In Free Will, What Makes it "Free"

[DBT]

if you want to argue for the reality of something

I'm not arguing for the "reality" (or 'existence') of anything.

I know exactly what you are saying

Wow, aren't you the clever boy. Your response just another example of conceit. You have nothing substantial to offer, just vague references to semantics, so you resort to insults, irrelevant comments and emoticons to cover the absence of a logical argument based on sound premises to support your untenable position. A waste of time and effort.

I know what you are saying, I've read what you say, but maybe you mean something other than what you are saying.

In that case, give a clear and unambiguous description of your argument.

Put up or shut up.

 

[The AntiChris]

In that case, give a clear and unambiguous description of your argument.

My argument is based on a theory of word meaning derived from common usage.

Of course this argument only works if you accept the theory of 'meaning is usage'. On this you're ambiguous:

In linguistics meaning is usually derived from usage in context. The precise meaning of words which can have multiple meanings such as 'free' and 'freedom' will depend on how the word is commonly used in specific contexts.

That's exactly what I have been saying...

This looks promising, but ...

However, since you reject 'meaning is usage'

I don't reject usage, just question the validity of some common applications...

So it turns out you subscribe to 'meaning is usage' except when it would mean giving up one of your ideological beliefs.

This is like the person who claims to be a vegetarian but eats fish! Just as this person is not a vegetarian, you are not a subscriber to the 'meaning is usage' theory of word meaning.

The trouble is, in the absence of the way people actually use a word, how on earth do decide what a word means?

 

[Speakpigeon]

The causes may only influence what I choose. Ultimately, quantum mechanics may give me some freedom.

How?

How can QM give you freedom, that you couldn't equally get from dice rolls or coin flipping?

Randomness is not freedom. Probability is not freedom. QM is not freedom.

QM randomness is qualified by scientists as something like "true" randomness, as opposed to the kind of imperfect randomness produced by throwing a coin, casting dice, or running some specific algorithms.
Nothing compares to QM randomness.

That being said, this leaves unanswered the question of whether the brain could turn some QM tricks or not.
EB

 

[Togo]

I'm not sure that's the point, is it?

My understanding was that the point about QM was not that the brain could use QM somehow to make the brain do non-determined things, but rather that QM is evidence that we do not, in fact, live in a determined universe. You can argue that some things are still in effect determined, but that's just a determinism-of-the-gaps argument.

 

[ryan]

If everything is QM, then we are QM too.

QM describes physics on a quantum scale, QM is not to be confused with a ToE....which has not yet been formulated. The closest thing being QM and General Relativity. Even so, this cannot be used to explain evolution or animal behaviour, for example.

Your QM free will proposition is a dead end.

Do you not see that QM would have a major impact on what happens at larger scales?

 

[ryan]

That being said, this leaves unanswered the question of whether the brain could turn some QM tricks or not.
EB

The brain is just what everything is doing at the quantum scale.

 

[fromderinside]

That being said, this leaves unanswered the question of whether the brain could turn some QM tricks or not.
EB

The brain is just what everything is doing at the quantum scale.

Its a quantum scale because it is beyond our ability to apply determinant scale. That is to say there may be order, but, we can't divine it. From all appearances the QM world doesn't mess up the world we can measure. We don't find quantum effects perturbing our measurable macro world. My conclusion. The Quantum world is determinant. If it weren't it would contain elements that impact order, say, like does dark matter and energy. They are beyond our abilities to measure but we can observe its effects on motion and such of ordinary matter. However these things may be measurable after all. Now we can see effects in dark matter relative to ordinary matter that are not identical to that of ordinary matter implying some matter of control in dark matter and energy.

We go pretty far finding ordinary effects from processes we can't measure.

 

[ryan]

The brain is just what everything is doing at the quantum scale.

Its a quantum scale because it is beyond our ability to apply determinant scale. That is to say there may be order, but, we can't divine it. From all appearances the QM world doesn't mess up the world we can measure. We don't find quantum effects perturbing our measurable macro world. My conclusion. The Quantum world is determinant. If it weren't it would contain elements that impact order, say, like does dark matter and energy. They are beyond our abilities to measure but we can observe its effects on motion and such of ordinary matter. However these things may be measurable after all. Now we can see effects in dark matter relative to ordinary matter that are not identical to that of ordinary matter implying some matter of control in dark matter and energy.

We go pretty far finding ordinary effects from processes we can't measure.

The brain is what its parts are doing. I don't see how this kind of reductionism can be contested.

If there was something different than QM, do you still think that the brain would function exactly the same way?

 

[Juma]

If there was something different than QM, do you still think that the brain would function exactly the same way?

This is an interesting question since it shows that you have at least some understanding of the role of different scales. But could a brain be built in a universr that is "classical all the way down"? Hard to say since it isnt sure that such a universe is possible.

 

[ryan]

If there was something different than QM, do you still think that the brain would function exactly the same way?

This is an interesting question since it shows that you have at least some understanding of the role of different scales. But could a brain be built in a universr that is "classical all the way down"? Hard to say since it isnt sure that such a universe is possible.

