If free will doesn't exist...

[Fawlty]

Dan Dennett said that our not having free will is only true in about the same way that it's true that money isn't worth anything. If we're keeping it simple, that satisfies me well enough that I can go about my life as if I am free.

 

[EradiatedHaggis]

I’m not here to push Christianity, but their thinking system is more rational than one that says we have no free will. All of your questions about God there are answered by the bottom line that God gave everyone free will. It’s out of his hands from that moment, and the responsibility is ours.
How destructive can lefties get to be saying that we can’t control ourselves and aren’t responsible?
Well Holy Fuckin Christ!

Yet Religion teaches that God governs all things...His sovereign (decretive) will, His revealed (preceptive) will, and His dispositional will.

In the Bible, Jesus life was written down long before his birth. It was his "destiny" and throughout the religion there are prophecies. That indicates destiny, that all things are pre-determined, fate. All 3 major faiths have issues with this. In the Jewish faith there is Yachida, part of the soul that is united with God and only because of that we have free will...yet clearly we dont if the part of us that is one with God allows us to do something. In Christianity there is widespread disagreement on all freedoms depending on denomination. In Islam there is Jabr, Gods commanding power, and that overrides human will.

 

[Alcibiades007]

were you Predestined to type that response to me? or create this thread?

no, right? there's your answer my dude

Yes I was. I actually explained how all our decision making is just the sum of external factor applied to our specific genotype(neither of which was chosen by us) giving birth to unconsciousness electro chemical reaction at the neuronal level which manifest as our day to day actions giving the illusion of free will. Which is to say we are on auto-pilot.

If you have an argument to disprove that, I'd like to hear it.

 

[EradiatedHaggis]

Please read the posts I made ITT. Just because there is no free will doesn't mean you will not take action against people committing crimes. Like the lion analogy I made in post #5

I never said we wont, I indicated that you shouldnt and if you do, you are going against your own belief. After-all, if a person cannot choose to do something, and they do it and you punish them for it, you are punishing an innocent person.

 

[HunterSdVa29]

Yes I was. I actually explained how all our decision making is just the some of external factor applied to our specific genotype(neither of which was chosen by us) giving birth to unconsciousness electro chemical reaction at the neuronal level which manifest as our day to day actions giving the illusion of free will. Which is to say we are on auto-pilot.

If you have an argument to disprove that, I'd like to hear it.

That's more of an argument for psychological egoism IMO, or chasing appetites and avoiding aversions.

You literally created a thread though...nobody forced you, you can choose not to participate in this site, or just respond, or just read, but you went out of your way to create this thread. There was no external factor being applied to you.......Creating a thread isn't a reaction, but a deliberate act my dude

How do you explain Altruistic acts, also? Why would someone take a bullet for somebody, especially if it was an unconscious response?

 

[Swing]

Since you can't actually consciously perceive the constant auto-pilot mode that we operate in, you do actually have the burden of pondering on your ideologies and plans. Just to give a very vivid example of what actually trying to live(and consequentially fail) by the fact that free will doesn't exist is like think of the following chain of events:
You realize free will doesn't exist and you're on auto pilot, so you lay down on you bed with a very nihilistic mindset and simply let yourself be carried away by the "flow of things" since factually you're fate is decided. After a few hours(maybe days) you're body acts on it's own searching for food and water out of self preservation rendering the quitting attitude futile.

This is essentially the same thing with saying you don'y have to think anymore after you've discovered that free-will doesn't exist. You will have to do so automatically out of self preservation(and will be perceived as actual decision making in real time). The only advantage you gain is that you might be less rage-full at the people around you realizing that in most cases they are unlucky and not malevolent.

I never said that I don't have to think. I said that I can feel comfortable in my thought process without second guessing myself.

And no, I wouldn't have to react in any of the ways that you're describing. Just like not everyone's body would take over in search of food per your hypothetical. There are people who die from going on hunger strike, and there are people who just plain commit suicide. It's not possible for you to outline a chain of events that fits everyone (or everyone's supposed autopilot).

 

[Alcibiades007]

That's more of an argument for psychological egoism IMO, or chasing appetites and avoiding aversions.

You literally created a thread though...nobody forced you, you can choose not to participate in this site, or just respond, or just read, but you went out of your way to create this thread. There was no external factor being applied to you.......Creating a thread isn't a reaction, but a deliberate act my dude

The science is really simple but counter intuitive, i'll give you that. Yes, nobody forced me, but I was NEVER able to NOT make this thread the current state of the Universe. The very thought that lead me to open the thread was an electro chemical reaction born from my genotype being stimulated by the external factors(which includes lack of activity). Let's say I was bored and because I talked about this subject in the past, the sum of my experience led to this moment.

