Quake3World

This thread is dedicated to Canis. So, say what side of the line you are on.

I fully believe we are determined. The illusion of free will stems from our ability to foresee in the world the effect from the cause. We are able to calculate out actions based on this knowledge. But at no point are we free. What would 'free' mean, anyway?

mjrpes wrote:What would 'free' mean, anyway?

Ah see there's where the debate pivots, and usually the point of contention over which it breaks down.

I see it as any action a person makes is the direct result of external stimuli and their physical composition. Brain chemicals, development, the direction of the wind yesterday. Chaos theory. All that jazz.

After all, if it's not just an incomprehensible series of cause and effect loops, then what else can it be short of appealing to some form of higher power. But even then it begs the question of the cause of that too.

freedom meens to be able to do as one wishes, one doesnt wish but prefer, one prefers something because of its environment, thus freedom is not purely 'free' ? whatever, humans share eachother brain, just like ants, xcept we're not as willing to co-operate as much as they do, cause we prefer individualism, the human race drives on paradoxal entities bla bla bla could continue for ages, no one will agree with me though

free will:
freedom of self determination and action independent of external causes.

i don't see it possible to have action independent of external causes and until someone explains this i'll stick to determinism.

Foo wrote:

mjrpes wrote:What would 'free' mean, anyway?

After all, if it's not just an incomprehensible series of cause and effect loops, then what else can it be short of appealing to some form of higher power. But even then it begs the question of the cause of that too.

Instilling the idea of Free Will into someone allows you to cast blame, creating guilt. So and so made the wrong choice.... they didn't have to do it. You had a free choice, and fucked up. In this sense, Free Will sounds like a societal construct.

i'd like to hear a determinist describe in detail what they think free will would be like, if it existed

mjrpes wrote:Instilling the idea of Free Will into someone allows you to cast blame, creating guilt. So and so made the wrong choice.... they didn't have to do it. You had a free choice, and fucked up. In this sense, Free Will sounds like a societal construct.

Perhaps something with valid social function, but I would guess the notion of free will came into being before full consideration of the alternatives, rather than being created as a concept for such a purpose.

seremtan wrote:i'd like to hear a determinist describe in detail what they think free will would be like, if it existed

Is that a question meant to be for or against? If you ask a determinist this question, they will say it's impossible to imagine what it would be like, just like you can't imagine what a four sided triangle looks like.

deterministic freewill

free will mos def

it's determinism which is an illusion

mjrpes wrote:

seremtan wrote:i'd like to hear a determinist describe in detail what they think free will would be like, if it existed

Is that a question meant to be for or against? If you ask a determinist this question, they will say it's impossible to imagine what it would be like, just like you can't imagine what a four sided triangle looks like.

it's neither for or against. it's a socratic question designed to get at just what determinists believe they are repudiating when they reject free will, and what free willys are accepting when they accept it.

without knowing what determinism and free will are, how can you say which is correct?

You don't need a rock solid definition of free-will to think that determinism is true.

Causality is one of the basic laws upon which the Universe is constructed. Causality implies determinism. So, free will is an illusion.

However, from the point of view of the individual (and perhaps of society and the humanity as a whole), this illusion of free will is useful, otherwise there exists no foundation upon which morals can be built (and trust me, morals are a human invention) and without morals we can't have a functioning society.

So there is nothing to gain from becoming a fatalist, that's just a cheap way to clear one's conscience and make it harder to function as a social human being.

Wow...I wake up and find a whole thread dedicated to me. Hot diggity!

In this debate, I'm for free will.

Quantum mechanics would beg to differ regarding causality and determinism.

Grudge wrote:Causality is one of the basic laws upon which the Universe is constructed. Causality implies determinism. So, free will is an illusion.

However, from the point of view of the individual (and perhaps of society and the humanity as a whole), this illusion of free will is useful, otherwise there exists no foundation upon which morals can be built (and trust me, morals are a human invention) and without morals we can't have a functioning society.

So there is nothing to gain from becoming a fatalist, that's just a cheap way to clear one's conscience and make it harder to function as a social human being.

hax103 wrote:Quantum mechanics would beg to differ regarding causality and determinism.

Yes, and it would be important to specify exactly what one means by 'determinism'. Determinism, of the Laplacean sort, is a METAPHYSICAL doctrine; it is not something that could be confirmed/disconfirmed through empirical investigation.

seremtan wrote:

mjrpes wrote:

seremtan wrote:i'd like to hear a determinist describe in detail what they think free will would be like, if it existed

Is that a question meant to be for or against? If you ask a determinist this question, they will say it's impossible to imagine what it would be like, just like you can't imagine what a four sided triangle looks like.

it's neither for or against. it's a socratic question designed to get at just what determinists believe they are repudiating when they reject free will, and what free willys are accepting when they accept it.

without knowing what determinism and free will are, how can you say which is correct?

If it existed, I would define it as action with no physical cause on any level whatsoever.

The problem? Science will probably never have all the answers, and to date it certainly doesn't. This is the very 'problem' that causes many to use 'that which cannot be explained' to explain things.

Read: God, free will, spagetti monster etc.

hax103 wrote:Quantum mechanics would beg to differ regarding causality and determinism.

So would infinity, but if you dig into the subject it's apparent that infinity isn't really regarded as truly infinite, it's just used as a handy way to express absolutely inconceivable magnitude.

The same goes for quantum physics. That it's truly random is not the point of quantum physics, it's that the boundaries of our own 3 dimensions prevent observation beyond a point.

Also, the notion that something is randomly determined doesn't undermine determinism. Indeed, what control does a person exert over quantum mechanics?

hax103 wrote:Quantum mechanics would beg to differ regarding causality and determinism.

Well, on the quantum scale, yes. But on the macro level, no. And unless human intelligence is situated at least in part on the quantum scale (a la Penrose), you still can't have acasual behaviour (free will).

Free willy

mjrpes wrote:This thread is dedicated to Canis. So, say what side of the line you are on.

I fully believe we are determined. The illusion of free will stems from our ability to foresee in the world the effect from the cause. We are able to calculate out actions based on this knowledge. But at no point are we free. What would 'free' mean, anyway?

So are you saying that every decision we make is already determined based on the idea that one would always choose a certain outcome under certain circutstances? I think that the idea of free will is that you are free to choose something, even if it is not what you would normally choose, thereby destroying the notion of determinism. Once in a while someone will choose something different just because they want to be different that time, such as what flavor of icecream you want that day.