Free will and determinism

[Bradskii]

But why would we need to be consciously aware of the process? If determinism is true then my mind is perfectly capable of analyzing all of the pertinent antecedent conditions without any help from little conscious me. Just do it and be done with it. But noooo... the mind has to create the illusion of a ghost in the machine. And it keeps this 'illusion' running every waking moment of my entire existence. That seems like a pretty energy intensive way of doing a deterministic thing. Considering its use of resources, that ghost in the machine must be pretty darn important.

But what exactly is this 'ghost in the machine' doing? Well, among other things, it's making choices. And it's doing this by taking the sum total of all of the antecedent conditions, weighing them, reconsidering them, re-evaluating them, and thereby... making new antecedent conditions. And it may do this again, and again, and again, until some little voice says... this is the option that I choose.

It's almost certainly a deterministic process, but a process so deeply entwined in what I am, and what I do , that I have indeed become the 'Ghost in the Machine'. I'm not simply the outcome of those antecedent conditions, I'm those antecedent conditions given a sense of right and wrong. How absolutely incredible is that... that antecedent conditions can have a sense of morality. It's on par with the universe becoming self-aware.

The thing is though, why am I conscious of this process in the first place? That couldn't have been evolution's intent. Evolution has no intent. Evolution was just selecting for something that would include the potential outcome as an antecedent condition. That's it. As far as the brain is concerned it's just one more antecedent condition among a billion other antecedent conditions. Consciousness is completely superfluous if actions are simply the byproduct of antecedent conditions.

Or is evolution doing superfluous now?

I think that self awareness - or consciousness, is an emergent property. Just acting instinctively helps. But if you are aware of your environment, rather than try this or try that and hope for the best it's a huge advantage to run though the options before you act. And you need that self awareness to be able to do that. And those preconceived options are some of the antecedent conditions. IF this THEN that.

 

[Bradskii]

Culpable or not Culpable?

Not culpable. But this needs a longer answer and I'll get back to it in a couple of days. I'm in transit at the moment with little time and limited wi fi access.

 

[Neogaia777]

I think that self awareness - or consciousness, is an emergent property. Just acting instinctively helps. But if you are aware of your environment, rather than try this or try that and hope for the best it's a huge advantage to run though the options before you act. And you need that self awareness to be able to do that. And those preconceived options are some of the antecedent conditions. IF this THEN that.

We increasingly become more aware of our environment over time, and how to make better choices over time, but are always learning better or more always ever increasingly over time, etc. So that, every time we look back, we always wonder how truly aware or fully conscious we were before that, etc. So what if there is a predictable method or program or rhyme or reason to that, etc? And what if it couldn't have ever gone any way other than that ever, etc? We always think we are always more conscious in the now than we ever are or ever were looking back, etc. So how do we know that this moment now will not also be that way at some point in the future looking back, etc? And shouldn't that make us also question now just how truly conscious we are now in this very moment, etc?

If consciousness is an emergent quality/property, how do we, or when will we truly know when we have really truly fully emerged, or ever really fully got there, etc?

Take Care/God Bless.

 

[Grip Docility]

Not culpable. But this needs a longer answer and I'll get back to it in a couple of days. I'm in transit at the moment with little time and limited wi fi access.

Respect towards you on this...

 

[partinobodycular]

I think that self awareness - or consciousness, is an emergent property. Just acting instinctively helps. But if you are aware of your environment, rather than try this or try that and hope for the best it's a huge advantage to run though the options before you act. And you need that self awareness to be able to do that.

But according to determinism that consciousness isn't necessary. It doesn't add anything to the process. Sure, it's nice to have and all, and it seems important, but it isn't necessary. All of the antecedent events and conditions are already there. If you're going to choose coffee over Earl Grey, it's the antecedent conditions that are going to cause you to do that. If it's simply because you don't like Earl Grey, it's because the antecedent conditions dictated that you don't like Earl Grey, your conscious awareness of not liking Earl Grey has nothing to do with it. Reality will trundle along perfectly fine without your conscious awareness of what it's doing. So why does the mind go to all the trouble of creating the illusion that you're actively participating in the process, when in reality you're contributing nada?

It's as if you're watching a movie of your life over which you have no control. What's the point of you sitting there watching the movie if you have absolutely no input into how it plays out?

