Free will, illusion of choice, it's all the same. It doesn't matter, just enjoy your life.
Personally, I believe in free will. Cogito ergo sum.
Personally, I believe in free will. Cogito ergo sum.
Yeah, I believe in some kind of pseudo-fate. Everything was set in motion billions of years ago, and everything that happens after that is going to happen as a result of that no matter what. All of your brain functions are based around pre-determined things. The only way things would be different at all is if some molecules flew off in other directions during the big bang.Zachary Amaranth said:Probably not. Everything was set in motion billions of years ago.
Which means I was inevitably going to post this.
Pudding.
Kittties.
Rainbow Brite.
>.>
I couldn't really say it any better so there it is. He's got a very novel take on it that I think makes a lot of sense.When human beings become agents through reflexive self-awareness, they express their agency by having reasons for acting, to which they assign weights. Choosing the dimensions of one's identity is a special case, in which the assigning of weight to a dimension is partly self-constitutive. But all acting for reasons is constitutive of the self in a broader sense, namely, by its shaping one's character and personality in a manner analogous to the shaping that law undergoes through the precedent set by earlier court decisions. Just as a judge does not merely apply the law but to some degree makes it through judicial discretion, so too a person does not merely discover weights but assigns them; one not only weighs reasons but also weights them. Set in train is a process of building a framework for future decisions that we are tentatively committed to.
The life-long process of self-definition in this broader sense is construed indeterministically by Nozick. The weighting is "up to us" in the sense that it is undetermined by antecedent causal factors, even though subsequent action is fully caused by the reasons one has accepted. He compares assigning weights in this deterministic sense to "the currently orthodox interpretation of quantum mechanics", following von Neumann in understanding a quantum mechanical system as in a superposition or probability mixture of states, which changes continuously in accordance with quantum mechanical equations of motion and discontinuously via measurement or observation that "collapses the wave packet" from a superposition to a particular state. Analogously, a person before decision has reasons without fixed weights: he is in a superposition of weights. The process of decision reduces the superposition to a particular state that causes action.
But--- if we have, in fact, no free will, then we must inevitably punish wrongdoing, as we have no choice in the matter. Do I choose to believe in the reality of choice, or am I forced to by Destiny? Or chemistry, or momentum, call it what you will. If free will exists, then I choose to believe that it does; if not, then I have to believe it does. I do agree that the question is useless because the answer doesn't affect anything, but it's a fun way to chase your thoughts in circles for a while.trooper6 said:I think in many ways, this question is not all that useful. Because we can never truly know the answer as this question is being debated (a billion years ago the big bang happened so it was inevitable that Debbie Gibson would become a pop star in the 1980s).
I'm a pretty practical person and think it is important to think through the implications of which position you are about to argue.
If you argue that there is no free will, that all of our actions are out of our control, then we can not then punish people for murder or crimes...because it wasn't them who did it, it was the big bang that caused those people to commit those crimes.
I think the idea that we have no control over our actions, including actions that oppress or harm other people, is socially dangerous...indeed anti-social.
Whether or not we have free will, I prefer to live in a society that believes in free will and also recognizes the effects of social environment on the possibilities we can inact our will upon. This allow us to do social justice work to try and improve the social environment of people to allow them more and better choices, but also gives us the ability to take action against members of our society making what we see as bad choices to rape, kill, rob, etc.
I don't want to live in a society where someone might walk up to me punch me in the face and say, "Sorry, I punched you in the face, it wasn't my fault, I had no choice but to do that. You know, the big bang."
The real question is, was it going to have landed that way before you threw it?BiscuitTrouser said:My only point would be, i can roll a dice, and physics can tell me where the dice will land if i can tell the force i applied. Just because i cant predict the dice does it mean that, from the second i threw it, it wasnt already going to land a certain way up? Prediction of an action and it being determined are seperate concepts.
While your biological and physical explanations are and for the most part fairly accurate, you seem to have a lot of dislike for randomness which is odd seeing how there are large portions of biology and chemistry that are completely random in nature.BiscuitTrouser said:SNIP