• Is free will possible, or are we always affect by some level of determinism
    354 replies, posted
[QUOTE=carcarcargo;43649894]If things are determined then there isn't free will, to have free will would mean that YOU were determining what was happening, not the world around you. As for the computer, the computer does make choices the same as a person would, its making those choices on the basis of what it has learned, same as a human does. It does not however have free will and its choices will be determined by what it has learned and its decision will not deviate from that.[/QUOTE] Computer doesn't have free will because it is not an agent because it does not have the phenomenon of choice making. Only the function. It does not see red, it only registers wavelengths. Qualia.
A computer can have a qualia if it is capable of having one
[QUOTE=Zenreon117;43650011] What is ME if not a package constructed by causal agents. A package which now has something commonly refered to by everyone as a "Will". A set of actions given circumstance.[/QUOTE] That's still not free will though, what you do is a set of action but is purely made up from experience and conditioning, which of course came from out of you. [editline]24th January 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=Zenreon117;43650034]Computer doesn't have free will because it is not an agent because it does not have the phenomenon of choice making. Only the function. It does not see red, it only registers wavelengths. Qualia.[/QUOTE] It can see red if you give it the equipment to see red. I mean you could say all the eye sees is wavelengths because thats exactly what the eye does, and you can make a computer do exactly the same as the eye.
[QUOTE=carcarcargo;43650053]That's still not free will though, what you do is a set of action but is purely made up from experience and conditioning, which of course came from out of you.[/QUOTE] No, what I do is a result of my will combined with circumstance. My will, which is constructed by condition and experience and DNA and whatever else you would like to concieve of, is being expressed freely when the thing which I output reflects the intention. If I wish to walk left, but I am being dragged right by two burly men, my will is being infringed upon, it is being restricted as I can no longer act according to it.
I'm not a coder but I think depending on the program a computer could end up analyzing and weighing a lot of different options before spitting something out much like a person. Also, your free will definition still confuses me and I don't even know why anyone would call it that, but if that's the definition you're gonna go with then I agree that it exists. By the definition of free will that a person has some kind of control over their actions and does not just have the sensation of control, then it doesn't make sense.
You guys don't understand, there is a difference between sensing red and seeing red. You can know red is there, but if you can't experience qualia as humans do, then you will never know what it LOOKS like.
[QUOTE=Zenreon117;43650082]No, what I do is a result of my will combined with circumstance. My will, which is constructed by condition and experience and DNA and whatever else you would like to concieve of, is being expressed freely when the thing which I output reflects the intention. If I wish to walk left, but I am being dragged right by two burly men, my will is being infringed upon, it is being restricted as I can no longer act according to it.[/QUOTE] I don't see how any of that proves free will, all of that is still deterministic, if its deterministic then it was not because of the "will" (whatever that actually is) but because that is how their actions were determined to be.
[QUOTE=Zenreon117;43650093]You guys don't understand, there is a difference between sensing red and seeing red. You can know red is there, but if you can't experience qualia as humans do, then you will never know what it LOOKS like.[/QUOTE] But one could conceivably build a machine that emulates or simulates a human brain, and it would have as much of a claim to "free will" as any of us.
[QUOTE=Zenreon117;43650093]You guys don't understand, there is a difference between sensing red and seeing red. You can know red is there, but if you can't experience qualia as humans do, then you will never know what it LOOKS like.[/QUOTE] No sensing red and seeing red are exactly the same, your eyes are sensors and sense red, and thus you see red. A computer can do the exact same thing, it senses red and thus sees red Even still this is more on the subject of consciousness than free will
[QUOTE=carcarcargo;43650123]I don't see how any of that proves free will, all of that is still deterministic, if its deterministic then it was not because of the "will" (whatever that actually is) but because that is how their actions were determined to be.[/QUOTE] You just don't get it do you.... Causal Forces > Your will > Your actions I am not denying the determinism isn't in play, I am saying that it doesn't matter because it is compatible with free-will. Free will is the freedom to what one wills, it is not to will what one wills for that is non-sensical. [editline]23rd January 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=carcarcargo;43650133]No sensing red and seeing red are exactly the same, your eyes are sensors and sense red, and thus you see red. A computer can do the exact same thing, it senses red and thus sees red Even still this is more on the subject of consciousness than free will[/QUOTE] Why should we divorce the two? I fundamentally disagree though. To see red as you and I do, in a field of vision and to understand that as a picture, is fundamentally different than to light up when the wavelength red is coming from vectors 4 through 12.
