Eise Posted January 4, 2018 Posted January 4, 2018 On 2.1.2018 at 4:12 PM, Itoero said: True but those wishes and beliefs are formed by experiences/acquired knowledge...they don't just appear all of a sudden. Right. But what would free will be, when it was detached from what you are? So of course 'they don't just appear all of a sudden'. That is not a serious criterion for free will. On 2.1.2018 at 4:12 PM, Itoero said: You constantly make choices/decisions and some of them you can relate to free will. Which ones? These? On 2.1.2018 at 4:12 PM, Itoero said: When there seems to be a random aspect in the choice making, people call it 'free will'. Do you you belong to these people? If you do, you are wrong. Randomness has nothing to with free will. Just imagine all your actions would be random. What would they have to do with your motivations and believes? If they have nothing to do with what you are, how can one recognise his actions as really his actions? How can this be free will? On 2.1.2018 at 4:29 PM, EdEarl said: Our mind forms illusions, delusions and approximations of reality, considering the quantum reality is completely different than our perceived reality. With such boggy ground to stand on. Free will or not is an opinion that some believe strongly. To me the answer cannot be known. Free will has nothing to do with quantum reality (at least not more as it has to do with lifeless, purposeless entities). And I think the answer can be known, even when one always can say 'depends on what you mean with free will'. But I think philosophy has already provided the answer, by showing what kind of free will we do have, and which we don't. I am also pretty sure that the kind of free will we do have (compatibilist free will), is enough as a basis for our moral and legal praxis.
dimreepr Posted January 4, 2018 Posted January 4, 2018 18 minutes ago, Eise said: Free will has nothing to do with quantum reality (at least not more as it has to do with lifeless, purposeless entities). And I think the answer can be known, even when one always can say 'depends on what you mean with free will'. But I think philosophy has already provided the answer, by showing what kind of free will we do have, and which we don't. 1 Which is which?
Eise Posted January 4, 2018 Posted January 4, 2018 23 minutes ago, dimreepr said: Which is which? We have compatibilist free will. It is based on (sufficient) determinism. We do not have libertarian free will. It is contradictory with determinism. Randomness is no option as explained in my posting above.
EdEarl Posted January 4, 2018 Posted January 4, 2018 46 minutes ago, Eise said: Free will has nothing to do with quantum reality (at least not more as it has to do with lifeless, purposeless entities). And I think the answer can be known, even when one always can say 'depends on what you mean with free will'. But I think philosophy has already provided the answer, by showing what kind of free will we do have, and which we don't. I am also pretty sure that the kind of free will we do have (compatibilist free will), is enough as a basis for our moral and legal praxis. Didn't mean to imply free will was controlled by quantum reality; I don't have any evidence for that hypothesis. It is evidence of our understanding being illusion and approximation, and the difficulty of viscerally understanding quantum mechanics illustrates how little we truly know. I know scientists are making strides towards understanding the brain, but so far a brain simulation is incomplete.
dimreepr Posted January 5, 2018 Posted January 5, 2018 22 hours ago, Eise said: We have compatibilist free will. It is based on (sufficient) determinism. We do not have libertarian free will. It is contradictory with determinism. Randomness is no option as explained in my posting above. My question is more about the crossover point, the place on the spectrum where free will becomes an illusion. If we can train soldiers to kill without remorse and people are naturally unwilling to kill, the crossover point is skewed due to previous experience; how then can we be sure which is which?
Eise Posted January 8, 2018 Posted January 8, 2018 On 05/01/2018 at 4:38 PM, dimreepr said: My question is more about the crossover point, the place on the spectrum where free will becomes an illusion. If we can train soldiers to kill without remorse and people are naturally unwilling to kill, the crossover point is skewed due to previous experience; how then can we be sure which is which? Can you please clarify your question? Which spectrum? There is no spectrum from libertarian free will to compatibilist free will, so it seems you are introducing a new topic.
iNow Posted March 12, 2019 Posted March 12, 2019 Meanwhile, in related science news: https://qz.com/1569158/neuroscientists-read-unconscious-brain-activity-to-predict-decisions/ Neuroscientists can read brain activity to predict decisions 11 seconds before people act <...> Using the fMRI to monitor brain activity and machine learning to analyze the neuroimages, the researchers were able to predict which pattern participants would choose up to 11 seconds before they consciously made the decision. And they were able to predict how vividly the participants would be able to envisage it. <...> Though this is just one study, it’s not the first to show that thoughts can be predicted before they are conscious. As the researchers note, similar techniques have been able to predict motor decisions between seven and 10 seconds before they’re conscious, and abstract decisions up to four seconds before they’re conscious. Taken together, these studies show how understanding how the brain complicates our conception of free will.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now