Is Free Will Possible?
- Thread starter Daden
- Start date
Recommended Videos
By your matter "particles" not being isolated "islands". Sure, you could argue that a sea ultimately only consists of waterdrops, or even go all the way to idiocy by resolving them down to.... conceptual points that have no size, but a density (mass) and... rotation, AND can be at multiple places at the same time. If logic were a person, i guess it would be hitting its head against a wall at that "point".Cuddly Razor said:
But what i really wanted to get at: Nice, so now you've gotten a nice tunnel view by setting your binoculars to maximum zoom.... problem is: You've lost view of the sea. And that sea is there. In fact, you cannot even observe your beloved "particles" without them being affected by everything else. No matter what you do, the model you come up with will not describe particles, but instead the behaviour of particles in a system. Sure, you can act "as if" it were a model about particles - one can claim anything - but that wont change that you never got information about particles. Everything was based on interactions on a fluid spectrum of scale.
Or to put it more simple:
1. Not looking at something, doesn't make that something stop to exist.
2. Microcosm and Macrocosm are not isolated from each other. You may choose to only look at one of both at a time, but what you see always will be the combined aspects of both. Or in short: Micro does not dominate Macro. Macro does not dominate Micro. Scale just is about scale - not about master/slave games.
3. The choice to think introverted - to adore points, to be obsessed with micro to the point, where it is implied that "god" is in the micro and commands macro around - has nothing to do with nature. It is plain arbitrary choice.
It's the same as what i said earlier: If you claim that micro and macro describe different "things", then you lack any evidence. But if you claim that both are just different scales of the same thing, then "macro defines micro" is just as valid, as "micro defines macro" *because both are the same thing".
P.S.: You may now say that even ignoring the micro/macro shism, it is evident that the world works according to certain mechanics, and that therefore peoples actions were "commanded" by those mechanics. This too however would again imply a false distinction: If "I" am not part of the "world mechanics", then there is no evidence - its just a claim. But if "I" am part of the "World", then I too am those "mechanics", and the "mechanics" are "I". There is no "who came first"... this implied dualism is a disfunctional invention that doesn't match observation.
What? We always have free will, it is what makes you YOU, I mean I chose to do everything in my life, and that led up to now!
Interesting responses all around! I wasn't expecting as much activity from the "It doesn't matter!" and "Both of you are wrong!" camps, so I'll add my thoughts on these.
It Doesn't Matter:
You're partially right, I think. The "perfect illusion" description was particularly apt because even if our actions are 100% predetermined by external and internal forces coming together, it sure FEELS like we are making choices.
Where we differ, though, is that the issue DOES matter to many people who make decisions that affect us, which can be problematic.
For example, fields like psychiatry and psychology have to fight upward battles to broaden the definition of addiction (even though they have met the burden of proof with scientific data) because some people (even professionals in the field) will not accept that behaviors other than drug use are determined by chemical processes in the same areas of the brain. People choose to throw all their money away gambling because they're stupid, right?
Further, every day, some politician riles up the masses by asserting their voters are good, hard-working folk while the poor are lazy parasites who feed off of the system. Situation and context are for intellectual elitists, of course!
Whether you agree with the above examples or not, I think you can see that the belief in free will at least affects you indirectly, and that it does matter.
You're Both Wrong:
This is a supernatural position, as you assert that cause and effect are simply illusory and beside the point. If cause and effect are illusions, though, all of science becomes null and void, as these concepts are at its very core.
Models, constructs, and theories- these are all gross oversimplifications of the mechanisms of an extremely complex universe; however, the likelihood that they are ultimately inaccurate does NOT diminish their utility.
Science isn?t a view, but, rather, a method. All theories are tentative but progressive, building upon previous discoveries and failures. Just because macro and micro scales are not easily reconciled does not mean they CANNOT be. Quite frankly, nitpicking areas where understanding in science is limited and then claiming that one?s thought experiment must be correct as a result is one of the oldest tricks in the anti-science book.
It Doesn't Matter:
You're partially right, I think. The "perfect illusion" description was particularly apt because even if our actions are 100% predetermined by external and internal forces coming together, it sure FEELS like we are making choices.
Where we differ, though, is that the issue DOES matter to many people who make decisions that affect us, which can be problematic.
For example, fields like psychiatry and psychology have to fight upward battles to broaden the definition of addiction (even though they have met the burden of proof with scientific data) because some people (even professionals in the field) will not accept that behaviors other than drug use are determined by chemical processes in the same areas of the brain. People choose to throw all their money away gambling because they're stupid, right?
Further, every day, some politician riles up the masses by asserting their voters are good, hard-working folk while the poor are lazy parasites who feed off of the system. Situation and context are for intellectual elitists, of course!
Whether you agree with the above examples or not, I think you can see that the belief in free will at least affects you indirectly, and that it does matter.
You're Both Wrong:
This is a supernatural position, as you assert that cause and effect are simply illusory and beside the point. If cause and effect are illusions, though, all of science becomes null and void, as these concepts are at its very core.
Models, constructs, and theories- these are all gross oversimplifications of the mechanisms of an extremely complex universe; however, the likelihood that they are ultimately inaccurate does NOT diminish their utility.
