Yet another Free Will discussion.

[ydoaPs]

[13:27] <mib_4q9dhe> so you yall believe in free will or not

[13:27] <mib_4q9dhe> do you all*

[13:28] <ydoaPs> that depends on what you mean by free will

[13:28] <ydoaPs>

[13:28] <mib_4q9dhe> so whats your answer

[13:28] <ydoaPs> sure

[13:28] <ydoaPs> how 'bout you?

[13:28] <mib_4q9dhe> yeah

[13:29] <mib_4q9dhe> but you only believe in one time dimension

[13:29] <ydoaPs> o.O

[13:29] <ydoaPs> explain?

[13:30] <mib_4q9dhe> if you have free will you have a choice to choose between to possible outcomes

[13:30] <mib_4q9dhe> but if time is a line then there will only be one possible outcome

[13:30] <mib_4q9dhe> so you dont actually have free will

[13:32] <mib_4q9dhe> i think will consciousness we have the ability to choose between our possible futures

[13:33] <mib_4q9dhe> with*

[13:35] <mib_4q9dhe> thats what probability is

[13:35] <mib_4q9dhe> the wave function of time

[13:36] <ydoaPs> complete determinism does not negate free will

[13:37] <ydoaPs> in fact, free will is dependent upon determinism

[13:38] <mib_4q9dhe> how so

[13:38] <ydoaPs> give me a sec

[13:38] <ydoaPs> it's a bit of explanation

[13:40] <mib_4q9dhe> complete determinism would mean that every action you take could be determined before you actually decided to make to decision

[13:40] <ydoaPs> our minds are analogous to computer programming. we can look at computer programming from various levels. you can look it it from the low level of electrons moving about on wires. in the same manner, you can look at the brain as ion currents through neurons. at a higher level, you have logic gates in computers and neural hierarchies in the brain. then you have higher level programming like python. the analog in the brain is an idea.

[13:41] <ydoaPs> our actions, our choices, are all based upon our beliefs, our values, preconcieved notions, etc. it's algorithmic(albeit VERY complicated)

[13:42] <ydoaPs> all of these things come at the lowest level from deterministic physics(the brain is a classical system)

[13:42] <mib_4q9dhe> but if you knew the algorithm you could predict every action a person would ever take

[13:42] <ydoaPs> mib_4q9dhe, if, under the exact same circumstances, you make a different decision one time than another, what's to say it is you doing it?

[13:43] <ydoaPs> how does randomness fix anything?

[13:43] <ydoaPs> randomness is the problem

[13:43] <ydoaPs> there IS a pattern, and you use this information every day. if you didn't, you'd be utterly suprised by everyone's actions all the time

[13:45] <ydoaPs> for "you" to make a choice, there has to be a "you". for your "you" to be distinct from my "me", it can't be random. it has to have distinct properties

[13:45] <ydoaPs> follow?

[13:45] <mib_4q9dhe> yeah but everything your saying seems to qualify that we dont have free will

[13:47] <ydoaPs> what do you mean by free will?

[13:48] <ydoaPs> the ability for "you" to choose between multiple outcomes? if so, then it does not

[13:48] <mib_4q9dhe> the ability to not be bound by any algorithm

[13:48] <ydoaPs> so, your free will means complete randomness

[13:48] <mib_4q9dhe> yup basically

[13:49] <ydoaPs> see, most people don't even have an ill-defined notion of free will. they just don't think about it. it's just something they say they have. yours doesn't even fit with most of them

[13:49] * UnintentionalChaos has quit (Ping timeout)

[13:49] <mib_4q9dhe> yeah ive thought about it alot

[13:50] <ydoaPs> are you familiar with Daniel Dennett?

[13:50] <mib_4q9dhe> nope

[13:50] <ydoaPs> a good book by him is Freedom Evolves

[13:51] <mib_4q9dhe> ill check it out

[13:51] <ydoaPs> he's an american scientific philosopher

[13:51] <mib_4q9dhe> so then are we really conscious?

[13:52] <ydoaPs> again, that depends on what you mean by conscious

[13:53] <ydoaPs> are we self-aware? obviously, yes

[13:53] <mib_4q9dhe> well a rock is not conscious do you agree

[13:53] <ydoaPs> indeed

[13:53] <mib_4q9dhe> is your leg conscious

[13:54] <ydoaPs> consciousness is what it "feels like" to have a functioning neocortex or analogous structure

[13:54] <ydoaPs> you should read On Intelligence by Jeff Hawkins too....he's the guy that invented the Palm Pilot and the Treo Smartphone

[13:55] <mib_4q9dhe> so then the ability to change is consciousness

[13:55] <ydoaPs> no

[13:56] * Capn_Refsmmat (capnrefsmm@cloak-49E3759B.satx.res.rr.com) has joined #sfn

[13:56] * ChanServ sets mode +a #sfn Capn_Refsmmat

[13:56] * ChanServ gives channel operator status to Capn_Refsmmat

[13:57] <ydoaPs> the neocortex is a thin covering of the "old brain" which is densely packed neurons organized heiarically. it is basically a pattern-finding/comparing machine

[13:57] <ydoaPs> most of what you experience is not what you actually see/hear/ect, but rather, what you expect to see/hear/etc

[13:57] <mib_4q9dhe> so if you take the neocortex out of someone are they still conscious

[13:57] <ydoaPs> no

[13:58] <mib_4q9dhe> why not

[13:58] <ydoaPs> their model of the world is gone

[13:58] <mib_4q9dhe> if you make sure that all the cell that make it up are still living

[13:58] <Capn_Refsmmat> you mean take the neocortex out but keep it alive?

