Is there a missing link, between free will and survival of the fittest? imaginary?

[Gottservant]

Hi there,

So I just noticed this very subtle connection, and I am wondering what you can make of it. Free will has a very elusive mystery, in that when you examine what it is that gives it to you, you realize that it is more elusive than you can grasp purely by examining it - there is a sense in which you must commit to doing something with it, at the very least, before you can tell what it is supposed to be for.

Like free will, survival of the fittest is a solution to the problem of what man grasps, what is required of him, as he knows it to be required of him. It puts him in a context where his will is known - supposedly - as relative to his ability to keep himself alive, in a perpetual sense of need (being always under threat from nature). So there is a mystery, again, but this time a more limited mystery of what it is precisely, that threatens man and the "survival" of the mystery.

So there is some sort of switch there, I don't know if you can call it a connection after all, but there is a parallel, in that what is purely mysterious in one case, is mysterious in an evasively limited context in the other - much in the same way that you might enter a car from the left or from the right, depending on where you want the steering wheel to be, or whether you want to drive at all. But what is the relationship? In what sense is greater survival of the fittest more or less free will? In what sense is more or less free will, greater survival of the fittest?

Is there anything missing here?

Thanks.

 

[GrowingSmaller]

Maybe "freedom" it comes from a sense of not being compelled to decide one way or the other, in an ultra complex environment. With all the information I have, I still can't make a neat calculation of consequences even when it comes to choosing to pursue health as the moral option.

I value life and well being. BUT should I swim, walk more, cycle etc? All will improve my physical and mental well being, and therefore survival chances, but there is no overwhelming evidence in favour or one option over another....


That type of thing may give us a sense of freedom, and intuition that all viable alternatives are acceptable. This links to quatonas idea that freedom is an emotion that I can do something.

Emotions and feelings have survival value, yes. Yet they may work a lot better when there is less overload of complexity, for instance "I fear falling off the cliff" will cause avoidance of the cliff edge. Or affection towards a helper will probably increase my survival chances.

So the sense of freedom may stem from the intuitive side of survival. You're at a beach, or in a pool for example. There you can play and move at random, just on the spurr of the moment. The ultimate sense of freedom. This is especially true for children who have less knowledge of social expectations.

So maybe freedom is the adult at play beneath the infinite skies? Where life grasps and moulds life more as something akin to a work or art - to be lived in, and of and for itself - rather than because of a ready to hand practical necessity? And its when life is at its most beautiful, that it is at its most attractive...

Music and dance may then be the things your looking for? They work for me.

 

[jayem]

What appears to be free will is that we have a brain with 100 billion neurons and 100 trillion synapses. Which gives us the neural processing power to evaluate changing situations, and construct many options for how we will act. Our behavior is much more flexible than an organism with a simpler brain that behaves largely by instinct. This is an appearance of free will (though it is not absolute.) Combining this computing power with versatile tools (such as hands capable of precise motions) enables us to physically modify our environment to suit our needs. So we can survive and reproduce in varied and changing ecological niches. Humans are adaptable. Which has survival value for our species.

 

[Gottservant]

Interesting, interesting.

I came close to understanding myself, reading this.

I don't think you have yet uncovered the mechanism that allows the two extremes of will to interact, though - the mind yes, but in what way.

I suggested imagination, but I wonder if perhaps a more limited sense of imagination would do just as well - like if I said it is the influx of the imagination that describes the art of being human, whether a little free or greatly? Would that isolate the point at which the interaction is vulnerable? (Can you maximize your use of the imagination to improve the way in which they interact? Exercise yes, but what specific exercise? Intellectually?)

 

[Gottservant]

How do you get from one to the other without some kind of overlap (I guess is what I am asking)?

Where does that overlap occur? What is it?