3 ms·

OK, but if we're just atoms that obey physics, where does free will come into play? Neurons make electrical impulses or something right? How do we control tha

OK, but if we're just atoms that obey physics, where does free will come into play? Neurons make electrical impulses or something right? How do we control that so that it is possible that we could both choose to eat a hamburger or a pizza?

eli_gottlieb 10y ago
>OK, but if we're just atoms that obey physics, where does free will come into play? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compatibilism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compatibilism . Or to say more on the matter, free will is the ability to engage in counterfactual reasoning, and thus select actions according to motivations and understandings of the world rather than having actions determined without an understanding of the world. "Free will" says that the causal path from our circumstances to our actions passes through our motivations and our knowledge, thus making our intentions causal factors in the world.
- studentrob 10y ago
  That just sounds like a redefinition of free will to me. Free will and determinism aren't combinable, in my opinion. If you say there's free will alongside something else, then that's the free will view. Determinism says only one thing is possible, and free will says anything is possible. If you say that both just one thing is possible and also anything is possible, well, to me, that sounds a lot like you're saying anything is possible.
  - eli_gottlieb 10y ago
    >That just sounds like a redefinition of free will to me. Only if you start by assuming that "free" will must, necessarily, be supernatural. But of course, if you start that way, you've started everything in bad faith, because you're going to reject any possible view of the world that relies on science instead of magic. >free will says anything is possible No sensible definition of free will says that you can will yourself to desire slood (a substance you've never heard of because it doesn't actually exist and has no properties even as a hypothetical) or will yourself out of the influence of gravity.
    - studentrob 10y ago
      > Only if you start by assuming that "free" will must, necessarily, be supernatural. But of course, if you start that way, you've started everything in bad faith, because you're going to reject any possible view of the world that relies on science instead of magic. I'm willing to admit there are parts of science we don't understand, and that people often label this as "magic". In my opinion, sometimes humans call it religion and use it as a form of hope as we continue in the quest to know the unknown. Admittedly, any tool can be used to do harm too, and clearly in 2016, many of us can see how many religions have been perverted. Yet at the same time I think religious folks tend to levy the same criticism of strict scientists. Anyway, I have no beef with either side, and I know I won't be able to convince anyone here that science can also be viewed as a religion with its own biases. Plus I believe that most of the time science is great. I just don't know about this quest for true AI. It feels religion-y to me. > No sensible definition of free will says that you can will yourself to desire slood (a substance you've never heard of because it doesn't actually exist and has no properties even as a hypothetical) or will yourself out of the influence of gravity. Right, no, I didn't mean it like that. The thing I wanted to share is that free will and determinism cannot co-exist, in my opinion, for the reason stated in my last comment. Say I have a choice - pizza or pasta. If I choose pizza, then free will says I also could've chosen pasta. Determinism says if I chose pizza, then the "choice" was always going to be pizza. If you say both that I could've chosen pizza or pasta, and that I was fated to choose pizza, that makes no sense to me. [aside] It sounds like quantum mechanics, which I'm unable to observe myself because I don't have the training or equipment to do something like a double slit test as demoed here [1]. Also I haven't studied quantum mechanics at all. And, I'm not sure how trustable Dr. Quantum is as a source of information =). It's the first I've learned of quantum theory. I found another that says the same thing from the Royal Institution [2], which seems more reputable, but something tells me these findings haven't been replicated sufficiently to be fact. Or I could be 100% wrong. [/aside] Anyway, I'm interested in learning more, so if you have resources you think can point me in an interesting direction, I'm happy to check them out. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q1YqgPAtzho https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q1YqgPAtzho [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A9tKncAdlHQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A9tKncAdlHQ
      - 10y ago

eli_gottlieb 10y ago

>OK, but if we're just atoms that obey physics, where does free will come into play? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compatibilism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compatibilism . Or to say more on the matter, free will is the ability to engage in counterfactual reasoning, and thus select actions according to motivations and understandings of the world rather than having actions determined without an understanding of the world. "Free will" says that the causal path from our circumstances to our actions passes through our motivations and our knowledge, thus making our intentions causal factors in the world.

studentrob 10y ago
That just sounds like a redefinition of free will to me. Free will and determinism aren't combinable, in my opinion. If you say there's free will alongside something else, then that's the free will view. Determinism says only one thing is possible, and free will says anything is possible. If you say that both just one thing is possible and also anything is possible, well, to me, that sounds a lot like you're saying anything is possible.
- eli_gottlieb 10y ago
  >That just sounds like a redefinition of free will to me. Only if you start by assuming that "free" will must, necessarily, be supernatural. But of course, if you start that way, you've started everything in bad faith, because you're going to reject any possible view of the world that relies on science instead of magic. >free will says anything is possible No sensible definition of free will says that you can will yourself to desire slood (a substance you've never heard of because it doesn't actually exist and has no properties even as a hypothetical) or will yourself out of the influence of gravity.
  - studentrob 10y ago
    > Only if you start by assuming that "free" will must, necessarily, be supernatural. But of course, if you start that way, you've started everything in bad faith, because you're going to reject any possible view of the world that relies on science instead of magic. I'm willing to admit there are parts of science we don't understand, and that people often label this as "magic". In my opinion, sometimes humans call it religion and use it as a form of hope as we continue in the quest to know the unknown. Admittedly, any tool can be used to do harm too, and clearly in 2016, many of us can see how many religions have been perverted. Yet at the same time I think religious folks tend to levy the same criticism of strict scientists. Anyway, I have no beef with either side, and I know I won't be able to convince anyone here that science can also be viewed as a religion with its own biases. Plus I believe that most of the time science is great. I just don't know about this quest for true AI. It feels religion-y to me. > No sensible definition of free will says that you can will yourself to desire slood (a substance you've never heard of because it doesn't actually exist and has no properties even as a hypothetical) or will yourself out of the influence of gravity. Right, no, I didn't mean it like that. The thing I wanted to share is that free will and determinism cannot co-exist, in my opinion, for the reason stated in my last comment. Say I have a choice - pizza or pasta. If I choose pizza, then free will says I also could've chosen pasta. Determinism says if I chose pizza, then the "choice" was always going to be pizza. If you say both that I could've chosen pizza or pasta, and that I was fated to choose pizza, that makes no sense to me. [aside] It sounds like quantum mechanics, which I'm unable to observe myself because I don't have the training or equipment to do something like a double slit test as demoed here [1]. Also I haven't studied quantum mechanics at all. And, I'm not sure how trustable Dr. Quantum is as a source of information =). It's the first I've learned of quantum theory. I found another that says the same thing from the Royal Institution [2], which seems more reputable, but something tells me these findings haven't been replicated sufficiently to be fact. Or I could be 100% wrong. [/aside] Anyway, I'm interested in learning more, so if you have resources you think can point me in an interesting direction, I'm happy to check them out. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q1YqgPAtzho https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q1YqgPAtzho [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A9tKncAdlHQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A9tKncAdlHQ
    - 10y ago