On the other hand, if you do have input into how your life plays out... and those antecedent conditions aren't the end all and be all of reality, then your consciousness is indeed essential... and you have at least some degree of free will.

So which seems more logical, that evolution just serendipitously created consciousness for no reason at all, or consciousness and its accompanying free will are an essential part of how reality plays out?

But there's one thing that we do agree on... consciousness is an emergent property, and as is the case with emergent properties they inevitably do things that the underlying physics can't account for. Unfortunately for you they also make determinism a difficult position to defend, because if emergent properties exist, then reductionism isn't true, and if reductionism isn't true then determinism, at least in the sense that it negates free will, isn't true either.

 

[Bradskii]

But according to determinism that consciousness isn't necessary.

It allows us to place ourselves in the environment and run a few hypotheticals. Do I take Path A, B or C? Based on my knowledge of the conditions, I run in my mind's eye what might happen, or what I think will happen to me taking each choice in turn. I consider the benefits, the negatives, the risks, the rewards of each and those are the presumed antecedent conditions which will determine my choice.

I don't have to risk taking each path to see which is the least dangerous. I watch the hypothetical me die in the situations where it's obviously a bad idea. And then take the safer path. It will determine my choice.

The basic system is just instinctive. Just react automatically to any given input. That evolves to different options being tried out. And if you survive, all good. If you don't...tough luck. Then that evolves into consciously running through the options without taking the risk.

 

[Neogaia777]

But there's one thing that we do agree on... consciousness is an emergent property, and as is the case with emergent properties they inevitably do things that the underlying physics can't account for. Unfortunately for you they also make determinism a difficult position to defend, because if emergent properties exist, then reductionism isn't true, and if reductionism isn't true then determinism, at least in the sense that it negates free will, isn't true either.

The only thing an emergent property is, or another word for it is, just something new we learned, and added into a new set of antecedent conditions/properties, or added further onto already existing antecedent conditions or properties, etc. It's just us always constantly learning by kind of like @Bradskii just now said above this post, etc.

@partinobodycular I don't like trying to share this with you or debate this with you, etc, and it's because I can tell that you don't want it to be true, etc, and because of my compassion for you, I don't want it to be or become a reality for you or become true for you either, etc, I can tell it will do something, maybe very, very damaging, to your very own spirit or soul to try and accept this, etc.

And I can tell that you really, really don't want it to be true for those very reasons, etc, and I "feel that for you", really I do, and "very, very much deeply I do", etc, and I really, really don't want it to be true for you either, etc.

But we should never confuse what we want with the truth, etc, and I hope you'll understand me when I say that that is what I think you are right now doing right now, etc. Rejecting or denying the real truth for what you want, or want to be true, etc.

And it's very, very heartbreaking for me to say this to you, etc. So I hope you'll understand when I say how very truly sorry I am for bringing this out/up and/or saying it, etc.

You have a very, very beautiful soul, and I really, really hate doing this, etc.

Take Care/May God Richly Bless.

 

[partinobodycular]

It allows us to place ourselves in the environment and run a few hypotheticals. Do I take Path A, B or C? Based on my knowledge of the conditions, I run in my mind's eye what might happen, or what I think will happen to me taking each choice in turn. I consider the benefits, the negatives, the risks, the rewards of each and those are the presumed antecedent conditions which will determine my choice.

But your mind can run those hypotheticals without being conscious of doing so. I often do some of my best thinking while I'm asleep. Thus consciousness gains you nothing. Sure it's nice that you're conscious, but it's totally unnecessary. So why are we conscious? What do we gain by being conscious that isn't possible when we're unconscious.

 

[Bradskii]

But your mind can run those hypotheticals without being conscious of doing so. I often do some of my best thinking while I'm asleep. Thus consciousness gains you nothing. Sure it's nice that you're conscious, but it's totally unnecessary. So why are we conscious? What do we gain by being conscious that isn't possible when we're unconscious.

You have to be aware of a 'you' if you want to make decisions about what 'you' might do. You need to be concerned about what happens to you. You need to want to survive. If you're not conscious then there's no desire. There's no need. You can't picture what could happen to you without being aware of yourself.