Let me give you a more palpable example. Charles Whitman was a infamous mass murderer. Upon his autopsy, medics found out that he had a brain tumor pressing on his amygdala, "a part of the brain related to anxiety and fight-or-flight response". Suddenly from a piece of shit human being who killed innocents willingly, we see an unlucky dude who never asked for this brain tumor. The reason everyone can see the exact cause-effect in this case is because a tumor is something very palpable and understandable. But if you could map the ENTIRE brain counting every synapse and all his memories, we could clearly see that EVERY misdeed he commits is cause by a micro "Charles Whitman tumor". Whether it's the deranged childhood or simply bad genetics(none of which were chosen by the individual).

 

[HunterSdVa29]

The science is really simple but counter intuitive, i'll give you that. Yes, nobody forced me, but I was NEVER able to NOT make this thread the current state of the Universe. The very thought that lead me to open the thread was an electro chemical reaction born from my genotype being stimulated by the external factors(which includes lack of activity). Let's say I was bored and because I talked about this subject in the past, the sum of my experience led to this moment.

Let me give you a more palpable example. Charles Whitman was a infamous mass murderer. Upon his autopsy, medics found out that he had a brain tumor pressing on his amygdala, "a part of the brain related to anxiety and fight-or-flight response". Suddenly from a piece of shit human being who killed innocents willingly, we see an unlucky dude who never asked for this brain tumor. The reason everyone can see the exact cause-effect in this case is because a tumor is something very palpable and understandable. But if you could map the ENTIRE brain counting every synapse and all his memories, we could clearly see that EVERY misdeed he commits is cause by a micro "Charles Whitman tumor". Whether it's the deranged childhood or simply bad genetics(none of which were chosen by the individual).

Just b/c you had poor genetics and bad impulse control, does not equate to you having to be a mass murderer though. Choices were made by that guy each and every day that led to his lifestyle.

Even today, you could have chosen to create a different thread out of boredom....you still made the conscious decision to do this. Creativity is essentially rendered nonexistent in your theory, which is odd IMO

 

[Alcibiades007]

I never said we wont, I indicated that you shouldnt and if you do, you are going against your own belief. After-all, if a person cannot choose to do something, and they do it and you punish them for it, you are punishing an innocent person.

No it's not contradictory as per my example... Did you even read it? Even if a lion is near you, you won't hate it thinking it's malevolent(exactly what my thread suggests) but you will take action to protect yourself and society against it, even killing it with no hard feelings thinking it was an asshole lion afterwards.

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

I think science has quite conclusively shown that there is no such thing as free will.

I saw there was a study suggesting it. Where's the proof?

 

[Alcibiades007]

I never said that I don't have to think. I said that I can feel comfortable in my thought process without second guessing myself.

And no, I wouldn't have to react in any of the ways that you're describing. Just like not everyone's body would take over in search of food per your hypothetical. There are people who die from going on hunger strike, and there are people who just plain commit suicide. It's not possible for you to outline a chain of events that fits everyone (or everyone's supposed autopilot).

The point wasn't to outline a chain of events that fits everyone. Just that it's perfectly compatible to draw wisdom from the knowledge of no free will and still carry on with your life mostly as usual.

Just b/c you had poor genetics and bad impulse control, does not equate to you having to be a mass murderer though. Choices were made by that guy each and every day that led to his lifestyle.

Even today, you could have chosen to create a different thread out of boredom....you still made the conscious decision to do this. Creativity is essentially rendered nonexistent in your theory, which is odd IMO

Creativity is still genetics+experience. Nothing more. Nothing metaphysical about it.

And it sort of "gives you licence"(not literally as you will still face consequences) since anyone would have done the same thing in that person's place. Take note that being in his shoes doesn't means just to take the baby you to live the exact same life. It also means the exact same genetics, which automatically leads to the same outcome.

 

[JDragon]

I saw there was a study suggesting it. Where's the proof?

There is an ample set of studies that shows your brain decides before the level of consciousness is reached. Not a psychologist, but the last time I discussed this with friends who are, this was considered a pretty robust finding.

Personally, I think we can accept that free will is an illusion and still continue to act like it isn't.

