Forum Home Forum Home > Topics not related to music > General Polls
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Free Will vs. Determinism
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedFree Will vs. Determinism
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123>
Poll Question: Which view is closer to your own and why?
Poll Choice Votes Poll Statistics
9 [42.86%]
12 [57.14%]
This topic is closed, no new votes accepted

Author
Message Reverse Sort Order
  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
progvortex View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member


Joined: September 21 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 242 		Direct Link To This Post Topic: Free Will vs. Determinism
    Posted: April 14 2009 at 20:46
I will choose a path that's clear, I will choose freewill.

Life is like a beanstalk... isn't it?
Back to Top
Fists View Drop Down
Forum Newbie
Forum Newbie
Avatar

Joined: April 08 2009
Location: Canberra, Aus
Status: Offline
Points: 23 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 11 2009 at 23:21
Originally posted by Negoba Negoba wrote:

Originally posted by Epignosis Epignosis wrote:

Originally posted by Fists Fists wrote:

I'm with Logan  the Captain and others. Sice our consciousnes is made of predictable electrochemical reactions what we see as a descision made is actually just a one path action-reaction deal so while we think things are decided on when they happen it was sort of inevitable.
 
This theory supports being able to predict the future, with enough computing power (billions of times what exists in the sum of all devices now) we could predict all the reactions that will happen.


Only as quantum physics shows, the very act of "observing" the particles will change their behavior and our predictions will be false.  LOL
 
 
Exactly right.....and this is a monkey wrench that comes AFTER the fact that interactive dynamic variable in huge numbers are far far beyond our mathematics, let alone our computing power.
 
Pure determinism is at minimum functionally inaccurate.
 
Note the word billions, and there was a time where inticate fluid dynamics were completely ineffable (yay big word) but geniuses continue to break massive boudaries so assuming the human race survives long enough the algorithms could be found in time and super advanced photonics with nanotube vacuums or something will provide computing power
Back to Top
Sasquamo View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: September 26 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 828 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 11 2009 at 08:58
Well, I think it's pretty obvious that everybody has the ability to make their own choices and do their own thing, the confusing part is whether people will actually use their ability for free will, and whether using your free will can actually make much of a difference.
Back to Top
Negoba View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: July 24 2008
Location: Big Muddy
Status: Offline
Points: 5210 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 09 2009 at 09:04
Originally posted by Epignosis Epignosis wrote:

Originally posted by Fists Fists wrote:

I'm with Logan  the Captain and others. Sice our consciousnes is made of predictable electrochemical reactions what we see as a descision made is actually just a one path action-reaction deal so while we think things are decided on when they happen it was sort of inevitable.
 
This theory supports being able to predict the future, with enough computing power (billions of times what exists in the sum of all devices now) we could predict all the reactions that will happen.


Only as quantum physics shows, the very act of "observing" the particles will change their behavior and our predictions will be false.  LOL
 
 
Exactly right.....and this is a monkey wrench that comes AFTER the fact that interactive dynamic variable in huge numbers are far far beyond our mathematics, let alone our computing power.
 
Pure determinism is at minimum functionally inaccurate.
You are quite a fine person, and I am very fond of you. But you are only quite a little fellow, in a wide world, after all.
Back to Top
Epignosis View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: December 30 2007
Location: Raeford, NC
Status: Offline
Points: 32550 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 09 2009 at 07:14
Originally posted by Fists Fists wrote:

I'm with Logan  the Captain and others. Sice our consciousnes is made of predictable electrochemical reactions what we see as a descision made is actually just a one path action-reaction deal so while we think things are decided on when they happen it was sort of inevitable.
 
This theory supports being able to predict the future, with enough computing power (billions of times what exists in the sum of all devices now) we could predict all the reactions that will happen.


Only as quantum physics shows, the very act of "observing" the particles will change their behavior and our predictions will be false.  LOL
https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays
Back to Top
Fists View Drop Down
Forum Newbie
Forum Newbie
Avatar

Joined: April 08 2009
Location: Canberra, Aus
Status: Offline
Points: 23 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 09 2009 at 07:05
I'm with Logan  the Captain and others. Sice our consciousnes is made of predictable electrochemical reactions what we see as a descision made is actually just a one path action-reaction deal so while we think things are decided on when they happen it was sort of inevitable.
 
This theory supports being able to predict the future, with enough computing power (billions of times what exists in the sum of all devices now) we could predict all the reactions that will happen.
Back to Top
Negoba View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: July 24 2008
Location: Big Muddy
Status: Offline
Points: 5210 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 31 2009 at 14:08
Originally posted by BaldJean BaldJean wrote:

Originally posted by Negoba Negoba wrote:

http://www.calresco.org/lucas/philos.htm
 
 
That one has some of the basics of complexity theory.
 
