Free Will

(lappy: no scholar)

I like Wyatt's more introspective approach to it all. I'm often aware that I'm not aware of my options and I can tell that some of my opinions are random, default or hereditary. I believe he touches on both of those points.

PS, neato "versus" thread. o;)


Edited by laplace - March 17 2008 at 18:00

laplace wrote: Actually, I've always liked that bit in "Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency" where Dirk hypnotises Mike, or Mark, or whatever he was called, to jump into a canal when he mentions a certain word, and once he does, Dirk asks him why he did what he did and he can formulate a perfectly reasonable and entirely fictitious response. I know that's only a little relevant, but in that character there is a lot of me. o:)

I love that book.  My first attempt at a novella was heavily inspired by it.  Mine is a poor post, as I can't concentrate well, but what is also interesting, as I recall, is that Dirk later on told Richard that we can be influenced to do certain things that we wouldn't normally do, and then rationalise those actions that were effected by others, but we won't do, or it's much harder to get someone to do, something that goes against a person's character.  External factors effected his jumping in the canal, but his disposition allowed it.  We feel the need to rationalise the apparently irrational, and it can become a lasting fiction we truly believe in.  We feel the need to make sense of things and ourselves -- when we don't see or understand the determining factors that causes us to act in some, generally unacceptable (in particular) way, we are liable to construct.  I know people who have done selfish, hurtful, stupid or embarrassing things, and have rationalised  it in an absurd manner, but I believe, in some cases, that they believed those rationalisations (or came to believe them later), even though the initial motivations behind the action were clearly different. Can be a way of dealing with guilt or embarrassment -- some rewrite history and it becomes their truth.  I loved how Richard made sense of his actions where he didn't think it odd at all -- a perfectly reasonable thing to do.  Bringing meaning, making sense... We like to be in control of ourselves, but in my view, we're controlled by causal chains (which includes disposition and environmental factors).

^Now I hope you're not just saying that as a Rush fan.  

Incidentally, Laplace, just thought of this are you named after Simon-Pierre Laplace?

From wikipedia

Causal (or nomological) determinism is the thesis that future events are necessitated by past and present events combined with the laws of nature. Such determinism is sometimes illustrated by the thought experiment of Laplace's demon. Imagine an entity that knows all facts about the past and the present, and knows all natural laws that govern the universe. Such an entity might, under certain circumstances, be able to use this knowledge to foresee the future, down to the smallest detail.[5] Simon-Pierre Laplace's determinist dogma (as described by Stephen Hawkings) is generally referred to as "scientific determinism" and predicated on the supposition that all events have a cause and effect and the precise combination of events at a particular time engender a particular outcome. [3]. This causal determinism has a direct relationship with predictability. (Perfect) predictability implies strict determinism, but lack of predictability does not necessarily imply lack of determinism. Limitations on predictability could alternatively be caused by lack of information, excessive complexity, etc. An example of this could be found by looking at a bomb dropping from the air. Through mathematics, we can predict the time the bomb will take to reach the ground, and we also know what will happen once the bomb explodes.

[QUOTE=Logan]^Now I hope you're not just saying that as a Rush fan.  



[QUOTE]
No. I listened to the other song. I like Rush's Freewill better. But the other song wasnt bad. Is it worth it checking out more by Robert Wyatt??

Edited by jwxlite - March 17 2008 at 20:01

laplace wrote: I did take my name from his, but I did it while I was in a strange mood - I was fixating on black holes, despite knowing nothing about them, and wondering at the profundity of suggesting their existence. I hadn't really been aware of his philosophical work because, as I said, I'm no scholar... Plus I like the way the name sounds. =)

All I knew him by was LaPlace transforms in Diff EQ.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laplace_transform

Damned useful for solving some 2nd order differentials, though the the roots of the fractional equations that usually result can be difficult to determine.


Edited by Deathrabbit - March 18 2008 at 02:50

I never heard Waitt's song so I go with RUSH....

What can I say?   Demented forces push me madly round a treadmill. 

Determinism for me, hard if twas not too bold to say so, but this hasn't always been the case. As a younger person (tho' I still be young) with less experiences under my belt I was of a polar opinion, I actually remember been quite horrified by determinism upon first encounter partly because my feeble mind was interpreting the ideas more in relation to defeatism. I think this reaction demostrated well the state of mind I was in at the time. 

So I guess it is Wyatt.

Rush Rush Rush!

I've never heard Wyatt's song, while of course I know Rush's by heart. However, in many ways Wyatt's lyrics appeal to me more, since I happen to share his 'soft determinist' stance. As a matter of fact, I find libertarianism quite abhorrent in many ways - I generally call it 'God complex', and I see it as leading directly to social darwinism. Personally,  I think our will can influence what happens to us only up to a point there are undoubtedly factors beyond our control. On the other hand, I believe that 'hard determinism' can lead people to be far too passive, and adopt the stance (which I hate) of 'nothing can be done about it'.