After 100's of posts of me saying practically the exact same thing, NOW YOU GET IT?!?!?! WOOOOOOOOW!!!!!

And to think, I actually thought you were one of the better decipherers of my arguments. I don't think I should be on here anymore.

WHAT AN F***ING WASTE OF MY LIFE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Juma]

This is an interesting question since it shows that you have at least some understanding of the role of different scales. But could a brain be built in a universr that is "classical all the way down"? Hard to say since it isnt sure that such a universe is possible.

After 100's of posts of me saying practically the exact same thing, NOW YOU GET IT?!?!?! WOOOOOOOOW!!!!!

And to think, I actually thought you were one of the better decipherers of my arguments. I don't think I should be on here anymore.

WHAT AN F***ING WASTE OF MY LIFE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

? If this is what you have argued then I dont understand why you are talking about free will.

 

[ryan]

You're killing me!
It's all in this thread, said many times many different ways.

 

[fromderinside]

Quit your fricking whining. We've known what you are saying since you began asking these questions many threads back. You don't seem to understand that there is no evidence that the existence of a scale indetermacy leads to changes in decision making at any measurable level in decision making. Best conclusion are are that since there is only evidence of determinacy from what we measure of human thought and actions QM does introduce indeterminacy in human thought. But you just don't get it.

The point I made in my last post was that when we find evidence of something we can't measure impacting what we can measure, we can measure it. It also seems from our measurements that relating to that suggest that which we can't measure directly has properties similar to that which we can measure when interaction with such as gravity. Humans are quite capable. We've done a lot with what we can't directly measure and still we've found nothing in what we can measure that suggests other than a determinant world.

All you have is maybe-possibility piss piss piss with no evidence behind your pissing. It gets tiring.

The failure is yours my friend. We don't throw over things because someone sees something and leaps to the conclusion we have something that isn't demonstrated. Demonstrate it and you get the prize. Piss about it and you get the frothy result.

 

[ryan]

... we've found nothing in what we can measure that suggests other than a determinant world.

This is insane. QM does nothing but demonstrate an indeterminable world. Please - for the love of god - back your claim up with something. Give me anything written after 1920.

All you have is maybe-possibility piss piss piss with no evidence behind your pissing. It gets tiring.

I made it very clear from the beginning that I was advocating for this to be just a possibility. Why the hell would you give me s*** for it!?

This is philosophy, not science!!!

 

[Kharakov]

DE Terminate! DE terminate!

 

[bilby]

QM describes physics on a quantum scale, QM is not to be confused with a ToE....which has not yet been formulated. The closest thing being QM and General Relativity. Even so, this cannot be used to explain evolution or animal behaviour, for example.

Your QM free will proposition is a dead end.

Do you not see that QM would have a major impact on what happens at larger scales?

If that were generally true, then classical mechanics wouldn't work at all.

 

[Juma]

This is insane. QM does nothing but demonstrate an indeterminable world. Please - for the love of god - back your claim up with something. Give me anything written after 1920.

All you have is maybe-possibility piss piss piss with no evidence behind your pissing. It gets tiring.

I made it very clear from the beginning that I was advocating for this to be just a possibility. Why the hell would you give me s*** for it!?

This is philosophy, not science!!!

So you mesn this is a purely hypotetical discussion about a hypotetical feature in a hypotetical universe?

 

[ryan]

Do you not see that QM would have a major impact on what happens at larger scales?

If that were generally true, then classical mechanics wouldn't work at all.

No, one of the Schrodinger equation describes everything we see using QM and special relativity. Interference of probabilities gives us everything that we see and don't see. There is just QM and general relativity that is needed to describe pretty much everything we observe.

 

[bilby]

If that were generally true, then classical mechanics wouldn't work at all.

No, one of the Schrodinger equation describes everything we see using QM and special relativity. Interference of probabilities gives us everything that we see and don't see. There is just QM and general relativity that is needed to describe pretty much everything we observe.

Classical mechanics also describes pretty much everything we observe. That it accurately maps to QM is hard evidence that QM effects beyond those that map to classical mechanics are largely negligible in the real world.

It is not necessary to consider the sphericity of the Earth when mapping a journey of a few hundred miles. It is equally unnecessary to consider QM effects when discussing brain activity.

 

[DBT]

QM describes physics on a quantum scale, QM is not to be confused with a ToE....which has not yet been formulated. The closest thing being QM and General Relativity. Even so, this cannot be used to explain evolution or animal behaviour, for example.

Your QM free will proposition is a dead end.

Do you not see that QM would have a major impact on what happens at larger scales?

The jittery uncertainty of quantum behaviour smooths out above Compton scale and transforms into the classical behaviour of macro scale structures where it is possible to predict orbits and land spacecraft on distant planets with great precision, know that every action has an equal and opposite reaction, entropy, relativity and so on. You still ignore decoherance (Copenhagen interpretation) or MW, etc. Which is why QM is still not a ToE.