And it actually is exactly what Epignosis also said.
 
You start with the idea of Emergence. That a group of individual parts, depending on their relationships can become a new whole with different properties, abilities, and behavior.
 
Cells are capable of behavior that is impossible to individual organelles, organisms more than their individual cells, and the brain more than individual nerves. In fact, who you are is a series of stacked emergent phenomenon. You are relationships of relationships. One of the emergent properties of the emergent phenomenon that is the human being is free will. That free will is dependent on less complex, yet dynamic components, that in term on more static elements working under more strictly mechanistic rules.
 
There is both a separation and a connection between the levels of emergence. Choices made by the mind effect the cells (cut yourself) and disruptions at the cellular level effect the consciousness (sickness). All the while those two things are in some ways completely oblivious to each other.
 
One bite at a time.

Friede and I said the very same thing in the atheism post. the most complex self-regulating system of all is the universe. since already we mere humans can develop a consciousness, is it then not a sound assumption that the universe as a whole, which is an incredibly more complex self-regulating system, has a consciousness too?
 
There is with almost complete certainty other complex systems which have gotten as far as human kind...a paraphrase of Carl Sagan who always said it's virtually impossible for life to have evolved in only one place. Well the fact is that randomly, a system as complex as life itself let alone the level of self reflection of humans is impossible by chance. Instead, through successive levels of self-organizing systems, order has been concentrated to this incredible degree. It is unconceivable that this is the only time or place that it has happened. Now what that system looks like, whether we would call it "life" in any way that we would recognize, is hard to say. That their are universe wide level is certainly possible.
 
At the same time, it is dangerous to extrapolate too far with scientific knowledge. The majority of people today still don't understand Darwin, natural selection, or equally important concepts such as genetic drift, and yet "Evolution" is the dominant mythos of the world. And many many people still believe in Social Darwinist principles which have always been complete and total bunk.
You are quite a fine person, and I am very fond of you. But you are only quite a little fellow, in a wide world, after all.
Back to Top
Equality 7-2521 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: August 11 2005
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Points: 15784 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 31 2009 at 13:56
Originally posted by Negoba Negoba wrote:

Start here:
 
 
It's not all that different in some ways from what Logan was getting at.
 
Obviously, your will is not completely free. The number of choices you have is bounded...you can't choose to instantaneously change gender or teleport or a massive number of things. Some things are possible but difficult, making the likelihood of choosing those alternatives lower.
 
At the same time, the interactions of events in a dynamic world are so complex that any attempt at a realistic model of determinism is, in effect, identical to what most people mean by free will anyway.
 
The site mentioned above is enormous and one of the subjects is self-regulating systems. This refers to the fact that some systems actually have the ability to change their own state, and thereby alter their own boundary conditions. This is for all intents and purposes, functionally equivalent to free will. 


It seems I misunderstood your post really. I though you were trying to claim something much stronger and unrelated to what you were, which confused me given I've done a fair amount of work in dynamical systems.

The links you gave are pretty cool reading especially for those scared off by formalism.
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
Back to Top
BaldJean View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: May 28 2005
Location: Germany
Status: Offline
Points: 10387 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 31 2009 at 13:37
Originally posted by Negoba Negoba wrote:

http://www.calresco.org/lucas/philos.htm
 
 
That one has some of the basics of complexity theory.
 
And it actually is exactly what Epignosis also said.
 
You start with the idea of Emergence. That a group of individual parts, depending on their relationships can become a new whole with different properties, abilities, and behavior.
 
Cells are capable of behavior that is impossible to individual organelles, organisms more than their individual cells, and the brain more than individual nerves. In fact, who you are is a series of stacked emergent phenomenon. You are relationships of relationships. One of the emergent properties of the emergent phenomenon that is the human being is free will. That free will is dependent on less complex, yet dynamic components, that in term on more static elements working under more strictly mechanistic rules.
 
There is both a separation and a connection between the levels of emergence. Choices made by the mind effect the cells (cut yourself) and disruptions at the cellular level effect the consciousness (sickness). All the while those two things are in some ways completely oblivious to each other.
 
One bite at a time.

Friede and I said the very same thing in the atheism post. the most complex self-regulating system of all is the universe. since already we mere humans can develop a consciousness, is it then not a sound assumption that the universe as a whole, which is an incredibly more complex self-regulating system, has a consciousness too?


