3 ms·

The probabilistic indeterminacy of quantum physics is scarcely a refuge for free will. You may as well say a computer has free will because you gave it a Geige

The probabilistic indeterminacy of quantum physics is scarcely a refuge for free will. You may as well say a computer has free will because you gave it a Geiger counter.

brutusborn 4y ago
I think I understand what you are saying but I don’t think that’s a good analogy (good chance I’m misinterpreting though) The Geiger counter is measuring a phenomena that is random, but producing a ‘click’ once that random phenomena occurs is fundamentally deterministic. People who believe indeterminacy supports free will do so because they believe their will gets to ‘select’ a certain path, so the ‘randomness’ comes from their free will. So a computer with a Geiger counter doesn’t have free will because although it is measuring a random process, it doesn’t affect the process as it does so.
- stametseater 4y ago
  I'm saying that quantum physics basically gives you an RNG, and you cannot build meaningful free will in the sense that people believe in by adding an RNG to an otherwise deterministic toolbox. People who do as you describe are appealing not to quantum physics itself but rather to the mystic of quantum physics.. quantum woo. 'Quantum' is a word they throw around to give a veneer of science to their assertions, but there is nothing in the science of quantum physics that supports the notion of free will being expressed through the control of stochastic quantum phenomena like radioactive decay. People who appeal to quantum physics in this way are like people who appeal to magnetism to explain why crystals and pyramids have healing properties; there is nothing in the physics of magnetism that supports such claims, but magnets are mysterious enough to laypeople that "because magnets" is enough to impress the credulous. They're using words associated with science to imbue their ideas with some of science's credibility.
  - brutusborn 4y ago
    I agree that people take a little knowledge and run with it (myself included). But doesn’t the mere existence of random processes in quantum theory suggest that there is a route for non-deterministic action (I.e. free will). So although quantum randomness cannot currently be linked to consciousness, there’s no fundamental idea in quantum theory that precludes humans affecting the “randomness” via some yet unidentified mechanism. To simplify, the fundamental question of human free will is “why does it feel like we can freely make decisions?” And quantum theory can provide an ‘out’ that it feels this way because our decisions change the results of otherwise seemingly stochastic processes. If the universe isn’t choosing the outcome deterministically, maybe our consciousness is.
    - stametseater 4y ago
      Quantum physics doesn't offer a mechanism for free will, the best it offers is a "gap" for you to squeeze your god into: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_of_the_gaps https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_of_the_gaps
      - brutusborn 4y ago
        I wouldn’t say consciousness is my god, rather it is a concept I like to ponder sometimes. Assuming you believe in determinism, what is your explanation for stochastic processes? My naive view is that you either need faith that we will discover a deterministic explanation for the perceived randomness, or you need to drop your assumption of a deterministic universe. If you drop that assumption, why do you still reject the possibility of free will? I’m not saying you’re wrong, but I don’t think your chain of reasoning makes sense. Edit: I decided to have a look for more knowledgeable opinions than mine, and found a Nobel laureate who thinks there is a possibility https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orchestrated_objective_reduction https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orchestrated_objective_reduc... . As far as I can tell none of his theory has been falsified.
cypherpunks01 4y ago
Bingo. The discovery of quantum uncertainty / randomness does not add weight to determinism nor free will. It seems to take market share from both, if you ask me.
Der_Einzige 4y ago
It's definitely evidence against determinism, even if it's not evidence for free will.

The probabilistic indeterminacy of quantum physics is scarcely a refuge for free will. You may as well say a computer has free will because you gave it a Geiger counter.

brutusborn 4y ago

I think I understand what you are saying but I don’t think that’s a good analogy (good chance I’m misinterpreting though) The Geiger counter is measuring a phenomena that is random, but producing a ‘click’ once that random phenomena occurs is fundamentally deterministic. People who believe indeterminacy supports free will do so because they believe their will gets to ‘select’ a certain path, so the ‘randomness’ comes from their free will. So a computer with a Geiger counter doesn’t have free will because although it is measuring a random process, it doesn’t affect the process as it does so.

stametseater 4y ago
I'm saying that quantum physics basically gives you an RNG, and you cannot build meaningful free will in the sense that people believe in by adding an RNG to an otherwise deterministic toolbox. People who do as you describe are appealing not to quantum physics itself but rather to the mystic of quantum physics.. quantum woo. 'Quantum' is a word they throw around to give a veneer of science to their assertions, but there is nothing in the science of quantum physics that supports the notion of free will being expressed through the control of stochastic quantum phenomena like radioactive decay. People who appeal to quantum physics in this way are like people who appeal to magnetism to explain why crystals and pyramids have healing properties; there is nothing in the physics of magnetism that supports such claims, but magnets are mysterious enough to laypeople that "because magnets" is enough to impress the credulous. They're using words associated with science to imbue their ideas with some of science's credibility.
- brutusborn 4y ago
  I agree that people take a little knowledge and run with it (myself included). But doesn’t the mere existence of random processes in quantum theory suggest that there is a route for non-deterministic action (I.e. free will). So although quantum randomness cannot currently be linked to consciousness, there’s no fundamental idea in quantum theory that precludes humans affecting the “randomness” via some yet unidentified mechanism. To simplify, the fundamental question of human free will is “why does it feel like we can freely make decisions?” And quantum theory can provide an ‘out’ that it feels this way because our decisions change the results of otherwise seemingly stochastic processes. If the universe isn’t choosing the outcome deterministically, maybe our consciousness is.
  - stametseater 4y ago
    Quantum physics doesn't offer a mechanism for free will, the best it offers is a "gap" for you to squeeze your god into: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_of_the_gaps https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_of_the_gaps
    - brutusborn 4y ago
      I wouldn’t say consciousness is my god, rather it is a concept I like to ponder sometimes. Assuming you believe in determinism, what is your explanation for stochastic processes? My naive view is that you either need faith that we will discover a deterministic explanation for the perceived randomness, or you need to drop your assumption of a deterministic universe. If you drop that assumption, why do you still reject the possibility of free will? I’m not saying you’re wrong, but I don’t think your chain of reasoning makes sense. Edit: I decided to have a look for more knowledgeable opinions than mine, and found a Nobel laureate who thinks there is a possibility https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orchestrated_objective_reduction https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orchestrated_objective_reduc... . As far as I can tell none of his theory has been falsified.

cypherpunks01 4y ago

Bingo. The discovery of quantum uncertainty / randomness does not add weight to determinism nor free will. It seems to take market share from both, if you ask me.

Der_Einzige 4y ago

It's definitely evidence against determinism, even if it's not evidence for free will.