 

[Swing]

The point wasn't to outline a chain of events that fits everyone. Just that it's perfectly compatible to draw wisdom from the knowledge of no free will and still carry on with your life as usual.

Okay, but how does that prove we should be less judgmental based on there not being free will? For every hypothetical you come up with, it's easy to come up with a counter hypothetical.

Just because you want to claim that knowing about a lack of free will should make everyone less judgmental doesn't make it so. I've already told you how I would react, and it's not in the way you're describing.

 

[Overtures]

Nah, judgement is part of our worldview and informs our decisions free will or not.

I don't think free will is all that important. First, it's almost impossible to define. Second, if it's just the acceptance that things are predetermined by physical circumstances, it still doesn't change that "choice" is the foundation of just about everything: desire, passion, love, morality, etc.

Think of two conditions, in one room we have a bunch of people and poisonous ice cream. All we can do is watch. We can't interfere. So we watch helplessly as people gobble down ice cream and die.

That feeling of helplessness makes us sad, that we couldn't do anything to save these people - they were just predetermined to eat that ice cream.

In the second room, we have the same people and the same ice cream, but this time we can tell them it's poison. Now they don't eat it. Now we had control.

See how that works out? The discussion about free will is always a discussion about control and never a discussion about the fundamental order of things.

We're alive and self-aware, that's something which is truly fantastic.

 

[Andy Capp]

In either case you weren't making the decision. A thought is nothing more than a electro chemical reaction. And that reaction is the sum of only 2 things: 1.External factors 2.Your genetics. None of which were chosen by you to begin with. So basically all the actions and decisions you will ever make are just the product of the applied surrounding world on you genotype. Which is to say that from the moment you're born(even before that), you are on auto-pilot, but because we can't process that in real time, all the resulting actions we make are perceived as free will.

You might say this holds 99% only academical relevance but it's factual nonetheless.

It's the "all" element of this I have trouble with. I can't accept that 100% of ones behaviour is dictated by genetics and external factors. I understand and agree for lack of a better word, with the current scientific understanding, but I believe there's more to it than that. It's hard to articulate but suffice it to say, I think there's a fundamental interconnectedness that includes conscious thought processes.

 

[Andy Capp]

There is an ample set of studies that shows your brain decides before the level of consciousness is reached. Not a psychologist, but the last time I discussed this with friends who are, this was considered a pretty robust finding.

Personally, I think we can accept that free will is an illusion and still continue to act like it isn't.

Yeah, if that's true, acting like it's false is sort of a necessary aspect of a humane society. Psychological experiments show when subjects are primed to think about there being no free will, they're more likely to cheat in games and more likely to act selfishly when given a choice.

 

[HunterSdVa29]

if the brain decides before the level of consciousness is reached....what about indecisive people?

people in front of you in line that can't pick what to eat......

that's a dilemma, they have options, they are mulling them over (not reactionary merely), and then choose one or the other

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

There is an ample set of studies that shows your brain decides before the level of consciousness is reached. Not a psychologist, but the last time I discussed this with friends who are, this was considered a pretty robust finding.

Personally, I think we can accept that free will is an illusion and still continue to act like it isn't.

How do we know that what the brain "decides" isn't the result of previous conscious deliberation? Maybe we're just not rethinking everything every time.

 

[EradiatedHaggis]

No it's not contradictory as per my example... Did you even read it? Even if a lion is near you, you won't hate it thinking it's malevolent(exactly what my thread suggests) but you will take action to protect yourself and society against it, even killing it with no hard feelings thinking it was an asshole lion afterwards.

Your example does not work it has been used by intellectuals and shot down many times.

No free will for ALL indicates that you CANNOT choose to protect yourself or society...you have no free will to "take action". You do not get to play both sides by electing to hold onto either some moral or even a primal defense mechanism so society gets to continue on normally when tossing out will. Will is required for your example to be held up by a society.

 

[HunterSdVa29]

Your example does not work it has been used by intellectuals and shot down many times.

No free will for ALL indicates that you CANNOT choose to protect yourself or society...you have no free will to "take action". You do not get to play both sides by electing to hold onto either some moral or even a primal defense mechanism so society gets to continue on normally when tossing out will. Will is required for your example to be held up by a society.

well one CAN think that, that's what Compatibilists are

essentially some believe that even if you don't have true free will and Determinism (in some form) applies, there's still responsibility beared by the Actor due to previous actions and 'decisions' made. Even if you responded to some external force, perhaps you placed yourself in the place of that force so to speak IOW

I don't agree with it, but there are a lot of people that do