What is free will?

[WAB]

Thought experiment:

What if we can talk brain to brain?

That is how it works. That is how it has always worked....not supernaturally of course, but brain to brain by means of mouth, body language and the written word.

If the "I" doesn't exist, if what I think is "me" talking is actually just my brain - if there is no "I", if the sense of self is an illusion. Fine. What is to prevent a brain talking to a brain?

Self identity does exist, we are self aware, we are conscious, we think and act and communicate, these attributes and functions being the role and purpose of a functional brain.....to interact with the world through the means of consciousness.

Since the brain dictates everything? What is to prevent a brain talking to another brain?

Nothing. That is what we are doing now....both through means of consciousness, computers and the internet.

DBT? I call on your brain. Not DBT. But DBT's brain.

One and the same....except when the brain puts me the conscious self to sleep and dreams its dreams, consolidates its memories and other functions that are not conscious functions.

Let's talk.

Don't say "I" - because I will assume "you" are referring to your brain.

A brain, if healthy and functioning normally, forms self identity, learns language, self awareness, culture, interests, desires and fears and while conscious, that is experienced as being you. You talking, thinking, eating, working, reading, arguing on the internet,itself an invention of a brain

Exactly. What is it you refer to by saying "you"?

 

[DBT]

That is how it works. That is how it has always worked....not supernaturally of course, but brain to brain by means of mouth, body language and the written word.



Self identity does exist, we are self aware, we are conscious, we think and act and communicate, these attributes and functions being the role and purpose of a functional brain.....to interact with the world through the means of consciousness.

Since the brain dictates everything? What is to prevent a brain talking to another brain?

Nothing. That is what we are doing now....both through means of consciousness, computers and the internet.

DBT? I call on your brain. Not DBT. But DBT's brain.

One and the same....except when the brain puts me the conscious self to sleep and dreams its dreams, consolidates its memories and other functions that are not conscious functions.

Let's talk.

Don't say "I" - because I will assume "you" are referring to your brain.

A brain, if healthy and functioning normally, forms self identity, learns language, self awareness, culture, interests, desires and fears and while conscious, that is experienced as being you. You talking, thinking, eating, working, reading, arguing on the internet,itself an invention of a brain

Exactly. What is is it refer to by saying "you"?

You first.

What do you think the reference means?

 

[WAB]

That is how it works. That is how it has always worked....not supernaturally of course, but brain to brain by means of mouth, body language and the written word.



Self identity does exist, we are self aware, we are conscious, we think and act and communicate, these attributes and functions being the role and purpose of a functional brain.....to interact with the world through the means of consciousness.




Nothing. That is what we are doing now....both through means of consciousness, computers and the internet.

DBT? I call on your brain. Not DBT. But DBT's brain.

One and the same....except when the brain puts me the conscious self to sleep and dreams its dreams, consolidates its memories and other functions that are not conscious functions.

Let's talk.

Don't say "I" - because I will assume "you" are referring to your brain.

A brain, if healthy and functioning normally, forms self identity, learns language, self awareness, culture, interests, desires and fears and while conscious, that is experienced as being you. You talking, thinking, eating, working, reading, arguing on the internet,itself an invention of a brain

Exactly. What is is it refer to by saying "you"?

You first.

What do you think the reference means?

Excellent question, my old friend!

But I insist that "I" let my brain answer.

Will your brain answer, or will "You" answer?

 

[DBT]

That is how it works. That is how it has always worked....not supernaturally of course, but brain to brain by means of mouth, body language and the written word.



Self identity does exist, we are self aware, we are conscious, we think and act and communicate, these attributes and functions being the role and purpose of a functional brain.....to interact with the world through the means of consciousness.




Nothing. That is what we are doing now....both through means of consciousness, computers and the internet.



One and the same....except when the brain puts me the conscious self to sleep and dreams its dreams, consolidates its memories and other functions that are not conscious functions.

Let's talk.

Don't say "I" - because I will assume "you" are referring to your brain.

A brain, if healthy and functioning normally, forms self identity, learns language, self awareness, culture, interests, desires and fears and while conscious, that is experienced as being you. You talking, thinking, eating, working, reading, arguing on the internet,itself an invention of a brain

Exactly. What is is it refer to by saying "you"?

You first.

What do you think the reference means?

Excellent question, my old friend!

But I insist that "I" let my brain answer.

Will your brain answer, or will "You" answer?

