What is the actual free will humans have?

[Speakpigeon]

This is (I think) the guy to go to...

Yes, thanks. Very good example of somebody shooting at a dead cat.

It's significant here that it should be a religious guy personifying the wrongness in the idea of free will.

Except that, personally, I don't think that it's the same idea that most people have of free will. Instead, I think most people take free will to be something they experience in the course of their daily life. People have to make choices nobody will make for them. That is must be something within their brain that computes their choice is irrelevant because their brain is an integral part of themselves so the choice they make is still their choice.
EB

 

[Speakpigeon]

They're both talking about what we might call ultimate or actual free will, the sort that most people in the street (ie outside of philosophy) seem to think they have.

I think you're wrong. Most people think they have free will, or what is in effect a particular view of free will. What is usually discussed, however, is something very different, which is a sort of idealised version of our actual free will, mostly concocted by Christian ideologues and seized upon by their opponents as something to oppose.
EB

 

[ruby sparks]

They're both talking about what we might call ultimate or actual free will, the sort that most people in the street (ie outside of philosophy) seem to think they have.

I think you're wrong. Most people think they have free will, or what is in effect a particular view of free will. What is usually discussed, however, is something very different, which is a sort of idealised version of our actual free will, mostly concocted by Christian ideologues and seized upon by their opponents as something to oppose.
EB

Whilst it may be true that many of our notions of free will are saturated with religious influences, I think it is more likely the case that religions notions are a manifestation of a psychological tendency rather than being the cause of our basic underlying ideas of free will. I think you are putting the cart before the horse.

I must admit, in all my years of discussing free will, I haven't, I don't think, come across too many people bringing religion ideas in. I do think that's a slightly separate issue.

 

[Speakpigeon]

traditional free will is the capacity to freely and willingly (ie with will) choose to do otherwise in the same situation.

Yes, I'm not sure circularity around the idea of freedom helps very much.

You could have tried to be more explicit, I think.

Even better, if you could provide a definition that would best express the kind of free will you take to be what most people believe they have.

Or, is this one good enough, do you think?
EB

 

[ruby sparks]

This is (I think) the guy to go to...

Yes, thanks. Very good example of somebody shooting at a dead cat.

It's significant here that it should be a religious guy personifying the wrongness in the idea of free will.

Except that, personally, I don't think that it's the same idea that most people have of free will. Instead, I think most people take free will to be something they experience in the course of their daily life. People have to make choices nobody will make for them. That is must be something within their brain that computes their choice is irrelevant because their brain is an integral part of themselves so the choice they make is still their choice.
EB

None of that computes for me.

Sam Harris is an atheist?

The cat is not dead (see survey data in Jerry Coyne's video which suggests a cross-cultural belief in the sort of free will that the cat has).

Brain processes are not irrelevant. How could they be? For starters, most of them are non-conscious. How do people integrate those into a sense of self?

 

[ruby sparks]

traditional free will is the capacity to freely and willingly (ie with will) choose to do otherwise in the same situation.

Yes, I'm not sure circularity around the idea of freedom helps very much.

You could have tried to be more explicit, I think.

Even better, if you could provide a definition that would best express the kind of free will you take to be what most people believe they have.

Or, is this one good enough, do you think?
EB

I'm fairly good with Jerry Coyne's definition too. Though I like mine better. See also the survey results Jerry Coyne presents.

Also Schopenhauer: A man can do what he wills but not will what he wills. You can't create your own will.

 

[Speakpigeon]

Whilst it may be true that many of our notions of free will are saturated with religious influences, I think it is more likely the case that religions notions are a manifestation of a psychological tendency rather than being the cause of our basic underlying ideas of free will.

You could make the same argument about God and yet the Christian God is a good example of a concept most people would not have the time nor the inclination to construct on their own. So, yes, religious concepts starts from ordinary ideas but then they take a life of their own, probably for the same reasons that mathematical concepts are developed by mathematicians way beyond what most people could possibly understand.
EB

 

[ruby sparks]

http://dingo.sbs.arizona.edu/~snichols/Papers/Is_Belief_in_Free_will_a_Cultural_Universal

A relatively small study, it must be said.

