In Free Will, What Makes it "Free"

[PyramidHead]

As far as anybody knows, the smallest parts of the brain responsible for decision-making are millions and millions of times larger than quantum particles.

I know. But don't you think that two identical brains grown in a lab eventually would make different choices because of quantum mechanics?

Maybe, but that doesn't mean one of them is exercising its free will, it just means the factors that determined its choices have drifted relative to the other brain due to quantum effects.

 

[ryan]

I know. But don't you think that two identical brains grown in a lab eventually would make different choices because of quantum mechanics?

Maybe, but that doesn't mean one of them is exercising its free will, it just means the factors that determined its choices have drifted relative to the other brain due to quantum effects.

"I" is these quantum mechanical parts that make these deviations from an identical brain. Because of that, I see no difference between "particles have free will" and "I have free will".

 

[PyramidHead]

Maybe, but that doesn't mean one of them is exercising its free will, it just means the factors that determined its choices have drifted relative to the other brain due to quantum effects.

"I" is these quantum mechanical parts that make these deviations from an identical brain. Because of that, I see no difference between "particles have free will" and "I have free will".

Are you honestly presenting the textbook example of the fallacy of composition as if it were a reasonable thing to say?

Moreover, I never said particles had free will. They don't have any will of their own; they behave according to laws that happen to be probabilistic rather than deterministic.

 

[ryan]

"I" is these quantum mechanical parts that make these deviations from an identical brain. Because of that, I see no difference between "particles have free will" and "I have free will".

Are you honestly presenting the textbook example of the fallacy of composition as if it were a reasonable thing to say?

Moreover, I never said particles had free will. They don't have any will of their own; they behave according to laws that happen to be probabilistic rather than deterministic.

Particles do things for no particular reason - yes they have constraints and are influenced. I am particles, and I do things for no particular reason - yes I have constraints and am influenced. What's the difference?

 

[Juma]

determinism only survives if you assume that causal factors can not be fully understood and used to predict, even in theory.

1)Prove this!
2) explain clearly what this has to do with LFW.

 

[DBT]

Because physical objects, their relationships and the options they present to a brain/mind (a brain being a macro scale information processor) are macro scale objects, relationships and events. The decisions that need making by a mind/brain relate to the world as it is perceived:the macro world of other people and relationships, work, houses, cars, trees, rivers, mountains, oceans, sun, moon, stars.......

But the macro scale objects are not the micro scale parts of the brain that make choices about the macro world.

What about the possibility that two identical brains grown in a lab will eventually make different choices because of quantum effects?

Information processing is the function of neurons with glial support cells, dendrites, neurotransmitters, etc...whole orders of scale above sub atomic and QM, though the brain does utilize certain aspects of quantum behaviour, information being processed is, as I mentioned, related not to quantum states, but the objects and relationships of our macro world --- what people do and say, what we need to put on our shopping list, etc.

What about the possibility that two identical brains grown in a lab will eventually make different choices because of quantum effects?

Choices about what? And why? If you need to get dressed in the morning in order to go into town and do your shopping, is it a better choice to go naked instead? Random quantum behaviour? And why would this even be defined as 'free will?''

 

[ryan]

What about the possibility that two identical brains grown in a lab will eventually make different choices because of quantum effects?

Choices about what? And why? If you need to get dressed in the morning in order to go into town and do your shopping, is it a better choice to go naked instead? Random quantum behaviour? And why would this even be defined as 'free will?''

Free will will look random to from another observer's point of view. It would be mechanically undetermined, which is exactly how I would expect free will to work.

 

[DBT]

Choices about what? And why? If you need to get dressed in the morning in order to go into town and do your shopping, is it a better choice to go naked instead? Random quantum behaviour? And why would this even be defined as 'free will?''

Free will will look random to from another observer's point of view. It would be mechanically undetermined, which is exactly how I would expect free will to work.

Random is meaningless in terms of rational decision making. Instead of leaping clear of a speeding car....you leap into its path because that is the ''free will'' thing to do?

You need to describe 'free will' and offer some tangible examples of what you believe it to be, ryan.

 

[ryan]

Free will will look random to from another observer's point of view. It would be mechanically undetermined, which is exactly how I would expect free will to work.

Random is meaningless in terms of rational decision making. Instead of leaping clear of a speeding car....you leap into its path because that is the ''free will'' thing to do?

You need to describe 'free will' and offer some tangible examples of what you believe it to be, ryan.

Mechanically, free will seems to imply an action taken or a choice made without a reason. It is unpredictable for whatever is doing the action, and it is unpredictable for anyone observing the action.

 

[DBT]

Random is meaningless in terms of rational decision making. Instead of leaping clear of a speeding car....you leap into its path because that is the ''free will'' thing to do?

You need to describe 'free will' and offer some tangible examples of what you believe it to be, ryan.

Mechanically, free will seems to imply an action taken or a choice made without a reason. It is unpredictable for whatever is doing the action, and it is unpredictable for anyone observing the action.

Debatable, however, your examples of 'an action taken or a choice made without a reason' are.....?

 

[PyramidHead]

Are you honestly presenting the textbook example of the fallacy of composition as if it were a reasonable thing to say?

Moreover, I never said particles had free will. They don't have any will of their own; they behave according to laws that happen to be probabilistic rather than deterministic.

Particles do things for no particular reason - yes they have constraints and are influenced. I am particles, and I do things for no particular reason - yes I have constraints and am influenced. What's the difference?

You might as well say that since matter and energy cannot be created nor destroyed, and my house is matter and energy, my house cannot be created nor destroyed. When a flood utterly demolishes my house, I'm not going to stand around and claim I still have a place to live because the matter and energy are still intact. You're just playing with words here.

