4 ms·

This stuff makes my head hurt. I can choose to have beer for breakfast, or I can restrain myself and eat some eggs & toast instead. I have faced this choice n

This stuff makes my head hurt. I can choose to have beer for breakfast, or I can restrain myself and eat some eggs & toast instead. I have faced this choice numerous times, and I do not choose the same way every time. I can feel that choice dangling in front of me, and know I have the ability to do either one. Sometimes I can't decide, and I flip a coin. The idea that free will doesn't exist is not a concept most humans beings are ready to even try to think about-- I like to think I possess at least average intelligence, and despite trying for years I cannot make sense of the world while trying to hold that thought in my mind. There is a lot of stuff we do 'automatically', but a world where my choices are all deterministic simply does not make sense to me and is not useful.

jes 6y ago
I can relate. I have been a informal student of this topic for the last five years or so. In my case, my study of the topic has helped me to manifest more compassion for myself and for others. That change, in turn, improved all my relationships.
- slfnflctd 6y ago
  I guess I should amend the last part of what I said with, "[is not useful] ...when considering my own behavior." With regard to evaluating others, I agree that this mindset can definitely help foster increased kindness, which in many circumstances is one of the most useful outcomes you can hope for. For example, it does seem fairly clear at this point that the retribution/punishment model of treating lawbreakers causes more problems than it solves.
vidarh 6y ago
For me it is the idea of what it would mean to actually have free will that makes my mind hurts, because it is such an bizarre idea. Maybe it is because of decades of software development hammering in causality. Because free will implies that cause and effect breaks down, but in a way that is not random but governed by some agency that is not following the cause and effect of the physical structure of the brain. Where would that agency come from? How would it enable a decision that is not then just deterministic one step removed, or randomness one step removed, or agency one step removed? And so we have infinite regression: For each additional step of agency you add to sidestep the problem, the same questions arises of how the decision can be made without being a combination of determinism and randomness or involve some external agency... Conversely, the idea that we do not have free will is easy to resolve for me: Consider yourself a character in a movie. Conceptually your character has free will within the movie universe. Your character could have chosen differently if it had been written differently. But in the movie they will always make the same choice, no matter how many times you rewind, because the choice is already locked in.
- adjkant 6y ago
  And that doesn't get into the weeds even! If we follow that computer model style of thinking, I think it's quite interesting that we still have no real randomness in computing, only computing seemingly random signals from the outside world.
- apta 6y ago
  If there's no free will as you're positing, what logically follows is that we should not have a legal system. Why punish someone because they stole for example? It was all pre-determined. This is where this line of reasoning breaks apart quickly. Just because our minds can't rationalize the vast unknowns of the universe, doesn't mean that we should jump to simplistic conclusions based on our experiences.
  - dragonwriter 6y ago
    > If there's no free will as you're positing, what logically follows is that we should not have a legal system. That does not follow. In fact, the idea that we “should” or “should not” is irrelevant unless you assume free will. Because what we should do only matters if we have a choice.
    - apta 6y ago
      So as you're putting it, it doesn't matter, it's all the same either way whether we or don't have a legal system. So why punish people if they don't have free will?
      - vidarh 6y ago
        You would have an interest in doing what minimises harm to society rather than for punishment. That means focusing on rehabilitation rather than vengeance. Consider that eg the US legal system has absolutely awful reoffending rates compared to eg Norway - it is geared for punishment rather than minimising harm.
      - dragonwriter 6y ago

jes 6y ago

I can relate. I have been a informal student of this topic for the last five years or so. In my case, my study of the topic has helped me to manifest more compassion for myself and for others. That change, in turn, improved all my relationships.

slfnflctd 6y ago
I guess I should amend the last part of what I said with, "[is not useful] ...when considering my own behavior." With regard to evaluating others, I agree that this mindset can definitely help foster increased kindness, which in many circumstances is one of the most useful outcomes you can hope for. For example, it does seem fairly clear at this point that the retribution/punishment model of treating lawbreakers causes more problems than it solves.

vidarh 6y ago

For me it is the idea of what it would mean to actually have free will that makes my mind hurts, because it is such an bizarre idea. Maybe it is because of decades of software development hammering in causality. Because free will implies that cause and effect breaks down, but in a way that is not random but governed by some agency that is not following the cause and effect of the physical structure of the brain. Where would that agency come from? How would it enable a decision that is not then just deterministic one step removed, or randomness one step removed, or agency one step removed? And so we have infinite regression: For each additional step of agency you add to sidestep the problem, the same questions arises of how the decision can be made without being a combination of determinism and randomness or involve some external agency... Conversely, the idea that we do not have free will is easy to resolve for me: Consider yourself a character in a movie. Conceptually your character has free will within the movie universe. Your character could have chosen differently if it had been written differently. But in the movie they will always make the same choice, no matter how many times you rewind, because the choice is already locked in.

adjkant 6y ago
And that doesn't get into the weeds even! If we follow that computer model style of thinking, I think it's quite interesting that we still have no real randomness in computing, only computing seemingly random signals from the outside world.
apta 6y ago
If there's no free will as you're positing, what logically follows is that we should not have a legal system. Why punish someone because they stole for example? It was all pre-determined. This is where this line of reasoning breaks apart quickly. Just because our minds can't rationalize the vast unknowns of the universe, doesn't mean that we should jump to simplistic conclusions based on our experiences.
- dragonwriter 6y ago
  > If there's no free will as you're positing, what logically follows is that we should not have a legal system. That does not follow. In fact, the idea that we “should” or “should not” is irrelevant unless you assume free will. Because what we should do only matters if we have a choice.
  - apta 6y ago
    So as you're putting it, it doesn't matter, it's all the same either way whether we or don't have a legal system. So why punish people if they don't have free will?
    - vidarh 6y ago
      You would have an interest in doing what minimises harm to society rather than for punishment. That means focusing on rehabilitation rather than vengeance. Consider that eg the US legal system has absolutely awful reoffending rates compared to eg Norway - it is geared for punishment rather than minimising harm.
    - dragonwriter 6y ago