[13:58] <mib_4q9dhe> yup

[13:58] <ydoaPs> oh, i was thinking you meant remove it and discard it

[13:58] <mib_4q9dhe> oh no

[13:59] <ydoaPs> mib_4q9dhe, maybe....it would be completely dependant upon imagination

[13:59] <ydoaPs> which, oddly enough, is EXACTLY THE SAME as actual experience in the neocortex!

[14:00] <mib_4q9dhe> really

[14:00] <ydoaPs> very interesting stuff, imo

[14:00] <ydoaPs> like i said, On Intelligence

[14:00] <ydoaPs> you'll learn all kinds of stuff

[14:01] <mib_4q9dhe> ill check it out next time im at the library

[14:01] <mib_4q9dhe> i dont like using the internet

[14:01] <mib_4q9dhe> or learning from the internet rather

[14:01] <ydoaPs> lol.....then why are you here?

[14:01] <ydoaPs>

[14:02] <mib_4q9dhe> well i assume at a website dedicated to the sciences might be a bit more creditable then wikipedia

[14:03] <mib_4q9dhe> how do you describe quantum superposition without free will

[14:03] <mib_4q9dhe> or randomness

[14:05] <ydoaPs> brain structures aren't on the quantum level. they're classical structures

[14:05] <mib_4q9dhe> not true

[14:05] <ydoaPs> it's quite true, actually

[14:05] <mib_4q9dhe> brains function by sending and receiving electrical signals so they have to work at the quantum level

[14:06] <mib_4q9dhe> to some extent

[14:06] <Capn_Refsmmat> well, but it's mostly chemical interactions

[14:06] <ydoaPs> "electrical signals" means ion exchanges

[14:06] <Capn_Refsmmat> nothing down on the crazy atomic level

[14:06] <ydoaPs> mib_4q9dhe, what Capn_Refsmmat said

[14:06] <mib_4q9dhe> what about photosynthesis

[14:07] <Capn_Refsmmat> what about it?

[14:07] <mib_4q9dhe> its a classical structure that has recently been found to function at the quantum level

[14:07] <Capn_Refsmmat> http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=when-it-comes-to-photosynthesis-plants-perform-quantum-computation

[14:07] <Capn_Refsmmat> aha.

[14:07] <Capn_Refsmmat> Well, you never know. Maybe some structures in the brain are somewhat quantum

[14:07] <Capn_Refsmmat> But why should that undermine free will?

[14:09] <mib_4q9dhe> because quantum events are never 100% gauranteed

[14:09] <ydoaPs> mib_4q9dhe, if we were to encode information using spin(essentially quantum computing), would that make the computer any less deterministic?

[14:09] <Capn_Refsmmat> Here's my take on the free will questionS

[14:09] <ydoaPs> would our programs no longer work?

 

 

What's your take?

[bascule]

[14:05] <mib_4q9dhe> brains function by sending and receiving electrical signals so they have to work at the quantum level

[14:06] <mib_4q9dhe> to some extent

 

The brain is a classical system, not a quantum one

 

And even if it were, that's a big red herring in a discussion about free will

[john5746]

<mib_4q9dhe> the ability to not be bound by any algorithm

[13:48] <ydoaPs> so, your free will means complete randomness

[13:48] <mib_4q9dhe> yup basically

[13:49] <ydoaPs> see, most people don't even have an ill-defined notion of free will. they just don't think about it. it's just something they say they have. yours doesn't even fit with most of them

 

I think this exchange is key. After watching Dennett, I realized that my expectation of free will was basically randomness. We aren't even asking the right question.

[padren]

[13:42] <mib_4q9dhe> but if you knew the algorithm you could predict every action a person would ever take

 

Just a note on this: The algorithm alone does not allow prediction, it is that combined with the data that does. For data to be useful, it has to be organized in some fashion in a model, which requires more information than the simple sum being modeled.

 

Therefore, it's impossible for a predictive system to make absolute predictions from within the system because it cannot model all the data that comprises it's own existence. So it could make predictions, but only predictions that did not take it's own existence into account.

 

Just mentioning it as a side note because I've seen it come up a lot.

[bascule]

[13:42] <mib_4q9dhe> but if you knew the algorithm you could predict every action a person would ever take

 

Yes, if you could predict everything in the entire world, this is correct.

 

That said, this is another way of saying "if you put the same person in the same place at the same time, they would always make the same decision"

 

To me, that implies the decision a person makes is a function of their identity, or in other words, their identity drives their decision making process. To me, that defines free will: my decisions are shaped by my identity, not nonphysical/quantum forces, random events, etc.

Edited June 19, 2009 by bascule

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

Yes, if you could predict everything in the entire world, this is correct.

I can predict Heisenberg's response to this.

[iNow]

I always like Hitchens comment on this issue in his debates.

 

I believe you have free will and, if you ask, I must retreat to the philosophical irony that... We are

predetermined

to have free will. Incidentally, the Christian must say "of course we have free will, God

demands

it."

[Severian]

Hasn't this been discussed to death already? Don't we have any forum rules prohibiting people from bringing up the same old chestnuts again and again?

[J.C.MacSwell]

Hasn't this been discussed to death already? Don't we have any forum rules prohibiting people from bringing up the same old chestnuts again and again?

 

But...we can't help it!