A shot of me as High Priestess of Gaia during our fall festival. Ceterum censeo principiis obsta
Back to Top
Negoba View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: July 24 2008
Location: Big Muddy
Status: Offline
Points: 5210 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 31 2009 at 13:13
http://www.calresco.org/lucas/philos.htm
 
 
That one has some of the basics of complexity theory.
 
And it actually is exactly what Epignosis also said.
 
You start with the idea of Emergence. That a group of individual parts, depending on their relationships can become a new whole with different properties, abilities, and behavior.
 
Cells are capable of behavior that is impossible to individual organelles, organisms more than their individual cells, and the brain more than individual nerves. In fact, who you are is a series of stacked emergent phenomenon. You are relationships of relationships. One of the emergent properties of the emergent phenomenon that is the human being is free will. That free will is dependent on less complex, yet dynamic components, that in term on more static elements working under more strictly mechanistic rules.
 
There is both a separation and a connection between the levels of emergence. Choices made by the mind effect the cells (cut yourself) and disruptions at the cellular level effect the consciousness (sickness). All the while those two things are in some ways completely oblivious to each other.
 
One bite at a time.


Edited by Negoba - March 31 2009 at 13:20
You are quite a fine person, and I am very fond of you. But you are only quite a little fellow, in a wide world, after all.
Back to Top
Alitare View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: March 08 2008
Location: New York
Status: Offline
Points: 3595 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 31 2009 at 12:55
Originally posted by Negoba Negoba wrote:

Start here:
 
 
It's not all that different in some ways from what Logan was getting at.
 
Obviously, your will is not completely free. The number of choices you have is bounded...you can't choose to instantaneously change gender or teleport or a massive number of things. Some things are possible but difficult, making the likelihood of choosing those alternatives lower.
 
At the same time, the interactions of events in a dynamic world are so complex that any attempt at a realistic model of determinism is, in effect, identical to what most people mean by free will anyway.
 
The site mentioned above is enormous and one of the subjects is self-regulating systems. This refers to the fact that some systems actually have the ability to change their own state, and thereby alter their own boundary conditions. This is for all intents and purposes, functionally equivalent to free will. 


I am highly interested in such a notion, and would love to hear any further thoughts you've come to on the matter. I abstain from voting, as of now. So far though, I want to agree with you.
Back to Top
Epignosis View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: December 30 2007
Location: Raeford, NC
Status: Offline
Points: 32550 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 31 2009 at 12:12
Originally posted by rpe9p rpe9p wrote:

Originally posted by Epignosis Epignosis wrote:

Every person's brain is a material entity, full of synapses and "working parts," that compute data at a rapid rate, and produce our choices.

The fact that it's our brain that produces choices do not make those choice any less ours (or any less free, I would argue).

As I've mentioned, determinism makes freewill possible.

If there is no materialistic determinism, then the only alternative is universe of complete randomness- and no freewill is possible at all in a random universe.


I dont understand what you are trying to say at all.  It seems like you are trying to make an argument for determinism


I'm what you might call a compatibilist- freewill only exists because our world is governed by deterministic laws (aka physics).  Take away determinism, and you cannot have freewill.
https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays
Back to Top
rpe9p View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: December 31 2008
Location: Charlottesville
Status: Offline
Points: 485 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 31 2009 at 12:01
Originally posted by Epignosis Epignosis wrote:

Every person's brain is a material entity, full of synapses and "working parts," that compute data at a rapid rate, and produce our choices.

The fact that it's our brain that produces choices do not make those choice any less ours (or any less free, I would argue).

As I've mentioned, determinism makes freewill possible.

If there is no materialistic determinism, then the only alternative is universe of complete randomness- and no freewill is possible at all in a random universe.


I dont understand what you are trying to say at all.  It seems like you are trying to make an argument for determinism
Back to Top
Anthe View Drop Down
Forum Groupie
Forum Groupie
Avatar

Joined: December 29 2008
Location: Netherlands
Status: Offline
Points: 48 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 31 2009 at 09:45
Originally posted by Negoba Negoba wrote:

http://www.calresco.org/perturb.htm

The site mentioned above is enormous and one of the subjects is self-regulating systems. This refers to the fact that some systems actually have the ability to change their own state, and thereby alter their own boundary conditions. This is for all intents and purposes, functionally equivalent to free will. 

Looks like an interesting site! 

I like what you say here and somehow I think that indeed the essense of free will is a 'self-regulating system' that can 'alter their own boundary conditions'. 








