Sam Harris' argument against free will (video lecture)

[Underseer]

Fascinating stuff.

I've always felt that free will is an illusion for many of the reasons Harris states. If you rearranged all of my atoms to match those of Charles Manson at a certain point in his life, then replaced him with me at the appropriate point in the past, then I would have made all the same decisions he did.

At around 37:00, he brings up another point I've long agreed with: that determinism isn't the same thing as fatalism.

 

[rousseau]

Just don't bring it up when you're flirting with a cute girl at the bar.

 

[Underseer]

Just don't bring it up when you're flirting with a cute girl at the bar.

If you have to misrepresent yourself to get a phone number, do you really want the phone number?

 

[rousseau]

Just don't bring it up when you're flirting with a cute girl at the bar.

If you have to misrepresent yourself to get a phone number, do you really want the phone number?

I was joking, but it's a real problem for myself (and probably for many people on the site). I've spent a lot of time over the past 5-10 years studying, and have gained a lot of wisdom about a lot of things. There is some of it that I think many people just aren't ready to hear, or that I wouldn't feel comfortable bringing up in conversation.

I really can't imagine lying in bed with my girlfriend chatting and then casually saying something like, "so do you ever feel like your free will is an illusion?". In most cases, the illusion, if that's the real case, is a great thing, and telling someone who just wants to go get an ice cream and play a board game that they don't have free will feels weird.

In my situation, my girlfriend is actually a very smart cookie, and she's aware that I know a lot about a lot of stuff. In many cases, though, I think she doesn't ask because she doesn't really want to know.

 

[Togo]

I'm half an hour in, and so far not very impressed. He makes the assumption that the universe consists of events that are either determined or random, and then goes through various iterations of demonstrating that this assumption is incompatible with (incompatibalist) free will. He's a very entertaining speaker, but the arguments are a bit half-hearted.

The whole thing is just under an hour and a half. Are there any highlights I can fast-forward to?

 

[Underseer]

If you have to misrepresent yourself to get a phone number, do you really want the phone number?

I was joking, but it's a real problem for myself (and probably for many people on the site). I've spent a lot of time over the past 5-10 years studying, and have gained a lot of wisdom about a lot of things. There is some of it that I think many people just aren't ready to hear, or that I wouldn't feel comfortable bringing up in conversation.

I really can't imagine lying in bed with my girlfriend chatting and then casually saying something like, "so do you ever feel like your free will is an illusion?". In most cases, the illusion, if that's the real case, is a great thing, and telling someone who just wants to go get an ice cream and play a board game that they don't have free will feels weird.

In my situation, my girlfriend is actually a very smart cookie, and she's aware that I know a lot about a lot of stuff. In many cases, though, I think she doesn't ask because she doesn't really want to know.

Let me reiterate: if you can't have random discussions about obscure esoteric topics like the relationship between determinism and free will, why would you want to be in that relationship?

There's only so many conversations I can have about sports cars and how well the drapes match the furniture before wanting to kill myself.

 

[untermensche]

I'm half an hour in, and so far not very impressed. He makes the assumption that the universe consists of events that are either determined or random, and then goes through various iterations of demonstrating that this assumption is incompatible with (incompatibalist) free will. He's a very entertaining speaker, but the arguments are a bit half-hearted.

The whole thing is just under an hour and a half. Are there any highlights I can fast-forward to?

Yes, he is much more style than substance.

He merely assumes his conclusion and makes a bunch of "what if" arguments that really go nowhere.

He doesn't define "will" nor does he define "free". He merely states that decisions are the end result of a chain of events without the least bit of evidence as to what a "decision" is (physiologically).

I kept asking "Where's the beef?" without ever being satisfied.

 

[rousseau]

I was joking, but it's a real problem for myself (and probably for many people on the site). I've spent a lot of time over the past 5-10 years studying, and have gained a lot of wisdom about a lot of things. There is some of it that I think many people just aren't ready to hear, or that I wouldn't feel comfortable bringing up in conversation.

I really can't imagine lying in bed with my girlfriend chatting and then casually saying something like, "so do you ever feel like your free will is an illusion?". In most cases, the illusion, if that's the real case, is a great thing, and telling someone who just wants to go get an ice cream and play a board game that they don't have free will feels weird.

In my situation, my girlfriend is actually a very smart cookie, and she's aware that I know a lot about a lot of stuff. In many cases, though, I think she doesn't ask because she doesn't really want to know.

Let me reiterate: if you can't have random discussions about obscure esoteric topics like the relationship between determinism and free will, why would you want to be in that relationship?

There's only so many conversations I can have about sports cars and how well the drapes match the furniture before wanting to kill myself.

I understand, and follow the premise in my own life. I do draw the line with some subjects, though. I don't suspect I'll find a lot of friends that will casually bring up free will, in particular, with me, and I don't suspect many of them would enjoy me doing so. But maybe I'm just projecting..