[QUOTE=carcarcargo;43650123]I don't see how any of that proves free will, all of that is still deterministic, if its deterministic then it was not because of the "will" (whatever that actually is) but because that is how their actions were determined to be.[/QUOTE] So you're saying because someone else was "determined" (ergo they had no free-will of their own) to drag you away that means you have no free-will when you don't want to comply and go a different way? Zenereon117 is correct here, your free-will is being infringed in that case.
No. Your will is being infringed upon. Not your "free" will, just your will, just your output is being denied. This is a situation like any other. You have no free will, you have a will, but it is not free, and outside forces are impinging on it. Yes your will is being stopped by outside forces but your decision to go left in the first place was not YOUR decision. [editline]23rd January 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=Zenreon117;43650158]You just don't get it do you.... Causal Forces > Your will > Your actions I am not denying the determinism isn't in play, I am saying that it doesn't matter because it is compatible with free-will. Free will is the freedom to what one wills, it is not to will what one wills for that is non-sensical. [editline]23rd January 2014[/editline] Why should we divorce the two? I fundamentally disagree though. To see red as you and I do, in a field of vision and to understand that as a picture, is fundamentally different than to light up when the wavelength red is coming from vectors 4 through 12.[/QUOTE] It's only difference because your qualia is telling you your definition is better than a computers where as a computer who can "see" the red and "look" at the red may disagree with you on what red is, but you're human so you'll consider it inferior to your own opinion
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;43650238]No. Your will is being infringed upon. Not your "free" will, just your will, just your output is being denied. This is a situation like any other. You have no free will, you have a will, but it is not free, and outside forces are impinging on it. Yes your will is being stopped by outside forces but your decision to go left in the first place was not YOUR decision.[/quote] No, a will is a want, a need. It's like being hungry- getting food is a will, what sort of food you get is down to free-will though, because at the end of the day it matters not which substance you choose to consume, your body won't feel hunger afterwards.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;43650238]No. Your will is being infringed upon. Not your "free" will, just your will, just your output is being denied. This is a situation like any other. You have no free will, you have a will, but it is not free, and outside forces are impinging on it. Yes your will is being stopped by outside forces but your decision to go left in the first place was not YOUR decision. [/QUOTE] No, if it was just your will being infringed upon then someone or something would literally be changing your personal identity in such a way that it causes you to change what you want. Determinism could be said to be infringing one's will by changing it gradually, and in fact even creating it, but that doesn't speak to the fact that when we speak about someone being unduly coerced we are referring to a situational occurance which is not allowing that which the agents would will under normal circumstance. My point about qualia is that terms like free will only apply to larger complex things like a personal identity. Certain things don't scale down. To illustrate this point let me ask you this; Can a biological cell commit a crime?
[QUOTE=ViralHatred;43650297]No, a will is a want, a need. It's like being hungry- getting food is a will, what sort of food you get is down to free-will though, because at the end of the day it matters not which substance you choose to consume, your body won't feel hunger afterwards.[/QUOTE] Why is it free will that you want pizza over say chinese food? How is that not controlled by a chemical reaction? How are you in control of that chemical reaction? You never responded to my other post. A will is an intent to do an action. A will is not determined by a choice. It is determined by your software, by your input. A will is your output. You do not have "free" will as there is no choice in what this will will be.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;43650326]Why is it free will that you want pizza over say chinese food? How is that not controlled by a chemical reaction? How are you in control of that chemical reaction? You never responded to my other post. A will is an intent to do an action. A will is not determined by a choice. It is determined by your software, by your input. A will is your output. You do not have "free" will as there is no choice in what this will will be.[/QUOTE] It is not free will that he wants pizza more than chinese food. It is just the will. Free will is him expressing that will without being unduly coerced. The will is the conglomeration of actions given any circumstance. It is this which collectively constitutes personal identity.