 

[Speakpigeon]

The cat is not dead (see survey data in Jerry Coyne's video which suggests a cross-cultural belief in the sort of free will that the cat has).

Thanks, I have my own data through my experience of life talking to real people.

Brain processes are not irrelevant.

I didn't say they were. You just misunderstood what I said.
EB

 

[ruby sparks]

Whilst it may be true that many of our notions of free will are saturated with religious influences, I think it is more likely the case that religions notions are a manifestation of a psychological tendency rather than being the cause of our basic underlying ideas of free will.

You could make the same argument about God and yet the Christian God is a good example of a concept most people would not have the time nor the inclination to construct on their own. So, yes, religious concepts starts from ordinary ideas but then they take a life of their own, probably for the same reasons that mathematical concepts are developed by mathematicians way beyond what most people could possibly understand.
EB

Yes, and while I think it's ok to say that for a lot of people, ideas of free will are filtered through religion, I think that the basic psychologies can be detached and beliefs in free will can (arguably should) be studied fairly independently of that.

Also worth noting the cultural and religious variations (between, say, Christian and Buddhist ideas).

 

[Speakpigeon]

A relatively small study, it must be said.

I think you haven't tried to understand what I am saying.
EB

 

[ruby sparks]

Thanks, I have my own data through my experience of life talking to real people.

The plural of anecdote is not data.

- - - Updated - - -

A relatively small study, it must be said.

I think you haven't tried to understand what I am saying.
EB

No, I have tried. That said, it's possible I haven't understood. What are you saying?

 

[Speakpigeon]

I like mine better.

Ok, I'll take this one.

Also Schopenhauer: A man can do what he wills but not will what he wills. You can't create your own will.

Exactly. Most people are like Schopenhauer, they don't think they could will what they will. That's it in a nutshell.
EB

- - - Updated - - -

What are you saying?

I already said it if you care to read again.
EB

 

[Speakpigeon]

The plural of anecdote is not data.

It's not anecdote. It's experience. And it's data all right.

And I have no data whatsoever on the value of other people's studies.
EB

 

[Speakpigeon]

Also worth noting the cultural and religious variations (between, say, Christian and Buddhist ideas).

Precisely, while I believe most people have basically the same sense of free will throughout the world, give or take the influence of their religious belief in how they may choose to express these basic beliefs.
EB

 

[ruby sparks]

Also worth noting the cultural and religious variations (between, say, Christian and Buddhist ideas).

Precisely, while I believe most people have basically the same sense of free will throughout the world, give or take the influence of their religious belief in how they may choose to express these basic beliefs.
EB

Good. We agree on something.

I might say similar rather than same, but basically I agree.

- - - Updated - - -

Exactly. Most people are like Schopenhauer, they don't think they could will what they will. That's it in a nutshell.
EB

No. Most people DO seem to think that they can (freely) will what they will. Schopenhauer, like a lot of other philosophers, was countering the commonly-held belief.

 

[Speakpigeon]

No. Most people DO seem to think that they can (freely) will what they will. Schopenhauer, like a lot of other philosophers, was countering the commonly-held belief.

That's quite the story.
EB

 

[ruby sparks]

No. Most people DO seem to think that they can (freely) will what they will. Schopenhauer, like a lot of other philosophers, was countering the commonly-held belief.

That's quite the story.
EB

Whatever. I think he was. It is actually largely irrelevant whether Schoppers himself was explicitly countering this or that. Many philosophers, scientists and others have been.

 

[Speakpigeon]

Many philosophers, scientists and others have been.

Sure, and this thread is not about philosophers' views.

I'm interested in the views of TFT members here, if they have any.
EB

 

[ruby sparks]

Many philosophers, scientists and others have been.

Sure, and this thread is not about philosophers' views.

I'm interested in the views of TFT members here, if they have any.
EB

Fair enough, but I was responding to your view specifically.

It seems to me that you just take free will at face value. If it feels like it in you or looks like it from a distance in others, it is, or something.

I would not go along with that.