. The patients moved their hands, arms or mouths without realising it. One of them flexed his left wrist, fingers and elbow and rotated his forearm, but was completely unaware of it. When his surgeons asked if he felt anything, he said no. Higher currents evoked stronger movements, but still the patients remained blissfully unaware that their limbs and lips were budging.''


Pattern recognition/prediction;
''Neuroscientists have repeatedly pointed out that pattern recognition represents the key to understanding cognition in humans. Pattern recognition also forms the very basis by which we predict future events, i e. we are literally forced to make assumptions concerning outcomes,and we do so by relying on sequences of events experienced in the past.

Huettel et al. point out that their study identifies the role various regions of prefrontal cortex play in moment-to-moment processing of mental events in order to make predictions about future events. Thus implicit predictive models are formed which need to be continuously updated, the disruption of sequence''

Three things...

1, What is the evidences that the universe is not the product of thought?

That question is much the same as asking - 'what is the evidence that there is no God?' - or 'what is the evidence that Allah is not the Creator of the Universe?' - or ''what is the evidence that the Galactic Federation has no the placed the planet Earth in quarantine?''

There is no evidence. Because there is no evidence to support the proposition, there is no justified to form a belief in the affirmative.

2, The laws of nature are not subject to my or your will...but our wills can clearly manipulate the laws of nature...that's how we invent useful things that would not otherwise exist.

I've pointed out your error in category before.

When we use raw materials, mining, processing, etc, in order to design and build machinery, computers, appliances, etc,etc, we do not alter the laws of nature one iota.

The laws of nature being QM, [including] Nuclear strong force, the nuclear weak force, gravity and electromagnetism..which we do not, and cannot alter or modify, only use.

3, The correlation between actions on the brain and the thoughts that seem to emanate from that brain need be nothing more than correlation...it in no way proves causation ... and in fact the correlation theory is simpler. That this is a dream like experience is simpler than believing an expanding universe unthinkingly creates a thing called a brain that offers no survival advantage to the atoms that comprise it.

Oh, come on...a simple knock on the head ends conscious activity in an instant.

Lose memory function and the ability of the brain to make decisions breaks down...decision making, including recognition, being impossible without a working memory.

Certain changes to brain structure, connectivity, cells and chemistry breaking down the brains ability to form and generate coherent conscious perception, thoughts, decisions and actions.

In short, no memory function equals no consciousness as we experience it. Only a series of disjointed and incomprehensible sensations.

 

[bilby]

Suppose QM acts on our thoughts and actions in a random way, the thoughts and actions still would have some freedom from QM of their own.

This sentence is total gibberish.

At best, I can parse it to mean either "If we accept that (quantum) randomness doesn't lead to freedom, then it is still possible that thoughts and actions would have some freedom, due to (quantum) randomness", which is self contradictory; Or to mean "It is possible that (quantum) randomness leads to freedom", which is an unsupported and highly doubtful assertion.

How can randomness (of any kind), which is necessarily unguided (or it isn't random), possibly produce freedom of will?

 

[Kharakov]

Who isn't in dispute of this. It sure seems to be in dispute with everyone else I am talking to on this forum.



I have explained this many times. Each time it was a reasonable explanation.

I beg to differ.

You don't have to beg.

 

[ryan]

Suppose QM acts on our thoughts and actions in a random way, the thoughts and actions still would have some freedom from QM of their own.

This sentence is total gibberish.

At best, I can parse it to mean either "If we accept that (quantum) randomness doesn't lead to freedom, then it is still possible that thoughts and actions would have some freedom, due to (quantum) randomness", which is self contradictory; Or to mean "It is possible that (quantum) randomness leads to freedom", which is an unsupported and highly doubtful assertion.

Don't be stupid; read what I responded to.

This is similar to my response. In this analogy, A is the "thought" or "action" that was affected by QM. Suppose random QM event affects A, and A has to respond. But if A is also random in nature, then A still has its own freedom/randomness. So I keep trying to tell DBT that A would have its own QM, unless we talking about some kind of duality which I don't we are.

How can randomness (of any kind), which is necessarily unguided (or it isn't random), possibly produce freedom of will?

Do you have any idea how many times you have asked this same question? Every time you ask it I answer, then you go away for a week and eventually build back up to it again. This really is going to be the last time for you.

Nothing about what I say produces free will; it is simply an interpretation of the nature of matter and consciousness. If our choices are at all a function of QM, or in other words, are probabilistic in nature, then what ever the possible outcomes are is the freedom we have.