 

[Juma]

He makes the assumption that the universe consists of events that are either determined or random, and then goes through various iterations of demonstrating that this assumption is incompatible with (incompatibalist) free will.

And you keep arguing the possibility of a causation that goes as it pleases...

 

[Brian63]

Big Sam Harris fan here, both in his explaining style (very good use of analogies and metaphors) and substance (his "End of Faith" book dramatically altered how I viewed religion in the world).

In this lecture, he made some very thoughtful points about the universe is very deterministic, and adding a concept like "free will" actually would not change it, contrary to common religious doctrines.

I favorited the video here, and will watch again at some point in the future. Thanks for the link, Underseer.

Brian

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

When I think a while about it, I have to conclude that free will is an illusion. We will do what we will do, based on our genetics, our history, and our stimuli. I think this is an inescapable conclusion if you adhere to materialism and if you read the research that has clearly shown people's bodies towards their choice before they think they "make" that choice.

I think it is a neccessary illusion though, and I don't know how I'd function if I didn't trick myself into believing I had free will.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

Regarding Sam Harris himself, I have yet to hear him say anything I haven't either thought of or heard somebody else say first. He hasn't presented anything to me that I find original to him. I don't find him useful, but he does present his points pretty well. Hitchens was better though

 

[untermensche]

When I think a while about it, I have to conclude that free will is an illusion. We will do what we will do, based on our genetics, our history, and our stimuli. I think this is an inescapable conclusion if you adhere to materialism and if you read the research that has clearly shown people's bodies towards their choice before they think they "make" that choice.

I think it is a neccessary illusion though, and I don't know how I'd function if I didn't trick myself into believing I had free will.

You are merely assuming your conclusion.

And doing more.

Claiming that your sense of making "free" decisions is really an illusion. A speculation.

 

[fromderinside]

He makes the assumption that the universe consists of events that are either determined or random, and then goes through various iterations of demonstrating that this assumption is incompatible with (incompatibalist) free will.

And you keep arguing the possibility of a causation that goes as it pleases...

Eyup. "I choose to take the train (except the train he wanted just left so the took another) and I took the train".

 

[Underseer]

When I think a while about it, I have to conclude that free will is an illusion. We will do what we will do, based on our genetics, our history, and our stimuli. I think this is an inescapable conclusion if you adhere to materialism and if you read the research that has clearly shown people's bodies towards their choice before they think they "make" that choice.

I think it is a neccessary illusion though, and I don't know how I'd function if I didn't trick myself into believing I had free will.

Just because your thoughts are likely predetermined, it does not follow that your decisions don't matter. Of course they matter.

 

[fromderinside]

When I think a while about it, I have to conclude that free will is an illusion. We will do what we will do, based on our genetics, our history, and our stimuli. I think this is an inescapable conclusion if you adhere to materialism and if you read the research that has clearly shown people's bodies towards their choice before they think they "make" that choice.

I think it is a neccessary illusion though, and I don't know how I'd function if I didn't trick myself into believing I had free will.

Just because your thoughts are likely predetermined, it does not follow that your decisions don't matter. Of course they matter.

Mattering and being free are not identical twins they're not even family. Constrain situations enough to others another's choices appear freely chosen.

 

[Underseer]

Just because your thoughts are likely predetermined, it does not follow that your decisions don't matter. Of course they matter.

Mattering and being free are not identical twins they're not even family. Constrain situations enough to others another's choices appear freely chosen.

The general assumption people seem to make is that without free will, you can't make choices. They then go on to insist that it's either free will (preferably supplied by a magic soul) or else nihilism. If you don't have free will, then you can choose whatever you want because it doesn't matter.

 

[Kharakov]

Mattering and being free are not identical twins they're not even family. Constrain situations enough to others another's choices appear freely chosen.

The general assumption people seem to make is that without free will, you can't make choices. They then go on to insist that it's either free will (preferably supplied by a magic soul) or else nihilism. If you don't have free will, then you can choose whatever you want because it doesn't matter.

If will was free, we wouldn't lock up repeat offenders with the idea that they had specific characteristics that mold their actions.

 

[Underseer]

The general assumption people seem to make is that without free will, you can't make choices. They then go on to insist that it's either free will (preferably supplied by a magic soul) or else nihilism. If you don't have free will, then you can choose whatever you want because it doesn't matter.

If will was free, we wouldn't lock up repeat offenders with the idea that they had specific characteristics that mold their actions.

Just because a universe-sized computer could predict someone's decisions, it does not follow that decisions are not being made. You don't need free will to make decisions, and you don't need free will to hold people accountable for their decisions.

 

[fromderinside]

Just because a universe-sized computer could predict someone's decisions, it does not follow that decisions are not being made. You don't need free will to make decisions, and you don't need free will to hold people accountable for their decisions.

Yes. Like I wrote "Constrain situations enough to others another's choices appear freely chosen."