 

[PyramidHead]

Random is meaningless in terms of rational decision making. Instead of leaping clear of a speeding car....you leap into its path because that is the ''free will'' thing to do?

You need to describe 'free will' and offer some tangible examples of what you believe it to be, ryan.

Mechanically, free will seems to imply an action taken or a choice made without a reason. It is unpredictable for whatever is doing the action, and it is unpredictable for anyone observing the action.

I think that's the opposite of free will. Think about enrollment in the military as an example. Two people, Alice and Bob, sign up. Alice thought about what she wanted for her career, considered the needs of her friends and family, debated whether or not she wanted to serve her country, and after making all those deliberations, she finally decided to join the military. Bob has no particular interest in the military either way, but one day as he is walking past a recruitment booth on his way to a dentist's appointment, he suddenly changes direction and signs up for active duty. I don't know about you, but most people would think Alice exercised her free will more than Bob did, since she went through the whole process of making a decision: weighing the pros and cons and using her critical thinking skills to make an informed choice. Bob, by all appearances, was just struck by a whim. The kind of free will that people actually value is Alice's, not Bob's. They want to believe that they can carefully examine their options and make a choice that is their own, and take responsibility for that choice. The kind of free will that abruptly sends you hurtling towards a random outcome for no reason whatsoever is not something many people would even want. Do you? I would rather make choices for rational reasons, not completely arbitrary ones.

 

[ryan]

Mechanically, free will seems to imply an action taken or a choice made without a reason. It is unpredictable for whatever is doing the action, and it is unpredictable for anyone observing the action.

Debatable, however, your examples of 'an action taken or a choice made without a reason' are.....?

It would probably have to be a choice that is not obvious or easy. It could be a choice like, steak or chicken if you are in the mood for both. Or it could be something like, sell stocks or hold onto them. There would probably be too much "hard wiring" that would stop us from jumping in front of a car if we did not have any desire to.

 

[ryan]

Mechanically, free will seems to imply an action taken or a choice made without a reason. It is unpredictable for whatever is doing the action, and it is unpredictable for anyone observing the action.

You might as well say that since matter and energy cannot be created nor destroyed, and my house is matter and energy, my house cannot be created nor destroyed. When a flood utterly demolishes my house, I'm not going to stand around and claim I still have a place to live because the matter and energy are still intact. You're just playing with words here.

I don't see how this is a good comparison. Our bodies would be partly quantum mechanical.

I think that's the opposite of free will. Think about enrollment in the military as an example. Two people, Alice and Bob, sign up. Alice thought about what she wanted for her career, considered the needs of her friends and family, debated whether or not she wanted to serve her country, and after making all those deliberations, she finally decided to join the military. Bob has no particular interest in the military either way, but one day as he is walking past a recruitment booth on his way to a dentist's appointment, he suddenly changes direction and signs up for active duty. I don't know about you, but most people would think Alice exercised her free will more than Bob did, since she went through the whole process of making a decision: weighing the pros and cons and using her critical thinking skills to make an informed choice. Bob, by all appearances, was just struck by a whim. The kind of free will that people actually value is Alice's, not Bob's. They want to believe that they can carefully examine their options and make a choice that is their own, and take responsibility for that choice. The kind of free will that abruptly sends you hurtling towards a random outcome for no reason whatsoever is not something many people would even want. Do you? I would rather make choices for rational reasons, not completely arbitrary ones.

Well, I don't see how free will can be anything else. If there is a reason why we do things, then we are puppets to that reason. If we have a reason to follow a certain line of reasoning, then we are still puppets to the original reason.

 

[PyramidHead]

Well, I don't see how free will can be anything else. If there is a reason why we do things, then we are puppets to that reason. If we have a reason to follow a certain line of reasoning, then we are still puppets to the original reason.

Is that so bad? And wouldn't any attempt to do something random and unpredictable just to show how free you are ALSO be an act taken for a specific reason?

 

[bilby]

The argument from consequences fallacy remains fallacious no matter how much you dislike the consequences.

 

[ryan]

Well, I don't see how free will can be anything else. If there is a reason why we do things, then we are puppets to that reason. If we have a reason to follow a certain line of reasoning, then we are still puppets to the original reason.

Is that so bad? And wouldn't any attempt to do something random and unpredictable just to show how free you are ALSO be an act taken for a specific reason?

There is no known reason why quantum mechanics works the way it does, and hidden variables is considered to be ruled out somehow. You can't choose to do something random; a random choice is choice made for no reason.

 

[PyramidHead]

Is that so bad? And wouldn't any attempt to do something random and unpredictable just to show how free you are ALSO be an act taken for a specific reason?

There is no known reason why quantum mechanics works the way it does, and hidden variables is considered to be ruled out somehow. You can't choose to do something random; a random choice is choice made for no reason.

But earlier you said the ONLY free choice is random. Now you're saying it can't be random?

 

[ryan]

The argument from consequences fallacy remains fallacious no matter how much you dislike the consequences.

Who is this directed to?

 

[ryan]

There is no known reason why quantum mechanics works the way it does, and hidden variables is considered to be ruled out somehow. You can't choose to do something random; a random choice is choice made for no reason.

But earlier you said the ONLY free choice is random. Now you're saying it can't be random?

You might be mixing up the following.

If I base my choice on the randomness of a particle in a superposition of spin, say, spin up means I buy the black car and spin down means I buy the white car, then my choice to base it on chance is given by a reason and the outcome is undeterminable. The reason is the puppet master.

But if there is a choice that is fundamentally dependent on a particle in my brain with the same superposition, then my choice is free and the outcome is undeterminable.