 

[partinobodycular]

@partinobodycular I don't like trying to share this with you or debate this with you, etc, and it's because I can tell that you don't want it to be true, etc, and because of my compassion for you, I don't want it to be or become a reality for you or become true for you either, etc, I can tell it will do something, maybe very, very damaging, to your very own spirit or soul to try and accept this, etc.

Don't worry, nothing you do can offend me. Remember I'm a solipsist, I have absolutely no idea whether free will exists or not. It just happens that @Bradskii took one side of the debate, so I'll take the other, not because I think that it's true, but simply because I don't like it when people make assumptions, and in this particular instance Bradskii's making an assumption.

So don't worry, give me your best shot, but be warned, my little brain is gonna try to find a flaw in it. So if you're cool with it... then I'm cool with it.

 

[Neogaia777]

Don't worry, nothing you do can offend me. Remember I'm a solipsist, I have absolutely no idea whether free will exists or not. It just happens that @Bradskii took one side of the debate, so I'll take the other, not because I think that it's true, but simply because I don't like it when people make assumptions, and in this particular instance Bradskii's making an assumption.

So don't worry, give me your best shot, but be warned, my little brain is gonna try to find a flaw in it. So if you're cool with it... then I'm cool with it.

Cool, thanks man.

Take Care.

 

[Neogaia777]

You have to be aware of a 'you' if you want to make decisions about what 'you' might do. You need to be concerned about what happens to you. You need to want to survive. If you're not conscious then there's no desire. There's no need. You can't picture what could happen to you without being aware of yourself.

@partinobodycular also.

Why do I feel like you guys just sometimes like to argue, lol.

That one of you guys will be on one side of the argument one minute, and the other one will be on the other, and you'll be arguing those sides one minute, but then you both flip sides the next minute, and the only reason you guys are even arguing those sides that you just switched or flipped to in the next minute, is just to argue a different stance or side or point of view than the other one in the next minute, lol.

Take Care/God Bless.

 

[partinobodycular]

You have to be aware of a 'you' if you want to make decisions about what 'you' might do. You need to be concerned about what happens to you. You need to want to survive. If you're not conscious then there's no desire. There's no need. You can't picture what could happen to you without being aware of yourself.

Awesome, I'll make a solipsist out of you yet. So I need to have a concept of "me". And included in that concept of 'me' are my experiences, memories, likes, dislikes, fears, desires, etc. Those are all the things that constitute me. So tell me, what's the difference between the things that constitute me, and the things that you refer to as antecedent conditions?

 

[partinobodycular]

Why do I feel like you guys just sometimes like to argue, lol.

You need to keep in mind that I've known @Bradskii since he only had one 'i'. I think that it was about 2008 when we both joined CAF. He's lost a bit of snarkiness over the years, but I still think that he's great. Usually logical and better informed than me, but every once in a while he'll make an assumption, and I'm not about to pass up an opportunity to get on his case. Don't let it trouble you. If you're lucky you'll get the same treatment some day... you've got a ways to go, but you've got potential.

 

[Neogaia777]

You need to keep in mind that I've known @Bradskii since he only had one 'i'. I think that it was about 2008 when we both joined CAF. He's lost a bit of snarkiness over the years, but I still think that he's great. Usually logical and better informed than me, but every once in a while he'll make an assumption, and I'm not about to pass up an opportunity to get on his case. Don't let it trouble you. If you're lucky you'll get the same treatment some day... you've got a ways to go, but you've got potential.

Thanks... I think...? Lol.

Take Care Guys!

 

[Neogaia777]

You need to keep in mind that I've known @Bradskii since he only had one 'i'. I think that it was about 2008 when we both joined CAF. He's lost a bit of snarkiness over the years, but I still think that he's great. Usually logical and better informed than me, but every once in a while he'll make an assumption, and I'm not about to pass up an opportunity to get on his case. Don't let it trouble you. If you're lucky you'll get the same treatment some day... you've got a ways to go, but you've got potential.

If you're going to argue that life is a lot more fun when you don't assume anything, then I'm not going to argue that point, as I think it's a potentially valid one, etc.

And I am right now working on being a lot more intellectually honest, and on admitting when I can't know a thing for 100% sure absolutely, etc.

But this determinism thing, I feel it in my soul, and way, way down deep to the core of my very being, etc.

