Free Will

[SelfSim]

Effectively, yes.

Therefore personalities are indeterministic (or random).
Personality is a property of a mind, and therefore personality would also be a sufficient basis for distinguishing/classifying 'a free will'?

 

[Bradskii]

Therefore personalities are indeterministic (or random).

No. That doesn't logically follow. Personalities are determined by an infinite combination of genetic and environmental situations. An infinite number possibilities does not imply that each of them are random. Even simply non random binary decisions will result in an infinite number of results.

 

[SelfSim]

No. That doesn't logically follow. Personalities are determined by an infinite combination of genetic and environmental situations. An infinite number possibilities does not imply that each of them are random. Even simply non random binary decisions will result in an infinite number of results.

Hmm .. let's see: a system (or process) is deterministic if it is possible to uniquely determine its past and future trajectories (ie all points it passed through and will pass through) from its initial (present) state. A system is semi‐deterministic if its future, but not its past trajectory, can be uniquely determined. An indeterministic system is one without a unique future trajectory, so that the evolution is random.

The system that produces the set of all personalities, (past, present and future), is unbounded .. it has no determinable future trajectory .. a future personality cannot be predicted. That system is therefore indeterministic .. (.. I think?)

 

[Ophiolite]

I feel compelled to say that free will is a real thing!

 

[Neogaia777]

No. That doesn't logically follow. Personalities are determined by an infinite combination of genetic and environmental situations. An infinite number possibilities does not imply that each of them are random. Even simply non random binary decisions will result in an infinite number of results.

@SelfSim also...

Not infinite, and not random, the future can be predicted, and there was/is only one way things ever could/can/will go that is always determined, or was already all caused/chosen, by whatever was present before it, and this goes all the way back to the very first atoms/particles/molecules that were very first set in motion...

 

[Neogaia777]

I feel compelled to say that free will is a real thing!

And you know with absolute certainty do you, that it was not caused by what you just read...?

 

[Bradskii]

Hmm .. let's see: a system (or process) is deterministic if it is possible to uniquely determine its past and future trajectories...

No...and here we have some semantics. I think a deterministic system is one where the ultimate result is determined...but not necessarily can be known, in practice, in advance.

There are undoubtedly a set of circumstances that lead to another set. We can work backwards from the final set to understand how it came to be from the initial set. But we can't necessarily work forward to see where the initiual set will lead us.

 

[Bradskii]

@SelfSim also...

Not infinite, and not random, the future can be predicted, and there was/is only one way things ever could/can/will go that is always determined, or was already all caused/chosen, by whatever was present before it, and this goes all the way back to the very first atoms/particles/molecules that were very first set in motion...

Not infinite in that there is eventually only one path. But infinite that there are infinite number of options to take that that path. And as I said in the last post, we can't predict the future, but we can determine how it occured.

 

[Neogaia777]

Not infinite in that there is eventually only one path. But infinite that there are infinite number of options to take that that path. And as I said in the last post, we can't predict the future, but we can determine how it occured.

The infinite number of options is an illusion though, since there is only one path/way you will take, and it is/already was (all) determined/predetermined/chosen already by "factors", or "things" or "stuff", that were also already predetermined, etc, anyway, "having not one single thing to do with you", etc, and that is how it occurred/always does occur, etc, which could also all be fully known/predicted/determined/predetermined if we knew everything, etc...

 

[Bradskii]

The infinite number of options is an illusion though, since there is only one path/way you will take, and it is/already was (all) determined/predetermined/chosen already by "factors", or "things" or "stuff", that were also already predetermined...

I tend to agree.

 

[Ophiolite]

And you know with absolute certainty do you, that it was not caused by what you just read...?

Reflect on the fact that irony can be difficult to detect in print. In this instance the irony higlights my personal view that the question of free will is, currently, necessarily indeterminate.

 

[Neogaia777]

Reflect on the fact that irony can be difficult to detect in print. In this instance the irony higlights my personal view that the question of free will is, currently, necessarily indeterminate.

Well, you are (supposedly) free to your opinions and your views.

Everyone is so insistent about it after all, etc.

God Bless!

 

[Ophiolite]

Well, you are (supposedly) free to your opinions and your views.

Everyone is so insistent about it after all, etc.

God Bless!

My original post, to which you responded, is the very antithesis of insistent. The heart of it lies in the sub-text, which is wholly non-commital. My indecision is final!
(Is all of this flying past your left hip?)

 

[Neogaia777]

My original post, to which you responded, is the very antithesis of insistent. The heart of it lies in the sub-text, which is wholly non-commital. My indecision is final!
(Is all of this flying past your left hip?)

I did detect the irony, and I apologize for my sense of humor (or lack thereof).

I've been told by many that sometimes I am just too serious sometimes, I'm working on it.

God Bless!

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Curious. Where elemental uniqueness of personality amongst the set of all personalities is so, then isn't the set of all personalities, therefore, unbounded(?)

The set of possible personalities is very large - unbounded for all practical purposes. But since it's an ill-defined concept that we can only crudely assess, we have to coarse-grain it - you can coarse-grain into as few personality types as you like, e.g. extrovert/introvert.

 

[SelfSim]

No...and here we have some semantics. I think a deterministic system is one where the ultimate result is determined...but not necessarily can be known, in practice, in advance.
...
There are undoubtedly a set of circumstances that lead to another set. We can work backwards from the final set to understand how it came to be from the initial set. But we can't necessarily work forward to see where the initiual set will lead us.

Ok .. so that knowledge is acquired via post-diction (curve-fitting, etc), based on current observations, but I don't think that description accounts for the uniqueness aspects appearing as other instances of the same system play out elsewhere(?)
I don't see how that definition covers that.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Therefore personalities are indeterministic (or random).
Personality is a property of a mind, and therefore personality would also be a sufficient basis for distinguishing/classifying 'a free will'?

They're not completely random because the genetic, developmental, and environmental influences are not completely random.

I don't see how having a unique personality is connected to "distinguishing/classifying 'a free will'", or even what that means - can you explain?

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

I feel compelled to say that free will is a real thing!

What do you mean by 'free will'?

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

The infinite number of options is an illusion though, since there is only one path/way you will take, and it is/already was (all) determined/predetermined/chosen already by "factors", or "things" or "stuff", that were also already predetermined, etc, anyway, "having not one single thing to do with you", etc, and that is how it occurred/always does occur, etc, which could also all be fully known/predicted/determined/predetermined if we knew everything, etc...

If we knew 'everything', we'd know the future outcome. That's not the same as it being predetermined or predictable. Also, quantum indeterminacy means that macro-scale determinism is an approximation.

 

[SelfSim]

The set of possible personalities is very large - unbounded for all practical purposes. But since it's an ill-defined concept that we can only crudely assess, we have to coarse-grain it - you can coarse-grain into as few personality types as you like, e.g. extrovert/introvert.

Scale dependent then, with some similarities and some differences, ie: not strictly 'deteministic'... (as it sort of sounded in your post, which then triggered my thinking ..)

They're not completely random because the genetic, developmental, and environmental influences are not completely random.

Ok .. fair enough ..

I don't see how having a unique personality is connected to "distinguishing/classifying 'a free will'", or even what that means - can you explain?

Uniqueness,(of personality), I think, might be a distinguishing aspect of what people mean when they think of free will .. dunno .. just throwin' it out there ..(?) (Eg: 'She's a free-spirited individual')