- Nov 28, 2010
- 287
- 4
- 43
- Faith
- Agnostic
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Others
Not really free will, if it always is determined by that which you were born with, is it?
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Not really free will, if it always is determined by that which you were born with, is it?You have natural free will but with always go back to your own desires you're born with.
I can agree with that.Depends on how the brain works. If there's some mechanism that involves true spontaneity and randomness (perhaps some sort of quantum 'switch' within synapses, or exotic timers using C14), then the doctor can't predict what will happen with complete certainty. It might not be free will as traditionally interpreted, but it still prevents (internal) omniscience.
So what made you choose food A?
Why not stop supposing these convoluted scenarios and deal with something potentially more reralistic? Because afaict those scenarios are probably not reaslistic, and we are discussing free will in real people.Not if an absolutely discernible mechanism does not exist. For instance, suppose the following day you are placed in the exact same scenario. But on that day you choose food B. And let's suppose this doctor can only view your brain function, and has no idea that there are actually two different types of food. Let's call the the brain activity that occurred when you chose food A, brain function A. If brain function A also occurred on the second day, the doctor would not be able to discern a distinguishable mechanism for you choosing food A, as opposed to food B. It would appear to him you made the same choice.
Let's suppose however, that there is a difference in brain function between the two days, if everything you do on both days is identical up until you make the choice, the doctor would not notice a difference until the choice is made. So on a third day, if you are in an identical scenario as the first two days, there is no way the doctor would be able to determine conclusively which food you will choose until you make the choice. Because brain function A is identical to brain function B up until the choice is made.
Nice. Maybe there are evolutionary learning programmes in the brain that involve elements of randomized neural functioning. So we might after all have a highly "evolved" sense of taste, for instance.Depends on how the brain works. If there's some mechanism that involves true spontaneity and randomness (perhaps some sort of quantum 'switch' within synapses, or exotic timers using C14), then the doctor can't predict what will happen with complete certainty. It might not be free will as traditionally interpreted, but it still prevents (internal) omniscience.
Why not stop supposing these convoluted scenarios and deal with something potentiaslly more reralistic?
Ok souble standards. But as far as I can tell there are only 2 options. Complete determinism, in which case libertarian free will is void, or there are randomized elements due to QM or something, which influence the overall functioning, but that woulkd be a strange idea of "free will".Hey, you are the one who suggested that there was a brain doctor who knew everything about my brain in the first place, an unrealistic scenario to begin with.
How did your "I" come to be, so that you are able to make a choice?'I' made myself choose food A, or rather, 'I' chose food A freely. Nothing made me choose it, although many causal factors determine that a decision must be made, the causal factors do not determine the result of the decision--they are influential in my consideration. In fact, causal factors are necessary to facilitate freewill, because without the environment and our biology, decisions are not even possible for us.
In truth we do not know if the universe operates in a deterministic manner or indeterminate. However, having said that I hold to a deterministic interpretation. A deterministic universe does not have free will, unless of course you define free will like the compatibilists do.Ok souble standards. But as far as I can tell there are only 2 options. Complete determinism, in which case libertarian free will is void, or there are randomized elements due to QM or something, which influence the overall functioning, but that woulkd be a strange idea of "free will".
But IIRC someone said something like "the dynamic of the brain operates according to Maxwell's Equations which are completely deterministic" which Wiccan or someone trained in physics might comment on.
Right.Not really free will, if it always is determined by that which you were born with, is it?
Not what the Muslims say. They say when young we naturally believe in One God, so much that they actually call converts "reverts".Right.
We're born not to have any desire to seek God.
It's called, "Total Depravity".
We're all born totally screwed.
Never heard of them. What and who are Muslims?Not what the Muslims say. They say when young we naturally believe in One God, so much that they actually call converts "reverts".
Ok souble standards. But as far as I can tell there are only 2 options. Complete determinism, in which case libertarian free will is void, or there are randomized elements due to QM or something, which influence the overall functioning, but that woulkd be a strange idea of "free will".
How did your "I" come to be, so that you are able to make a choice?
What does it mean to say "I", or define what "I" is?
Never heard of them. What and who are Muslims?
Ok if the dynamics are not objectively knowable, why do you claim the link between consciousness and QM. Either you have good reason to believe, in which case people would expect you to produce supporting evidence, or it may as well all be in your imagination. Thats what the skeptics will say.I would agree with your two options except I would replace a couple of your words with a phrase. Instead of 'are randomized' I would use 'is subjective conscious awareness.' Then the idea of freewill isn't strange at all.
I think human consciousness is directly related with QM, however I do not think the dynamics between the two can be objectively studied and understood by science. Mainly because human consciousness as an emergent property of the universe is not quantifiable in relation to QM activity.
You need knowledge by aquaintance rather than just description.Although one may be able to objectively study the human brain through observation and experimentation, and map out how the electro-chemical dynamics affect human behavior, that doesn't entirely explain what human consciousness is. It's only half of the equation.
In order to know what human consciousness is, you have to be a human. IOW, you can't know what human consciousness is by knowing everything about human biology, you can only know what human consciousness is by being human biology. The subjective conscious awareness of humans has the capacity to utilize freewill, and as such, is an element that influences the functioning of the otherwise seemingly determined universe.
edit.Never heard of them. What and who are Muslims?
According to this mandala
SO would your idea of free will stem from QM processes?Ultimately through evolution. More specifically, my "I" came to be, by my emergent consciousness experiencing what it is like to be my body.
"I" is the subjective conscious awareness an entity manifests with relation to being a specific biological organism. At least as far as humans are concerned.
Ok if the dynamics are not objectively knowable, why do you claim the link between consciousness and QM. Either you have good reason to believe, in which case people would expect you to produce supporting evidence, or it may as well all be in your imagination. Thats what the skeptics will say.?
You need knowledge by acquaintance rather than just description.
So why do you link consciousness with QM if aquantance first hand (which does not tell you that) or description of biology (which does not tell you that) do not support that link? Then again there is the Orch-Or model but aafaik it is just surmise.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?