[QUOTE=Zenreon117;43650318]No, if it was just your will being infringed upon then someone or something would literally be changing your personal identity in such a way that it causes you to change what you want. [/QUOTE] How do you figure? Your free will is impigned upon, and it's only impinging on that, but your "will" is fought and that becomes who you are being manipulated? No, I'm sorry, this sounds like you're twisting my words and not listening to me. [QUOTE]Determinism could be said to be infringing one's will by changing it gradually, and in fact even creating it, but that doesn't speak to the fact that when we speak about someone being unduly coerced we are referring to a situational occurance which is not allowing that which the agents would will under normal circumstance.[/QUOTE] But how did it come to exist in the first place if it didn't follow the rules of a determinist world? You make the brain and mind sound like a magical area that can deny determinism. It can't. It isn't. [QUOTE]My point about qualia is that terms like free will only apply to larger complex things like a personal identity. Certain things don't scale down. To illustrate this point let me ask you this; Can a biological cell commit a crime?[/QUOTE] Uh okay but that doesn't matter because I'm not talking about that. Qualia is your "how it feels" to you moment in your brain chemistry. You are saying this is somehow unique to beings with "free will". But I don't see why that is. I don't actually understand that supposition at all as qualia is just a result of an individual system undergoing causal changes [editline]23rd January 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=Zenreon117;43650339]It is not free will that he wants pizza more than chinese food. It is just the will. Free will is him expressing that will without being unduly coerced. The will is the conglomeration of actions given any circumstance. It is this which collectively constitutes personal identity.[/QUOTE] Him expressing that is an expression of physical determinist events? How did he "choose" what brain chemistry would be present at the time.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;43650326]Why is it free will that you want pizza over say chinese food? How is that not controlled by a chemical reaction? How are you in control of that chemical reaction? You never responded to my other post. A will is an intent to do an action. A will is not determined by a choice. It is determined by your software, by your input. A will is your output. You do not have "free" will as there is no choice in what this will will be.[/QUOTE] No if I want or in this case have a will for pizza that doesn't mean I will get pizza. My free-will allows me to exercise control. I may want pizza in general but I can choose the toppings for it, I can compromise, I can choose to go somewhere else and make do with a different meal if the pizza place is too far away or I'm too hungry or feel like a scrooge if I deem it not worth the money. Yes there are other factors at work, but generally you don't analyse all factors fully. "oh this pizza is expensive" I don't think about how that's going to affect my rent in two weeks time, I'm not a computer. I just look at the fact it means I won't be able to buy a drink after this pizza or catch a bus home. I might then decide to walk to the kebab shop round the corner and get a kebab for half the cost. It may not be pizza but I also just got the drink I also had a want for and enough change to catch the bus home.
you're getting the idea of choice and options confused for your ability to choose things specifically... [editline]23rd January 2014[/editline] I mean I guess the brain is magic to you or some shit.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;43650360] Him expressing that is an expression of physical determinist events? How did he "choose" what brain chemistry would be present at the time.[/QUOTE] I think everything can be responded to by answering this; He didn't choose what brain chemistry is present at the time. He is the brain chemistry present at the time, and so the only thing it makes sense to talk about being free is his expression of that will which constitutes himself. I am not saying anything is free from determinism, I am saying that free will is a phrase used to talk about the phenomenological entity we call a person, because that person has something he wills, he is either free or not free to act upon it. [editline]23rd January 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=HumanAbyss;43650412] I mean I guess the brain is magic to you or some shit.[/QUOTE] Please don't be condescending.
Then when you discuss free will, you are not discussing the conventional concept of free will and instead discussing the experiential effects of a person and their ability to retain things. [editline]23rd January 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=Zenreon117;43650423] Please don't be condescending.[/QUOTE] His representation of perception basically requires the nullification of what we know about brain chemistry, the universe itself, and the entire concept of cause and effect. So maybe I shouldn't be condescending, but I should get an answer to the questions I ask rather than have what I ask ignored to be written over with things that I've already argued about.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;43650437]Then when you discuss free will, you are not discussing the conventional concept of free will and instead discussing the experiential effects of a person and their ability to retain things.[/QUOTE] The concept of free-will is that a person can decide what they want to do based on their own life experiences and thoughts, and while the choices may be offered to them they are free to ignore those offered before them and make their own. Decisions are made on the fly they are not made beforehand. Try this: If people don't have free-will why do they experience regret? It's not their fault, they had no power to change events at all, it was all pre-determined. p.s. if you hadn't noticed I'm ignoring your earlier post and putting an effect onto you in this case you're displaying an emotional response Look I'm shouting at the beaker.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;43650437]Then when you discuss free will, you are not discussing the conventional concept of free will and instead discussing the experiential effects of a person and their ability to retain things.[/QUOTE] Who dictates the conventional concept of free will? Alot of philosophers these days are compatabilists, and we define free will how we think we should. Free will isn't something like 'dog' that can be clearly shown to be defined falsely or truly, free will is a phrase like any other that people throw around without thinking about it, and when pressed for an answer we can either say the obvious and work with that or nit pick it until what you are talking about isn't even relevant to the macroscopic scale you should be referring to. Let me ask you; What is justice? What is good? Who is God? If your tendency is to go to the dictionary to find the answer instead of thinking for yourself then I give you my pity.
