Free Will

DEATHPIGGIE · I'm fat and nobody likes me

RE: Free Will

Andy001 · Spaghetti

I was talking about my own statements of course. You clearly have a better grasp of the vocabularly.
Having said that, I do have to wonder somewhat about your basic position. Would I be correct in understanding it as follows? -
You believe in the existence of a human faculty, that of reasoning, which is material through and through, and tied directly to the neural states of the brain, yet at the same time is by it's very nature incapable of being explained in terms of any determinstic process, in direct oppostion to all other forms of matter.
I'm not saying such a state of affairs is impossible. There are times when I myself have been drawn to similar views. But can you at least admit there is something very odd, even miraculous about the facts happening to be this way?

DEATHPIGGIE · I'm fat and nobody likes me

Jason wrote:

DEATHPIGGIE wrote:

" Just because I don't believe in choice, doesn't mean I don't believe in choice. "

What we call "choice" may not be free. What determines one choice over another is the result of the structure of the neural network that is our brain. That structure is shaped through our experiences -- specifically, the feedback received after past action.

Please do not play word games. The reason what men do is GOOD or EVIL relies on their ability to make a decision.
Choice cannot be determined. I hate this compatabilist stuff.
Hard determinism destroys ethics. NOthing can be good or bad, wrong or right. There's really not anyway you can even assess what you are thinking is totally correct, since you were determined to think it not because of reason, but just because that is you.

Jason · Only in cartoons

Andy001 wrote:

However, I believe reasoning itself is a rule-governed process if any is; we talk about a choice following from a process of reasoning being the 'right' choice, for factors which are independent of it simply being what we arbitrarily opted for.

Good point. I would go even further to describe the entire brain as a logical system of boolean values.*

*boolean refers to a true/false expression, much like a neuron can have only one of two values -- it can fire or it can not fire.

DEATHPIGGIE · I'm fat and nobody likes me

Andy001 wrote:

I was talking about my own statements of course. You clearly have a better grasp of the vocabularly.
Having said that, I do have to wonder somewhat about your basic position. Would I be correct in understanding it as follows? -
You believe in the existence of a human faculty, that of reasoning, which is material through and through, and tied directly to the neural states of the brain, yet at the same time is by it's very nature incapable of being explained in terms of any determinstic process, in direct oppostion to all other forms of matter.
I'm not saying such a state of affairs is impossible. There are times when I myself have been drawn to similar views. But can you at least admit there is something very odd, even miraculous about the facts happening to be this way?

Your choice to reason affects your brain, affects your life. People are not free from the psychological implications of their choices.

I would say there is something beautiful about it, not miraculous. There is no such thing as a miracle.
Volition is really what creates beauty.

Andy001 · Spaghetti

Well at this stage I would tend to side with Jason and say there is something in me which is distrustful of the claim that any phenomena is inherently unexplainable, is inherently without rules. But perhaps that is itself a prejudice on my part.

Andy001 · Spaghetti

'Unexplainable' isn't a word, of course. I apologise.

DEATHPIGGIE · I'm fat and nobody likes me

I am not disagreeing that volition is unexplainable or without rules. I've never stated that. I came out against the idea that free will is some system that is without any confines. Humans are limited in certain actions. Sometimes the brain totally prevents men from choice in the cases of the retarded, the insane ETC.

Volition isn't some mystical state of mind. It is the result of some kind of materiali phenomena that I am not sure of, but that I am fairly sure science will figure out given they regard a proper philosophic outlook on things.

Jason · Only in cartoons

Andy001 wrote:

You believe in the existence of a human faculty, that of reasoning, which is material through and through, and tied directly to the neural states of the brain, yet at the same time is by it's very nature incapable of being explained in terms of any determinstic process, in direct oppostion to all other forms of matter.

I agree with everything in bold. I think human reasoning can be explained at the neural level, and I think the next 100 years will come with huge revelations in the field of cognitive science and thus the philosophy of mind.

I don't consider myself a "hard determinist," and I agree that such ideas are incompatible with ethical responsibility. I think we need to reconceptualize the faculties of reason and agency in a more enlightened way, and I expect the "hard determinist"/"free will" dichotomy will be discovered as a false dilemma to be replaced by something different. If I knew exactly what that view was, I would have a Nobel Prize by now.

These are my leanings, and I don't mean to voice them as certainly true. I am, in fact, very uncertain about these views because I'm having difficulty reconciling human agency with a brain that is essentially mindless.

-- Edited by Jason at 23:27, 2008-08-21

DEATHPIGGIE · I'm fat and nobody likes me

I think this is the first serious topic that has gone so long.

CONGRATULATIONS.

Or...Perhaps no congratulations, you filthy, determined bastards.

Andy001 · Spaghetti

That makes sense to me.
You know, I'm not sure that any us really disagree with each other, more than we are emphasizing different elements of the same picture.

Jason · Only in cartoons

Andy001 wrote:

You know, I'm not sure that any us really disagree with each other, more than we are emphasizing different elements of the same picture.

I think you're really onto something there. Imagine the spectrum of views concerning free will, with free will on one extreme and hard determinism on the other. The truth isn't somewhere in between the two views, but is outside the spectrum altogether. The truth, I think, is something that neither extreme would have thought of, but which is understandable by both sides.

Andy001 · Spaghetti

Serious sub-topic: do you consider reason and decision-making to be at root the same mental faculty, or do you consider them to be related but distinct?

Jason · Only in cartoons

Andy001 wrote:

Serious sub-topic: do you consider reason and decision-making to be at root the same mental faculty, or do you consider them to be related but distinct?

Same faculty, I think, but decision-making is one step further in the process. Anything that can be called a decision is reasoned. Instinctual reactions are not decisions in this sense, since they are not reasoned.

I could be wrong; I haven't studied this in depth.

-- Edited by Jason at 23:44, 2008-08-21

DEATHPIGGIE · I'm fat and nobody likes me

I'd agree with Jason.

Jason · Only in cartoons

h5!

SlashXLA · Senior Member

I genuinely believe that physics disproves the existence of free will. I dont like it, but its true.

MorisUkunRasik · World's Strongest Millionaire

really?

DEATHPIGGIE · I'm fat and nobody likes me

What do you mean, really? That's not an outlandish claim.

MorisUkunRasik · World's Strongest Millionaire

"really" doesn't automatically mean I'm poking fun or anything, I should have wrote something else now that I look at it, but I regret nothing