Edited by Anthe - March 31 2009 at 09:48
Back to Top
BaldJean View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: May 28 2005
Location: Germany
Status: Offline
Points: 10387 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 31 2009 at 09:45
when it comes to a debate on free will I usually recommend this reading:
http://www.newbanner.com/SecHumSCM/IsGodTaoist.html
it is an excellent essay on the topic in the form of a dialog between a mortal and God, written by logician Raymond Smullyan.
one of the first things God says is that both the determinists and the defenders of free will are right. and he explains why


A shot of me as High Priestess of Gaia during our fall festival. Ceterum censeo principiis obsta
Back to Top
Negoba View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: July 24 2008
Location: Big Muddy
Status: Offline
Points: 5210 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 31 2009 at 09:06
Start here:
 
 
It's not all that different in some ways from what Logan was getting at.
 
Obviously, your will is not completely free. The number of choices you have is bounded...you can't choose to instantaneously change gender or teleport or a massive number of things. Some things are possible but difficult, making the likelihood of choosing those alternatives lower.
 
At the same time, the interactions of events in a dynamic world are so complex that any attempt at a realistic model of determinism is, in effect, identical to what most people mean by free will anyway.
 
The site mentioned above is enormous and one of the subjects is self-regulating systems. This refers to the fact that some systems actually have the ability to change their own state, and thereby alter their own boundary conditions. This is for all intents and purposes, functionally equivalent to free will. 
You are quite a fine person, and I am very fond of you. But you are only quite a little fellow, in a wide world, after all.
Back to Top
Equality 7-2521 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: August 11 2005
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Points: 15784 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 31 2009 at 08:44
Originally posted by Negoba Negoba wrote:

Guys, the math already has identified the answer to this with the advent of chaos theory, and it can actually be broken down into pretty understandable sense.

The entire universe is a combination of randomness which operates within boundary conditions. No boundary is absolute, and given a certain catalyst energy, a set condition can reach some very interesting combinations.
 
That is to say, that the boundaries on your choices are hard but not absolute. Within those boundaries is quite a bit of freedom. The more you push against the boundaries, the less choice you actually have.
 
I could babble on forever on this subject, but it actually is very close to my current religious beliefs so I get worked up....
 
It's called complexity theory, edge of chaos....if anyone's interested we can explore the rabbit hole. Must not be afraid of math to enter.

Please explore it, the notion seems incredibly absurd on the surface. 
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
Back to Top
Epignosis View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: December 30 2007
Location: Raeford, NC
Status: Offline
Points: 32550 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 31 2009 at 08:25
Every person's brain is a material entity, full of synapses and "working parts," that compute data at a rapid rate, and produce our choices.

The fact that it's our brain that produces choices do not make those choice any less ours (or any less free, I would argue).

As I've mentioned, determinism makes freewill possible.

If there is no materialistic determinism, then the only alternative is universe of complete randomness- and no freewill is possible at all in a random universe.
https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays
Back to Top
Anthe View Drop Down
Forum Groupie
Forum Groupie
Avatar

Joined: December 29 2008
Location: Netherlands
Status: Offline
Points: 48 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 31 2009 at 03:55
Originally posted by Logan Logan wrote:

That our conscious mind is acting in coordination with our sub or semi conscious mind (I do believe in internal and external factors when it comes to deliberation and execution).  We consciously deliberate and these facets of our mind effect resolution (we we react in any given situation).  The subconscious is "programmed," if you will, and the "conscious mind" is being affected by external and internal factors.  Still not free will.  But if one believes in "free will" as a concept can depend on how one defines it.  Rather like some of the categories at this site, ;), we can define things into existence.

I very much agree with this, although I voted free will. But I certainly do not believe we have the free will to do what ever we want or to become whatever we want. I think it often might seem that way, but soon there are many obstructions (indeed internal and external) and there comes a moment to realise the road has a dead end. And personally I think that is the moment to listen careful to your own subconscious mind and change direction if that is needed. 

So I see the free will as consciously acting upon what happens. Very limited free will in my opinion, but at the same time essential. And maybe indeed depending on how you define free will and determinism. 
Back to Top
Queen By-Tor View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: September 13 2006
Location: Xanadu
Status: Offline
Points: 16111 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 31 2009 at 02:29
*Tries to avoid making a connection to the Rush song of the same name*



Personally I don't believe in destiny, or a guiding hand of fate - I don't believe in forever or love as a mystical state. I don't believe in the stars or the planets, or angels watching from above ... (so far so good) ... After all, there are those who think that life is nothing left to chance, a host of holy horrors do direct our aimless dance ... (DAMN!)


I voted Free Will
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.188 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.