3 ms·

How does "making an example" work when the others are "robots"? If none of them have free will, "making an example" can't possibly make any difference.

vidarh 3y ago
This is not valid logic. "Making an example" changes the state of the world, part of which form inputs to us whether we are "robots" or not. Arguing that changing these inputs can't make any difference without free will is equivalent to arguing the output of a deterministic function can't change if its input changes. Here is an example of a function for which that is wrong: f(x) -> x It's a 100% deterministic function, yet its output changes with its input.
- Turing_Machine 3y ago
  > "Making an example" changes the state of the world And? If there's no free will, there's no choice about "changing the state of the world", either. Right? > It's a 100% deterministic function, yet its output changes with its input. Not if there is no choice about the value of x.
  - vidarh 3y ago
    > And? If there's no free will, there's no choice about "changing the state of the world", either. There is no choice involved, but what is the current state of the world over time still changes. You don't even need mutable state to model this, just the progression of a calculation where the output of one step becomes the input of the next. > > It's a 100% deterministic function, yet its output changes with its input. > Not if there is no choice about the value of x. Here is a program using the earlier definition of f: result = f(1) result2 = f(result + 1) This program is purely deterministic, yet the value of x in the application of f is different at two different points during the execution, and so the output it produces is different at different points in time. Furthermore it also shows how output in a purely deterministic manner can affect subsequent input, and so affect the output again. This is what is meant above with "yet its output changes with its input". Perhaps you're struggling with the use of "changes" to apply to multiple different executions of the function. The point is the same: If you assume a purely predetermined universe, it by no means means behaviours can not be different at different points in time, because inputs to a given process are different because of what has gone on before. No change or choice in the sense you're using it is required.
  - s1artibartfast 3y ago
    It sounds like you are starting to get it. No free will means there's no choice. You will do what you're going to do. What you do will change what other people do. What other people do will change what you do. There is no choice only doing.
s1artibartfast 3y ago
Being a robot isn't the same as being blind to feedback and the world. If I put shade in front of my light seeking robot or a plant, it will change what it is doing. For that matter, a soccer ball doesn't need free will to move when I kick it. It goes from being at rest to in motion because something new happened to it.

vidarh 3y ago

This is not valid logic. "Making an example" changes the state of the world, part of which form inputs to us whether we are "robots" or not. Arguing that changing these inputs can't make any difference without free will is equivalent to arguing the output of a deterministic function can't change if its input changes. Here is an example of a function for which that is wrong: f(x) -> x It's a 100% deterministic function, yet its output changes with its input.

Turing_Machine 3y ago
> "Making an example" changes the state of the world And? If there's no free will, there's no choice about "changing the state of the world", either. Right? > It's a 100% deterministic function, yet its output changes with its input. Not if there is no choice about the value of x.
- vidarh 3y ago
  > And? If there's no free will, there's no choice about "changing the state of the world", either. There is no choice involved, but what is the current state of the world over time still changes. You don't even need mutable state to model this, just the progression of a calculation where the output of one step becomes the input of the next. > > It's a 100% deterministic function, yet its output changes with its input. > Not if there is no choice about the value of x. Here is a program using the earlier definition of f: result = f(1) result2 = f(result + 1) This program is purely deterministic, yet the value of x in the application of f is different at two different points during the execution, and so the output it produces is different at different points in time. Furthermore it also shows how output in a purely deterministic manner can affect subsequent input, and so affect the output again. This is what is meant above with "yet its output changes with its input". Perhaps you're struggling with the use of "changes" to apply to multiple different executions of the function. The point is the same: If you assume a purely predetermined universe, it by no means means behaviours can not be different at different points in time, because inputs to a given process are different because of what has gone on before. No change or choice in the sense you're using it is required.
- s1artibartfast 3y ago
  It sounds like you are starting to get it. No free will means there's no choice. You will do what you're going to do. What you do will change what other people do. What other people do will change what you do. There is no choice only doing.

s1artibartfast 3y ago

Being a robot isn't the same as being blind to feedback and the world. If I put shade in front of my light seeking robot or a plant, it will change what it is doing. For that matter, a soccer ball doesn't need free will to move when I kick it. It goes from being at rest to in motion because something new happened to it.