And it also gets way, way deep into my convictions about God, and how I don't think omniscience is possible without it also, etc.

Take Care.

 

[partinobodycular]

But this determinism thing, I feel it in my soul, and way, way down deep to the core of my very being, etc.

And it also gets way, way deep into my convictions about God, and how I don't think omniscience is possible without it also, etc.

Don't take this the wrong way, but I think that there's a fundamental error in your understanding of God's omniscience. I don't think that God's omniscience stems from the fact that determinism preordains the end from the beginning, it stems from the fact that God can 'see/know' the end from the beginning. To our eyes that looks as if the ending is preordained, and therefore determinism is true and we have no free will.

Instead think of it this way... your knowledge of what happened yesterday didn't cause what happened yesterday. Yet you possess that knowledge. In the same way God's knowledge of all of the yesterdays... even tomorrow's yesterdays, didn't cause what happened then either, and yet He possesses that knowledge.

There's a form of antireductionism, that holds that certain properties of a system are inexplicable simply because we lack a sufficient understanding of the system, and we always will. Thus we can see determinism and think that free will is impossible, but this 'impossibility' has nothing to do with the nature of the system, instead it has everything to do with our understanding of the system. Sometimes impossible isn't really impossible... it's just inconceivable.

God may be the same way. Our understanding of His omniscience, as it concerns our free will, may have nothing to do with the nature of God, and everything to do with our understanding of God.

As a solipsist one thing is paramount, never be afraid to question what you think is right. It's not a weakness, it's not a flaw, and it's not a lack of faith... it's simply an admittance that I'm human... I don't know, what I don't know.

 

[Bradskii]

Awesome, I'll make a solipsist out of you yet. So I need to have a concept of "me". And included in that concept of 'me' are my experiences, memories, likes, dislikes, fears, desires, etc. Those are all the things that constitute me. So tell me, what's the difference between the things that constitute me, and the things that you refer to as antecedent conditions?

Nothing. If you are a placid man, that will go to determining your choices. Which might be different if you are easily angered. If you are thoughtful or prone to snap decisions, then they are likewise antecedent conditions. If you are conservative or liberal, fearfull or courageous, curious or disinterested...your character, your personal characteristics, are some of the more important antecedent conditions.

 

[partinobodycular]

Nothing. If you are a placid man, that will go to determining your choices.

So we agree... that emergent thing in my head... that conscious thing... that dislikes both coffee and Earl Grey. That abhors socializing, loves puzzles, repetitiveness, and dogs... that's me. That thing that agonizes for months over whether I really need a new pair of shoes, or whether I can get one more year out of the old ones. That emergent thing is me.

Absolutely it's the product of antecedent conditions. I'm not questioning that. And absolutely it's choices are deterministic, I'm not questioning that either. I'm saying that that conscious thing that's pondering what to say next... is me. And that process, deterministic or not, is me freely choosing what "I" want to do. Because me and those antecedent conditions are inescapably one and the same thing, so what they inevitably choose is exactly what I would inevitably choose.

And that choice is free, because it's the things that constitute me, and only the things that constitute me, that end up making that choice.

I don't know about you, but I've gained a lot from this discussion... thinking is good.

 

[Bradskii]

So we agree... that emergent thing in my head... that conscious thing... that dislikes both coffee and Earl Grey. That abhors socializing, loves puzzles, repetitiveness, and dogs... that's me. That thing that agonizes for months over whether I really need a new pair of shoes, or whether I can get one more year out of the old ones. That emergent thing is me.

Absolutely it's the product of antecedent conditions. I'm not questioning that. And absolutely it's choices are deterministic, I'm not questioning that either. I'm saying that that conscious thing that's pondering what to say next... is me. And that process, deterministic or not, is me freely choosing what "I" want to do. Because me and those antecedent conditions are inescapably one and the same thing, so what they inevitably choose is exactly what I would inevitably choose.

And that choice is free...

I'm at a loss as to how you can agree that all your decisions are determined by matters which are not under your control...and then still say that they are free will choices. The former contradicts the latter.

If a choice is determined then it cannot, by the very definition of free will, be a free will decision. From Britannica: Free will | Definition, Determinism, & Facts

'Free will, in philosophy and science, the supposed power or capacity of humans to make decisions or perform actions independently of any prior event or state of the universe.'