 

[bilby]

This sentence is total gibberish.

At best, I can parse it to mean either "If we accept that (quantum) randomness doesn't lead to freedom, then it is still possible that thoughts and actions would have some freedom, due to (quantum) randomness", which is self contradictory; Or to mean "It is possible that (quantum) randomness leads to freedom", which is an unsupported and highly doubtful assertion.

Don't be stupid; read what I responded to.

This is similar to my response. In this analogy, A is the "thought" or "action" that was affected by QM. Suppose random QM event affects A, and A has to respond. But if A is also random in nature, then A still has its own freedom/randomness. So I keep trying to tell DBT that A would have its own QM, unless we talking about some kind of duality which I don't we are.

How can randomness (of any kind), which is necessarily unguided (or it isn't random), possibly produce freedom of will?

Do you have any idea how many times you have asked this same question? Every time you ask it I answer, then you go away for a week and eventually build back up to it again. This really is going to be the last time for you.

Nothing about what I say produces free will; it is simply an interpretation of the nature of matter and consciousness. If our choices are at all a function of QM, or in other words, are probabilistic in nature, then what ever the possible outcomes are is the freedom we have.

What fucking 'freedom we have'?

From where does this freedom come? You admit that you haven't said yet. So say.

 

[DBT]

You still want to take the thoughts and actions outside of QM. Suppose QM acts on our thoughts and actions in a random way, the thoughts and actions still would have some freedom from QM of their own.

Please read the question carefully, ryan.

The question is: if uncontrolled elements act upon your (brains) cognitive processes, effecting non -chosen changes, and you yourself (brain) have no regulative control of what is happening at quantum scale...your thoughts and your actions being shaped and formed by non-willed quantum activity and non-willed changes to (brain) cognition, why exactly do you call this 'free will?'

In other words, why is quantum randomness even being whether stated or implied (by you) as being related to 'will' - yet alone 'free will' - when there is nothing being willed and no presence of will within quantum randomness or however it may happen to effect the cognitive process and the production of will by the agency of the brains neural networks?

Please think carefully before replying. No rush, I'll be away for a couple of days in the bush camping.

 

[apeman]

The problem being, there is no evidence that universe is thinking.

The other problem being, the universe as it is and as it functions and evolves is not subject to your will or my will. Not being subject to my will, your will or our combined will, the laws and principles of the universe are not a matter of will, yet alone free will.

If we exist within a greater mind then the world around us doesn't cause us to be, the mind that directs the world does. Obviously the mind behind the world may choose to give us a degree of free choice...a mindless world can never do that.

Decision making within the brain is well enough understood to describe it as a rational process performed by neural network information processing.

'
When it comes to the human brain, even the simplest of acts can be counter-intuitive and deceptively complicated. For example, try stretching your arm.
Nerves in the limb send messages back to your brain, but the subjective experience you have of stretching isn't due to these signals. The feeling that you willed your arm into motion, and the realisation that you moved it at all, are both the result of an area at the back of your brain called the posterior parietal cortex. This region helped to produce the intention to move, and predicted what the movement would feel like, all before you twitched a single muscle.

Michel Desmurget and a team of French neuroscientists arrived at this conclusion by stimulating the brains of seven people with electrodes, while they underwent brain surgery under local anaesthetic. When Desmurget stimulated the parietal cortex, the patients felt a strong desire to move their arms, hands, feet or lips, although they never actually did. Stronger currents cast a powerful illusion, convincing the patients that they had actually moved, even though recordings of electrical activity in their muscles said otherwise.

But when Desmurget stimulated a different region - the premotor cortex - he found the opposite effect. The patients moved their hands, arms or mouths without realising it. One of them flexed his left wrist, fingers and elbow and rotated his forearm, but was completely unaware of it. When his surgeons asked if he felt anything, he said no. Higher currents evoked stronger movements, but still the patients remained blissfully unaware that their limbs and lips were budging.''


Pattern recognition/prediction;
''Neuroscientists have repeatedly pointed out that pattern recognition represents the key to understanding cognition in humans. Pattern recognition also forms the very basis by which we predict future events, i e. we are literally forced to make assumptions concerning outcomes,and we do so by relying on sequences of events experienced in the past.

Huettel et al. point out that their study identifies the role various regions of prefrontal cortex play in moment-to-moment processing of mental events in order to make predictions about future events. Thus implicit predictive models are formed which need to be continuously updated, the disruption of sequence''

Three things...

1, What is the evidences that the universe is not the product of thought?

