6 ms·
For me "freedom of choice" argument always seemed completely philosophical with no practical implications. But still, philosophical arguments are fun.
by Svoka 8y ago
For me "freedom of choice" argument always seemed completely philosophical with no practical implications. But still, philosophical arguments are fun.
- crooked-v 8y agoI'm personally a fan of the theological-style "everything is perfectly predestinated, and also you have full free will, and both are true at the same time" arguments.
- lenticular 8y agoI've never quite understood those kind of arguments. It seems that if that were true, then either the logic that the physical or metaphysical world runs on would be inconsistent. I suppose that isn't necessarily a deal-breaker, though.
- jMyles 8y ago> It seems that if that were true, then either the logic that the physical or metaphysical world runs on would be inconsistent. This statement itself depends on the logic which are you supposing might be deprecated.
- Retra 8y agoIf everything was predetermined, you'd simply be predetermined to feel justified in the belief that free will exists. So we would all agree to it, even if it were false. Personally, I don't see any reason it isn't a figment of the mind. Nobody is debating whether love exists. Our ability to model counterfactuals in our mind doesn't have any broader philosophical implications, so I don't see why free will would, when that may as well be all that it is.
- state_less 8y agoAs we gather more information, the free will argument seems to be looking less viable, but it'll be interesting to see how things pan out as ANNs start to guess our next moves. It might be something like picking the next word using a string of past words. Perhaps such a system could predict our actions and intervene when some poor outcome is predicted and direct us toward more positive outcomes?
- neom 8y agoI like to explore the idea that there is premeditation in asking a question, but the experiments you run to get there may contain free will.
- polynomial 8y agoHow does that work exactly?
- ridgeguy 8y agoYou're in good company: "There's a divinity that shapes our ends/ Rough hew them how we will." Hamlet, to Horatio, in Hamlet Act 5 Scene 2.
- msviss 8y agoThe argument isn’t that “everything is predestined” but there is still free will. That’s illogical by definition (and theologians are not intellectual weaklings). Rather the question is wheather, despite God’s omniscience, we still have free will. The question therefore is: is God’s omniscience equivalent to predestination? Some think yes (no free will. some Protestants and Muslims). Some think not (therefore we are free. Catholics, ppl who reject omniscience.) Personally I like Tolstoy’s take on the whole thing in WnP, because it betrays how deep his understanding of physics is (he even scratches at chaos theory).
- smoyer 8y agoI definitely believe in both but not because God is omniscience. We experience time because that's how God designed our universe and we progress along or timeline exercising free will. God on the other hand is outside our universe and can see our entire timeline. So he hasn't predestined us to make one decision or the other but is rather able to see every decision we've made in or future.
- quickthrower2 8y agoLike the series Quantum Leap?
- tylerjwilk00 8y agoI like to use a record player analogy for this concept. We are the needle. The needle responds to the environment of the record but can't see outside it's little perspective. God on other hand sees the record from above all at once. We are a consciousness needle scratching a path through 4D space-time.
- goldenkey 8y agoFurthermore, our consciousness is harmonic in nature. Every moment experienced reflects a bounded bitrate state of the brain. And death is when the needle has scratched the record so much that it has become worn flat, producing just silence. The record is still being played but the effect is all the same.. Until a new record is placed on the player. Do you identify yourself with the record or the needle? ;-)
- andrepd 8y agoSuperdeterminism?
- atq2119 8y agoThe most important thing is to acknowledge that "freedom of choice" or "free will" or any concept like that isn't a binary. Addiction and marketing both prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that we don't have "perfect" free will, and this is both (1) true regardless of what you think about determinism and (2) more relevant than any consequences of whether the universe is deterministic or not. The pragmatically relevant aspect of "free will" is to what extent our actions can be predicted and/or manipulated by others today and in the future. This necessarily involves e.g. measurement and computational limitations that others have, and it's something that occurs on a scale rather than as a binary.
- akvadrako 8y agoFreedom is choice is important because you might decide to base your choice on a property of a photon that originated in a galaxy far away. If you have no choice, than that property must have been predetermined to have a specific conspiratorial outcome, essentially since the beginning of the universe. Just to make sure you and your friend make compatible measurements. Without that assumption, every outcome can be explained as due to a highly unlikely conspiratorial setup.
- naasking 8y ago> For me "freedom of choice" argument always seemed completely philosophical with no practical implications. The "free will" debated in philosophy is not the same as the "free will" physicists talk about. The former is about moral responsibility, the latter is about being able to set experimental parameters independently of the system you're measuring.