4 ms·

> brain and physics are very deterministic Not to get too much into the 'quantum woo' territory, but my naive understanding is that the physics is only somewha

by jagrsw 4y ago

> brain and physics are very deterministic Not to get too much into the 'quantum woo' territory, but my naive understanding is that the physics is only somewhat deterministic, b/c non-deterministic quantum events can have macroscopic effects? Say you decide for whether you'll eat a dinner, if a particle with half-time of 1 second will split within the next second. This you wouldn't be able to predict, even if you knew momenta of all particles within your local light-cone (of 1 light-second), no? (a variation of the Schroedinger's cat)

AlexandrB 4y ago
The problem is quantum effects are random. Even if they impact our behavior, RNG is not what most people think of when they say "free will". In my opinion, any coherent definition of "free will" implies a supernatural force - since it must be non-random yet not bound by deterministic chemical and physical processes. At this point it becomes a matter of faith/religion whether we have free will or not.
- pydry 4y ago
  Are there any coherent definitions of free will? I dont think I've ever seen a disprovable definition. It's like "god" or "love".
  - drdeca 4y ago
    I think I can give some sufficient conditions for a case in which I would consider someone to have “ceased to have free will”. If someone X with some manner of advanced brain altering technology was able to temporarily force someone Z’s actions to be whatever X specified into the machine, with afterwards Z remembered the experience as their taking these actions for whatever reasons X specified in the input (where this is achieved by influencing whatever is going on in Z’s head at the time, not via altering memories), then, during that duration, I think it would make sense to say that Z “did not have free will” for that duration. As for sufficient conditions for someone to have “free will”, I suppose I don’t have a great description. However, “what/who we are is the primary explanation for what we do (and so in particular, no external influence/manipulation is a primary explanation)” seems, like it has at least something right towards the goal of a good definition.
dinosaurdynasty 4y ago
There are deterministic interpretations of quantum mechanics.

by jagrsw 4y ago

AlexandrB 4y ago

The problem is quantum effects are random. Even if they impact our behavior, RNG is not what most people think of when they say "free will". In my opinion, any coherent definition of "free will" implies a supernatural force - since it must be non-random yet not bound by deterministic chemical and physical processes. At this point it becomes a matter of faith/religion whether we have free will or not.

pydry 4y ago
Are there any coherent definitions of free will? I dont think I've ever seen a disprovable definition. It's like "god" or "love".
- drdeca 4y ago
  I think I can give some sufficient conditions for a case in which I would consider someone to have “ceased to have free will”. If someone X with some manner of advanced brain altering technology was able to temporarily force someone Z’s actions to be whatever X specified into the machine, with afterwards Z remembered the experience as their taking these actions for whatever reasons X specified in the input (where this is achieved by influencing whatever is going on in Z’s head at the time, not via altering memories), then, during that duration, I think it would make sense to say that Z “did not have free will” for that duration. As for sufficient conditions for someone to have “free will”, I suppose I don’t have a great description. However, “what/who we are is the primary explanation for what we do (and so in particular, no external influence/manipulation is a primary explanation)” seems, like it has at least something right towards the goal of a good definition.

dinosaurdynasty 4y ago

There are deterministic interpretations of quantum mechanics.