I - me, my brain and I (the unholy trinity?)- suspect that we don't have much to argue over. Anyhow, got to go.

 

[WAB]

That is how it works. That is how it has always worked....not supernaturally of course, but brain to brain by means of mouth, body language and the written word.



Self identity does exist, we are self aware, we are conscious, we think and act and communicate, these attributes and functions being the role and purpose of a functional brain.....to interact with the world through the means of consciousness.




Nothing. That is what we are doing now....both through means of consciousness, computers and the internet.



One and the same....except when the brain puts me the conscious self to sleep and dreams its dreams, consolidates its memories and other functions that are not conscious functions.

Let's talk.

Don't say "I" - because I will assume "you" are referring to your brain.

A brain, if healthy and functioning normally, forms self identity, learns language, self awareness, culture, interests, desires and fears and while conscious, that is experienced as being you. You talking, thinking, eating, working, reading, arguing on the internet,itself an invention of a brain

Exactly. What is is it refer to by saying "you"?

You first.

What do you think the reference means?

Excellent question, my old friend!

But I insist that "I" let my brain answer.

Will your brain answer, or will "You" answer?

I - me, my brain and I (the unholy trinity?)- suspect that we don't have much to argue over. Anyhow, got to go.

Oh boo hoo! I am disappointed! This is important! WAB's "I" is getting all fussy. But this is her brain talking!!

Come on now!

 

[bilby]

Welll wow yourself. Lol. Consiousness makes decisions.

Neuroscience be damned.

Consciousness is the result of making decisions?

BwahhaAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHAAAAAAAHAAA....

Mirth is not a rebuttal.

It's not mirth.

Consciousness makes decisions.


Decrartes? Hegel? Spinoza? Kant?

Neurons make decisions.

Consciousness is just a limited awareness of some of those decisions recently made. It's immediate term memory, useful in assessing the value of the last decision as an input into the next.

Lists of philosophers are not a rebuttal either.

 

[WAB]

Which means, there is no real distinction between the "I" and the brain. Obviously, the "I" and the brain are one and the same. There is no crucial or real distinction between the perceived and conceived "I" and the brain.

Concluded.

Next....

 

[untermensche]

Neurons react to stimulation. They do what they are caused to do.

They do not make any decisions.

Being pushed and falling is not a decision.

That is the problem. One problem.

You have nothing but a bunch of reacting cells.

Where does the action come from?

Why does the brain do what it does? What motivates it?

Nobody has a clue.

 

[WAB]

It's not mirth.

Consciousness makes decisions.


Decrartes? Hegel? Spinoza? Kant?

Neurons make decisions.

Consciousness is just a limited awareness of some of those decisions recently made. It's immediate term memory, useful in assessing the value of the last decision as an input into the next.

Lists of philosophers are not a rebuttal either.

The mind makes decisions.

It's immediate term memory, useful in assessing the value of the last decision as an input into the next. -

Fine. Really! For you, humans are machines. I'm a humanitarian. I think differently. I think human beings are worth something. And it's because they care. Most of the humans I've known anyway. And I don't think they care because they've been programmed. They care because there is something inside them that compels them to care.
I personally don't care what compels them to care, so long as they care.

We probably don't disagree about a whole lot here???

 

[untermensche]

The human ability to make free choices based on ideas is not in doubt.

We are doing it here.

Those that present the ideas they have chosen are loudly proclaiming they can make free choices about ideas.

We are using our minds to tell our fingers which keys to strike.

Our mind knows which keys to strike.

There is no evidence the brain minus the mind knows anything.

A brain without a mind is a deep sleep.

To move around productively requires a mind.

 

[bilby]

It's not mirth.

Consciousness makes decisions.


Decrartes? Hegel? Spinoza? Kant?

Neurons make decisions.

Consciousness is just a limited awareness of some of those decisions recently made. It's immediate term memory, useful in assessing the value of the last decision as an input into the next.

Lists of philosophers are not a rebuttal either.

The mind makes decisions.

It's immediate term memory, useful in assessing the value of the last decision as an input into the next. -

Fine. Really! For you, humans are machines.

Yes.

I'm a humanitarian. I think differently.

I'm a humanitarian. I very much doubt that you think differently from me; And I am certain that you don't know how I think, as you demonstrate that in your next sentences:

I think human beings are worth something.

I agree.

And it's because they care.

I agree.

Most of the humans I've known anyway.

Me too.

And I don't think they care because they've been programmed.

That depends on what you mean by 'programmed'.

