Does Free Will Exist?

[AGSniper]

There's a debate that's been constantly talked about. That is, is there such thing as free will?

 

What is free will? Free will is the ability for us humans to make our own decisions based on analysis of the event. Does it exist?

 

Or is it a specially set chemically formula within our own brain triggered my certain stimuli meaning we don't have free will?

 

If we do have free will. How is it that we are able to control our own decisions based on events?

 

Post your opinions here, and let's try to keep religion out of this. Pure science all the way.

[ydoaPs]

Free will is the ability for us humans to make our own decisions based on analysis of the event. Does it exist?

 

Or is it a specially set chemically formula within our own brain triggered my certain stimuli meaning we don't have free will?

 

Not mutually exclusive

[bascule]

Not mutually exclusive

 

Yes, specifically functionalism covers the first scenario you describe while not being incompatible with the second.

[The Silent One]

There's a debate that's been constantly talked about. That is, is there such thing as free will?

 

If we do have free will. How is it that we are able to control our own decisions based on events?

 

In this case we have to consider which concept of free will we are talking about here, as it is still in heavy debate as to what the actual concept is.

Edited May 26, 2009 by The Silent One

[AGSniper]

Well Free will as in you are in charge of analyzing and deciding what YOU want to do and not some stimuli or chemical reaction that occurs within your own brain.

[ydoaPs]

Well Free will as in you are in charge of analyzing and deciding what YOU want to do and not some stimuli or chemical reaction that occurs within your own brain.

 

Again, these are not mutually exclusive. Free will is not necessarily magic. In fact, any functional model of free will depends upon determinism. The chemical reactions are how "you" do the "deciding".

[MM6]

Considering all the constraints and inputs/outputs and automatic responses I don't think the concept of free will is valid. I'm not even sure what use it has as a concept. Same with consciousness, which is inseparable from free will.

[J.C.MacSwell]

I definitely will say for a fact that I have free will. (not that I have any choice in the matter )

[scrappy]

I definitely will say for a fact that I have free will. (not that I have any choice in the matter )

Made me chuckle. This reminds me of what my old philosophy prof used to argue: "There is no un-freedom in not being able to do what you do not wish to do."

 

So, if all you can ever do is only what you want to do, is that freedom and free will? Or is that absolute imprisonment in your desires?

[Improvision]

There's a debate that's been constantly talked about. That is, is there such thing as free will?

 

What is free will? Free will is the ability for us humans to make our own decisions based on analysis of the event. Does it exist?

 

Or is it a specially set chemically formula within our own brain triggered my certain stimuli meaning we don't have free will?

 

If we do have free will. How is it that we are able to control our own decisions based on events?

 

Post your opinions here, and let's try to keep religion out of this. Pure science all the way.

You have free will, when YOUR mind is allowed to make its own decision. If your mind is forced to make the choice that the mind of another person dictates with the threat or use of force, then you as an individual person do not have free will.

 

Whether you want to call it chemical reactions or whatever, YOU have your own thoughts about things and you would act based on those thoughts if allowed.

[Kyrisch]

You have free will, when YOUR mind is allowed to make its own decision. If your mind is forced to make the choice that the mind of another person dictates with the threat or use of force, then you as an individual person do not have free will.

 

Whether you want to call it chemical reactions or whatever, YOU have your own thoughts about things and you would act based on those thoughts if allowed.

 

But this hearkens back to a question of identity. Your repetition works so long as you have a workable definition for "YOU" -- which you do not. Is a person the mental construct which dictates their actions? Or is a person just a bunch of cells? In the former case, an argument can be made for free will, whereas in the latter no such argument is tenable. Further, the mental construct which dictates an individual's actions is an emergent result of the physical and chemical structure of the cells which make up the individual. As such, while YOU (your 'mind', let's say) decide(s) whether or not to direct your body to do an action, if the process which leads to that decision is unconscious then there is no free will. Or would you say that every computer program that encounters and resolves an if-else statement has free will?

[Improvision]

But this hearkens back to a question of identity. Your repetition works so long as you have a workable definition for "YOU" -- which you do not. Is a person the mental construct which dictates their actions? Or is a person just a bunch of cells? In the former case, an argument can be made for free will, whereas in the latter no such argument is tenable. Further, the mental construct which dictates an individual's actions is an emergent result of the physical and chemical structure of the cells which make up the individual. As such, while YOU (your 'mind', let's say) decide(s) whether or not to direct your body to do an action, if the process which leads to that decision is unconscious then there is no free will. Or would you say that every computer program that encounters and resolves an if-else statement has free will?

The process of thinking is YOUR own individual process.

 

You don't have control of who you are and how you think, but it is YOU regardless. You can control your thoughts anyways, that is how we learn from mistakes. You do something you think is good, and when it turns out bad you change your thinking.