[QUOTE=ViralHatred;43650473]The concept of free-will is that a person can decide what they want to do based on their own life experiences and thoughts, and while the choices may be offered to them they are free to ignore those offered before them and make their own. Decisions are made on the fly they are not made beforehand. Try this: If people don't have free-will why do they experience regret? It's not their fault, they had no power to change events at all, it was all pre-determined.[/QUOTE] Because their brain chemistry tells them to go through an emotion? I don't see how the presence of emotions trumps the lack of ability to change the very basis of the chemistry and physics in your brain because you so will it. All you are is an assemblage of parts and pieces that happen to end up self aware, go through experiences and be imprinted by these experiences. The result of all your outputs are a result of all the various inputs you've had previously. Answer me this, if I drop a ball, will it fall to the ground? Yes. Yes it will.
[QUOTE=ViralHatred;43650473] Decisions are made on the fly they are not made beforehand. [/QUOTE] It may be true that they are made on the fly, but they follow the laws of physics and so can be predicted beforehand (given enough omniscience), at least if we are to grant brain chemistry to our hard-determinist fellow. The thing is that doesn't change the fact that the action of making a choice is still being gone through, and it is indeed you who is being talked about when we say the choice was made.
[QUOTE=Zenreon117;43650479]Who dictates the conventional concept of free will? Alot of philosophers these days are compatabilists, and we define free will how we think we should. Free will isn't something like 'dog' that can be clearly shown to be defined falsely or truly, free will is a phrase like any other that people throw around without thinking about it, and when pressed for an answer we can either say the obvious and work with that or nit pick it until what you are talking about isn't even relevant to the macroscopic scale you should be referring to. Let me ask you; What is justice? What is good? Who is God? If your tendency is to go to the dictionary to find the answer instead of thinking for yourself then I give you my pity.[/QUOTE] And who's being condescending now? No the conventional idea I speak of is the mainstream version of free will disucssed in many philosophy classes in the intro stages. Yes, philosophers regularly redefine terms to their own devices. What is justice? The balancing of a scale. What is good? Everything that I like. Why must I believe in god? You think for yourself as much as I do. None.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;43650491] Answer me this, if I drop a ball, will it fall to the ground? Yes. Yes it will.[/QUOTE] Let me ask you this; Can I intelligibly talk about a ball making a choice to fall or jump(bounce)? It is agents that we are talking about when we talk about choices, and choices aren't big bangs, they are influenced by circumstance, otherwise to say a choice is made would be nonsensical.
[QUOTE=Zenreon117;43650530]Let me ask you this; Can I intelligibly talk about a ball making a choice to fall or jump(bounce)? It is agents that we are talking about when we talk about choices, and choices aren't big bangs, they are influenced by circumstance, otherwise to say a choice is made would be nonsensical.[/QUOTE] So does this choice and ability to choose inside your brain exist in a different reality than the one we exist in where events are determined by causation, and not wills?
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;43650504] No the conventional idea I speak of is the mainstream version of free will disucssed in many philosophy classes in the intro stages. Yes, philosophers regularly redefine terms to their own devices. [/QUOTE] You must've had a bad philosophy prof if he didn't cover compatibilism.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;43650538]So does this choice and ability to choose inside your brain exist in a different reality than the one we exist in where events are determined by causation, and not wills?[/QUOTE] No, because determination by causation isn't incompatible with a will being or not being able to express itself freely.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.