3 ms·
If you take an action based on determining the probabilities of an event, you would take that action every single time because the state would be identical ever
by esotericn 8y ago
If you take an action based on determining the probabilities of an event, you would take that action every single time because the state would be identical every time.
You look at the roulette board. You bet on red.
We rewind time.
You still bet on red. The state is identical.
Did _you_ come up with that decision? Of course you did, who else could have?
My claim is not that there's no "you".
It's that "free will" is meaningless unless we use a weird interpretation of terminology.
If you'd do the same thing every time, there's no 'freedom'.
If you do different things, but it's based on some sort of tiebreaker RNG, there's no 'will'.
- simonh 8y agoThat is true, but only for some definitions of free and will. I don't accept definitions of 'free' that exclude inputs from my personal mental state. If my mental state doesn't determine the choice, then the choice isn't mine. Note that there could be random elements in my mental makeup. i.e. my mental state might include input from an RNG, but it's still part of me and as long as it's not the only input into any of my choices, we can still talk about responsibility. See my comment about No Country for old Men on choosing to use randomness.
- tylerjwilk00 8y agoLet's excuse that we have to invoke time travel, and that once the choice has been made it is now part of the past of our collapsed reality... The point you seem to be making: A) If I make the same choice everytime there is no free will. B) If I make different choices everytime there is no free will? Or perhaps even there is no "me"? Free will could entail the will to choose the same thing every time AND the will to choose something different. If we can't accept that then perhaps an argument could be made that there is no such thing as "you".