[padren]

If the question is between either free will or determinism then determinism wins. Our choices are the result of natural laws interacting with the components of our individual systems and the environment.

 

However, from our perspective we appear to have free will. When we contemplate many options, we always choose the best one - even if we think we are choosing a poor option, we are simply failing to understand the totality of our choosing process.

When we try to use 'creativity' to pull out a 'very random option' to feel like we have free will - we are simply utilizing the black-box of our subconscious to do the heavy lifting in the selection process, so as to hide the predictability from ourselves and fool ourselves into feeling like we are capable of more than choosing the best option possible.

 

 

I consider the idea of metaphysical free will to be dead, but subjective free will to exist as it has a much narrower definition. We can't know our own processes fully, and we will always contemplate choices from our subjective perspective in which we fully appear to have free will, even if it is not true in the objective sense.

[ydoaPs]

If the question is between either free will or determinism then determinism wins.

 

That, my friends, is what we call a false dichotomy.

[Glider]

I don't think so. The statement "If the question is between either free will or determinism then determinism wins. is conditional. The statement 'IF it is between A and B then B wins' is not the same as saying 'the choice IS between A and B'.

[Baby Astronaut]

I don't think so. The statement "If the question is between either free will or determinism then determinism wins. is conditional. The statement 'IF it is between A and B then B wins' is not the same as saying 'the choice IS between A and B'.

Ok, if the question isn't between determinism and free will, then maybe someone can tell us what the actual question is?

[Glider]

Well, there are mid-point arguments, for example, the idea of reciprocal determinism which is one of the central priciples in Health Psychology. This is the principle that we are both producers and products of our environment. Environment does, to a large degree, determine behaviour. However, we maintain 'executive control' (i.e. we can override primary behavioural urges).

[Sisyphus]

Ok, if the question isn't between determinism and free will, then maybe someone can tell us what the actual question is?

 

Well, I think the first question is what is an unambiguous, positive definition of "free will?" Until you've decided what you're talking about there's no point pondering whether it exists.

[GutZ]

If absolute free will exists we wouldn't be here discussing this. Photons, Gluons and what have you would be dancing the macarena in space....even then you can question free will unless every possible object exists doing every single thing wants to do at the same time.

 

Physically impossible. So just because there is determinism doesn't mean Free Will doesn't exist, you can't possible define it that way and not apply to the rest of the universe.

[padren]

That, my friends, is what we call a false dichotomy.

 

As Glider said, I included the 'if' for that reason. Quite often the question of "free will" arises as the question of whether our choices are free to choose how to modify the environmental conditions, or if the environment conditions locks in our choices to one possibility resulting in one possible subsequent environmental set of conditions.

 

That is the question I suppose of "absolute free will" which is why I briefly covered that context. Once that caveat is out the way, we can discuss the other ways we can define free will, and explore those ideas.

[Kyrisch]

The process of thinking is YOUR own individual process.

 

No, the process is determined by the structure of your brain. You, decidedly, did not dictate the characteristics of that structure.

[john5746]

No, the process is determined by the structure of your brain. You, decidedly, did not dictate the characteristics of that structure.

 

I guess that's mostly right, but our actions do affect our brain. While we have constraints on our potentials, how close we reach them is controlled by our actions - what we eat, exercise, reading, etc?

[Kyrisch]

I guess that's mostly right, but our actions do affect our brain. While we have constraints on our potentials, how close we reach them is controlled by our actions - what we eat, exercise, reading, etc?

 

What you have set up is a recursive structure. While your actions do (although minimally) affect your brain, which then in turn affects your actions, what effected (yes, that's a verb, too) those original actions in the first place was the original structure of the brain, which was the result of unconscious epigenesis and nothing else.

[andyupnorth]

Considering all the constraints and inputs/outputs and automatic responses I don't think the concept of free will is valid. I'm not even sure what use it has as a concept. Same with consciousness, which is inseparable from free will.

 

IMHO,

 

We are a black box (like a mathematical function). We're born with predispositions (and even life experiences begin before birth). If you knew all the intricate details about all its inputs, and you knew all the intricate details of how the black box behaves at any point in time, you could 'calculate' its output.

 

However, the behavior of that black box changes with previous inputted data, and even the lack of data or repeated data changes its behavior.

 

So technically, if we knew everything, there is no free will. However, since we will certainly never know all the intricate details of every input that has ever entered the black box, and how these inputs combine with the black box's predispositions, it's more practical to say that we do have free will.

[Kyrisch]

So technically, if we knew everything, there is no free will. However, since we will certainly never know all the intricate details of every input that has ever entered the black box, and how these inputs combine with the black box's predispositions, it's more practical to say that we do have free will.

 

No, it's still not; just because we don't have the knowledge does not mean that the knowledge is not there to be had. Since we will "certainly never know" the details results in the appearance of free will, but is still not free will proper.