They care because there is something inside them that compels them to care.

I agree.

I personally don't care what compels them to care, so long as they care.

Then why are you so upset about my claim that consciousness is simply immediate term memory, and that neurons make decisions that lead to those memories?

We probably don't disagree about a whole lot here???

We probably do - but you are inferring a lot of things that I do NOT agree with as somehow necessary consequences of what I said; And I don't agree that those are in fact necessary consequences or implications of my position.

Although if they were, that wouldn't alter the fact that argument from consequences is fallacious.

 

[WAB]

I should probably say, "I" would prefer to be referred to as a "she", just sayin...

 

[WAB]

Then why are you so upset about my claim that consciousness is simply immediate term memory, and that neurons make decisions that lead to those memories?

I don't know, or, I should say, I can't rightly say just now.

Gimme some time...

I'm an emotional and mental mess, and I could really use some love and help.

Maybe a mod can turn this into the support forum???????



God I really need help....

 

[ruby sparks]

Then why are you so upset about my claim that consciousness is simply immediate term memory, and that neurons make decisions that lead to those memories?

I don't know, or, I should say, I can't rightly say just now.

Gimme some time...

The world is just as beautiful and fascinating, perhaps even more so, without god as an explanation.

We could say something very similar about humans and free will, respectively.

Nothing is necessarily lost in either case. Something may in fact be gained in both.

 

[WAB]

I really need help, please help me.

 

[ruby sparks]

I really need help, please help me.

In what sense?

 

[WAB]

I really need help, please help me.

In what sense?

I want to die.

 

[ruby sparks]

I really need help, please help me.

In what sense?

I want to die.

I see you started a thread on that. I replied.

 

[Marvin Edwards]

I think there are two very different topics that can be discussed--neither of which are related to each other except that the term "free will" is used in both topics; there is the one I always default to which is post compatibilism while the other is precompatibilism. That last one has what I think of as having very dark overtones.

I associate any relevance to the brain's inner workings as belonging to the precompatibilist discussion. The darkness sets in with hard determinist views when pitted alongside postcompatibilist verbiage for reference.

I agree with you about the dark overtones. We normally view reliable cause and effect as a good thing. If I want to build a bird house, then I go to the store and get some wood, a saw, a hammer, and some nails. I use the saw to cut the wood into four walls, a roof, and a floor. I am able to cause the desired effect. I take my hammer and cause the nails to fasten the pieces together. Now I have what I wanted, a bird house!

Now, we take this beneficent notion of reliable cause and effect, and turn it into causal necessity. And we imbue causal necessity with the power to rob us of all our control and all of our freedom. Instead of the satisfaction of having built a bird house, we get the sense that causal necessity forced us to built it against our will. And we start wondering how we might be free of this monster we created.

The compatibilist's secret is to simply return to the view that reliable cause and effect enables us to do what we want to do. And this "ability to do what we want to do" also goes by the name "freedom".

 

[Marvin Edwards]

Not quite. You still have trouble wrapping your head around compatibilism, apparently because you equate "free" with "uncaused" rather than "unobstructed".

Actually, 'uncaused' would effectively be 'random'.

The future is where the real freedom lies.

Really? How?

Think about how we use the word "automaton". An automoton is a robot that always predictably performs the same actions under the same circumstances. It cannot change its behavior. It has no "free will". We are essentially automatons that can change our behavior to effect different future outcomes under the same circumstances. We do so to avoid punishment, pain, and grief. Or to achieve reward, pleasure, and happiness.

I think you are confusing 'very very complicated' with 'free'. At every point, everything is determined (barring random effects). It doesn't matter how complicated the decision 'algorithm' is. Given the past a machine (including a human one) would do exactly the same again if the same past were rerun. Or at least it appears there is no way to explain events otherwise. Determinism (barring random effects) rules, with an iron fist, it seems, and free will is not compatible with it. To say otherwise would arguably be an oxymoron.

And the issue isn't just 'free' but 'will' also. So 'free will' implies both. That's an even higher bar than 'free'. It implies conscious volition to enact the supposed freeness.

Compatibilism is, imo, essentially a dodge, or at best a (supposedly) pragmatic way to avoid what seems to be an inconvenient truth, one that you may still have trouble wrapping your head around (touche). I wouldn't have finished with that if you hadn't started with it.

Why would we need to be free of determinism? What we will inevitably do is exactly identical to us just being us, choosing what we choose, and doing what we do. That is not a meaningful constraint.