That question is much the same as asking - 'what is the evidence that there is no God?' - or 'what is the evidence that Allah is not the Creator of the Universe?' - or ''what is the evidence that the Galactic Federation has no the placed the planet Earth in quarantine?''

There is no evidence. Because there is no evidence to support the proposition, there is no justified to form a belief in the affirmative.

2, The laws of nature are not subject to my or your will...but our wills can clearly manipulate the laws of nature...that's how we invent useful things that would not otherwise exist.

I've pointed out your error in category before.

When we use raw materials, mining, processing, etc, in order to design and build machinery, computers, appliances, etc,etc, we do not alter the laws of nature one iota.

The laws of nature being QM, [including] Nuclear strong force, the nuclear weak force, gravity and electromagnetism..which we do not, and cannot alter or modify, only use.

3, The correlation between actions on the brain and the thoughts that seem to emanate from that brain need be nothing more than correlation...it in no way proves causation ... and in fact the correlation theory is simpler. That this is a dream like experience is simpler than believing an expanding universe unthinkingly creates a thing called a brain that offers no survival advantage to the atoms that comprise it.

Oh, come on...a simple knock on the head ends conscious activity in an instant.

Lose memory function and the ability of the brain to make decisions breaks down...decision making, including recognition, being impossible without a working memory.

Certain changes to brain structure, connectivity, cells and chemistry breaking down the brains ability to form and generate coherent conscious perception, thoughts, decisions and actions.

In short, no memory function equals no consciousness as we experience it. Only a series of disjointed and incomprehensible sensations.

1, It is just as much an affirmative proposition to state that the world is a mindless creative process . You couldn't create a computer program without the will to do it could you, so why do you think it is not an affirmative proposition to state that the world is mindlessly creating the program in which we live?

At least my theory stands on the foundation of two facts that we know...that thought (and the information that it considers/reacts to) definitely exists and that if we wish to construct a complex balanced system (like a computer program) then our will is an absolute requirement for its existence.

2, As I have said , I agree with you that we can't change the laws of nature, but our imagination means that we can bend those laws to our will by inventing things . Our imagination is able to think of new combinations of existent material (information)...which as I have said implies that we are the cause of those ideas and those ideas require that our wills have a degree of detachment from the world as it is...ie, free (to a degree) will .

3, If the world is constructed from thought alone then it is the case that there is correlation between the brain and mind, so if you damage your brain you damage your thought. There is nothing outrageous about such a statement. It's like in a computer program if you crash your simulated car into a simulated tree there is a correlation that means the car is damaged...but the simulated tree is not the cause of the damage, the underling program and therefore programmer is.

 

[ryan]

Don't be stupid; read what I responded to.

This is similar to my response. In this analogy, A is the "thought" or "action" that was affected by QM. Suppose random QM event affects A, and A has to respond. But if A is also random in nature, then A still has its own freedom/randomness. So I keep trying to tell DBT that A would have its own QM, unless we talking about some kind of duality which I don't we are.

How can randomness (of any kind), which is necessarily unguided (or it isn't random), possibly produce freedom of will?

Do you have any idea how many times you have asked this same question? Every time you ask it I answer, then you go away for a week and eventually build back up to it again. This really is going to be the last time for you.

Nothing about what I say produces free will; it is simply an interpretation of the nature of matter and consciousness. If our choices are at all a function of QM, or in other words, are probabilistic in nature, then what ever the possible outcomes are is the freedom we have.

What fucking 'freedom we have'?

It is a spatial freedom from its indeterminable behavior.

From where does this freedom come? You admit that you haven't said yet. So say.

No, I said that nothing produces free will. The free will is inherent to small systems within larger processes that we call decision making processes.

 

[ryan]

You still want to take the thoughts and actions outside of QM. Suppose QM acts on our thoughts and actions in a random way, the thoughts and actions still would have some freedom from QM of their own.

Please read the question carefully, ryan.

The question is: if uncontrolled elements act upon your (brains) cognitive processes, effecting non -chosen changes, and you yourself (brain) have no regulative control of what is happening at quantum scale...your thoughts and your actions being shaped and formed by non-willed quantum activity and non-willed changes to (brain) cognition, why exactly do you call this 'free will?'

In other words, why is quantum randomness even being whether stated or implied (by you) as being related to 'will' - yet alone 'free will' - when there is nothing being willed and no presence of will within quantum randomness or however it may happen to effect the cognitive process and the production of will by the agency of the brains neural networks?

It would be part of what we know as the decision making process. We can say that freedom is inherent to will because of the QM components the decision making process.