The Science and Mechanics of Free Will

[ryan]

There are always external constraints, usually duress, and frequently force. No man is an island.

Then I suppose that the definitions of constraints, force, and duress also need to be agreed to before arguing. Might as well define "choice" too. People are reluctant to use dictionaries, I guess that is because that would make a great many philosophical arguments irrelevant.

Dictionaries have knowledge; philosophy pursues it.

Thank you

 

[ryan]

It's just semantics. There are "roulette wheels", and then there are "choices".

Could you please explain the difference? Because I can't see one. What is it about a choice made by a human brain that differs in a substantial way from a choice made by a roulette wheel? As far as I can see, both are subject to deterministic elements, plus random (or at least, chaotic/pseudo-random) elements, the sum of which leads to the final outcome, without leaving any place for 'will'.

They are both free, except they call X a choice, and call Y a roulette wheel. I don't see the problem here.

 

[bilby]

Could you please explain the difference? Because I can't see one. What is it about a choice made by a human brain that differs in a substantial way from a choice made by a roulette wheel? As far as I can see, both are subject to deterministic elements, plus random (or at least, chaotic/pseudo-random) elements, the sum of which leads to the final outcome, without leaving any place for 'will'.

They are both free, except they call X a choice, and call Y a roulette wheel. I don't see the problem here.

I don't see a problem here - as long as we are in agreement that this disposes with the idea of 'will'. People make choices based on inputs, some of which are purely random. Will doesn't enter the picture except as hindsight; we look at what we did, and say "I chose to do that". But we could no more have chosen otherwise than a roulette wheel could have chosen to come up with a 25 instead of a 12.

 

[ryan]

They are both free, except they call X a choice, and call Y a roulette wheel. I don't see the problem here.

I don't see a problem here - as long as we are in agreement that this disposes with the idea of 'will'. People make choices based on inputs, some of which are purely random. Will doesn't enter the picture except as hindsight; we look at what we did, and say "I chose to do that". But we could no more have chosen otherwise than a roulette wheel could have chosen to come up with a 25 instead of a 12.

Yes, we would be a continuation of consciousness that embodies free will.

 

[DBT]

It doesn't help your argument in the least.

The decision in the first instance is determined by underlying information state represented in conscious form as it achieved readiness potential, which is followed by fresh information entering the system modifying the first decision and forming regret for having made that decision. But of course, in the first instance the fresh information was not available so it was not an option.

The brain can only make the decision it makes in any given instance in time because that is the expression of its information in that instance.

'Free will' plays no part in decision making or its conscious representation in relation to thought and deliberation. All of this is governed by underlying information exchange between cells and their networks.

Your response does not seem to address my reply. You mentioned regret, and I gave you my response. Can we please keep a linear discussion, or please tell me if you are branching out.

I think you understand the point I'm making, but as it happens to present a fatal flaw in your argument you cannot afford to acknowledge it.

Isn't that right?

I think so.

 

[Juma]

I don't see a problem here - as long as we are in agreement that this disposes with the idea of 'will'. People make choices based on inputs, some of which are purely random. Will doesn't enter the picture except as hindsight; we look at what we did, and say "I chose to do that". But we could no more have chosen otherwise than a roulette wheel could have chosen to come up with a 25 instead of a 12.

Yes, we would be a continuation of consciousness that embodies free will.

A "continuation of conciousness"??? Even Deepak couldnt have said that...

 

[ryan]

Your response does not seem to address my reply. You mentioned regret, and I gave you my response. Can we please keep a linear discussion, or please tell me if you are branching out.

I think you understand the point I'm making, but as it happens to present a fatal flaw in your argument you cannot afford to acknowledge it.

Isn't that right?

I think so.

Let's just back up. At some moment that I have free will, I would be free to choose something I would later regret.

 

[ryan]

Yes, we would be a continuation of consciousness that embodies free will.

A "continuation of conciousness"??? Even Deepak couldnt have said that...

So the consciousness doesn't continue? I do not think this is at all controversial.

 

[Juma]

A "continuation of conciousness"??? Even Deepak couldnt have said that...

So the consciousness doesn't continue? I do not think this is at all controversial.

Its how it is supposed to be an fitting answer.
It doesnt answer anything.

 

[ryan]

So the consciousness doesn't continue? I do not think this is at all controversial.

Its how it is supposed to be an fitting answer.
It doesnt answer anything.

As the rivers of the consciousness flow so too does the freedom of its microcosms.

 

[Juma]

Its how it is supposed to be an fitting answer.
It doesnt answer anything.

As the rivers of the consciousness flow so too does the freedom of its microcosms.

Amen mr Copra

 

[DBT]

I think you understand the point I'm making, but as it happens to present a fatal flaw in your argument you cannot afford to acknowledge it.

Isn't that right?

I think so.

Let's just back up. At some moment that I have free will, I would be free to choose something I would later regret.

You deliberately choose options that cause you serious harm or embarrassment....only to regret these decisions a moment later? Just to say ''I wish I hadn't done that!''

 

[ryan]

Let's just back up. At some moment that I have free will, I would be free to choose something I would later regret.

You deliberately choose options that cause you serious harm or embarrassment....only to regret these decisions a moment later? Just to say ''I wish I hadn't done that!''

Doesn't it seem like a possible reason why people do things that they know they shouldn't?

 

[bilby]

Its how it is supposed to be an fitting answer.
It doesnt answer anything.

As the rivers of the consciousness flow so too does the freedom of its microcosms.

Shave and a haircut, two bits.

 

[fromderinside]

As the rivers of the consciousness flow so too does the freedom of its microcosms.

Shave and a haircut, two bits.

four bits, a dollar.

All for bruma shave get up and holler.

 

[ryan]

like two peas in a pod

 

[DBT]

You deliberately choose options that cause you serious harm or embarrassment....only to regret these decisions a moment later? Just to say ''I wish I hadn't done that!''

Doesn't it seem like a possible reason why people do things that they know they shouldn't?

Perhaps it's because their condition only allowed that option in that given time, and if they could go back in time - 'knowing what I know now'' - they would not make the decision that they first made. A common lament, but demonstrates that decisions are based on the information available to the brain at any given moment, and nothing to do with 'freedom of will''

 

[untermensche]

This thread is simply evidence that science is not ready for talk about things like "animal will".

It can't even talk about the will of a worm, no less a mammal.

 

[DBT]

This thread is simply evidence that science is not ready for talk about things like "animal will".

It can't even talk about the will of a worm, no less a mammal.

What do you mean by 'will' - and why can't it be talked about?

 

[untermensche]

This thread is simply evidence that science is not ready for talk about things like "animal will".

It can't even talk about the will of a worm, no less a mammal.

What do you mean by 'will' - and why can't it be talked about?

It isn't understood, scientifically, at all.

We don't have the slightest clue beyond; "It is something the brain does".

As I said, we don't even have a clue what it is in simpler organisms like worms.

To talk about whether it is "free" or "unfree" is absurd when you don't even have a clue what it is.