Science isn?t a view, but, rather, a method. All theories are tentative but progressive, building upon previous discoveries and failures. Just because macro and micro scales are not easily reconciled does not mean they CANNOT be. Quite frankly, nitpicking areas where understanding in science is limited and then claiming that one?s thought experiment must be correct as a result is one of the oldest tricks in the anti-science book.
Hey, what the fuck? I posted about this not a month ago and no one responded 
I see how it is... you guys are racist. Just cause I'm not a robot doesn't mean I can't have opinions!
OT: [small]I don't really care anymore, but...[/small] I agree completely with the OP. All the circumstances of the entire universe culminate to create every situation you'll ever be in and determine what decisions you'll make. The quantum mechanics thing, as I understand it, actually creates multiple universes with different outcomes. It doesn't have anything to do with what you "choose," in fact the universe still "chooses" for you, only it chooses all things possible all at once, and creates multiple realities for those choices to effect.
But I don't have any authority on the subject so... make of that what you will.
I see how it is... you guys are racist. Just cause I'm not a robot doesn't mean I can't have opinions!
OT: [small]I don't really care anymore, but...[/small] I agree completely with the OP. All the circumstances of the entire universe culminate to create every situation you'll ever be in and determine what decisions you'll make. The quantum mechanics thing, as I understand it, actually creates multiple universes with different outcomes. It doesn't have anything to do with what you "choose," in fact the universe still "chooses" for you, only it chooses all things possible all at once, and creates multiple realities for those choices to effect.
But I don't have any authority on the subject so... make of that what you will.
Yes, I could tell you you are a blooming idiota (British and spainish in 1 insult) for thinking we have no free will, but I won't because I choose to instead quote Redd Foxx, "You big dummy."
Yes, we have free will. Your brain is effected by many things which alter and influence your decision making, but in the end it is up to you to decide what you want. For example, when our corporate overlords decde to imbed a chip in everyone's hand, you have the choice to accept it like your parents and everyone else or deny it and maybe start a rebellion that will lead to a major war that destroys much of humanity but in the end you'll triumph over the evil powers and lead humanity away from corruption.
Yes, we have free will. Your brain is effected by many things which alter and influence your decision making, but in the end it is up to you to decide what you want. For example, when our corporate overlords decde to imbed a chip in everyone's hand, you have the choice to accept it like your parents and everyone else or deny it and maybe start a rebellion that will lead to a major war that destroys much of humanity but in the end you'll triumph over the evil powers and lead humanity away from corruption.
Ah, the old question - if people could do so many things, then why is it that certain things happen so often? If they happen so often, then it must be "commanded" by something else (who? Chemicals? You mean, they are not part of that person?).Daden said:
Hints towards a solution:
1. The amount of options a person has available, is not binary. Actually, pretty much every binary thing ever invented by humans is either a flat out lie, or an unintended illusion. Can anyone show me anything "ultimate"? Any totality as in "infinity"? Things like "everything" and "nothing"? No observations? "Nothing" at all? Well, i guess one nothingness exists after all
2. Follow up to 1.: So, having totalities off the table, what remains? Well, the entire spectrum in between. You can have more or less options. Things can be easier or harder for you. Thus, it can be more or less probable that you will do something. And in some cases, the probabilities can be made so high or so low, that the mentioned patterns appear - all without "totally" removing choice from you.
3. Now, lets say a certain doctrine is made popular among a species. Once it reaches a critical mass, it becomes self-amplifying: People believe something because everyone tells them so, so those people then too will tell everyone else that it is so. But people like options - also, humans for some reasons tend to consider the "opposite" to something first. Well, here's an idea: Let's create a doctrine, that tells you that you should behave like this and like that. But the doctrine is designed so that no matter if you follow it, or do the opposite, the desired result will happen anyways (So, you get two opposite options, but both actually lead to the same results). Now we've us the illusion of a choice, that secretly doesn't matter. How do you guess chances are like, that almost everyone infected by it won't notice the trick?
People like to blame such mechanics on some conspiracy controlled by a minority, but the fact is: Such mechanics do not need a conspiracy. Well, at least not a conspiracy as in "A cheats B". Instead, humans can just choose to cheat themselves. And this stuff able to spread like a virus: The same thing that allows humans to conserve knowledge and ideas over generations - culture - can just as well be used to conserve maximes and lies. Culture can be used to conserve understanding as well as to obscure it. Know the old saying? The best lies are those that one believes oneself.
What am i trying to get at? Well, my point is that culture can be just as powerful - and i'd say for evolutionary reasons even more powerful - than biology. You're wondering why some people gamble? What if i tell you that the entire modus-operandi of society is based on gambling? On trying to get a shortcut? On trying to invest only half, but get full? Go out and look around you: Everywhere you're encouraged to believe that someway there is a shortcut to something - a bargain.
Does that mean that people couldn't do otherwise? Is this "culture" and "society" someone else than people? Nope. It's just that with a horde of zombies singing themselves into a sleep, it can be VERY hard to do otherwise. You'll be a total outsider, and they'll try to make your life hell whenever they can. Thats why most people choose to give up that possibility very early on in their life. Once on that path, the longer they follow it, the harder a change of mind becomes - because that would mean to acknowledge, that everything you did until today was an error.