3 ms·

No, but it implies a lack of choice. The ball doesn't decide to become yellow. It becomes yellow.

• psyc 10y ago
  Is choice more like a process, or more like a surprise inscrutable bolt out of the blue? We aren't talking about what it feels like from the inside. We're talking about what it is.
• barrkel 10y ago
  f(x) = x > 0 ? 1 : 2 If you give this function a positive integer, it chooses returns 1; otherwise it chooses to return 2. This is what I think choice is. g = () => f1 = (x) => x > 0 ? 1 : 2 f2 = (x) => x > 0 ? 10 : 20 f = f1 return (x) => if x > 100 f = f2 f(x) f = g() This is a function that can change its mind, and choose different results when it's given different input. I see this as isomorphic with what you call choice, and I believe that any distinction you see is in your imagination. You don't know what the algorithm feels like on the inside; for all you know, a machine executing these instructions feels like it's got free will. You can't prove otherwise.
  • sgt101 10y ago
    Hello, I think what I regards as choice and free will includes autonomy - which is the ability to decide to pursue and, by implication, create goals. I think that there is type 1 autonomy where an entity is free to undertake goals according to "choice" of the sort that I believe you are outlining above. Essentially a type 1 autonoma can create and modify plans like the code you have written down above. A type 2 autonoma can decide to do, or not do things. It can write the code you have written, if it decides to go on a functional programming course.... To me this is the difference between the weather and a sentient entity. I think of computer programs in the same category as I think of the weather, but I see sentient entities in a different category. I don't exclude machines from this category now, but I see all the machines that I have had experience of a part of category 1. How a machine could be described that fits into category 2 eludes me - and everyone else I think.