2 ms·

Stanford scientist, after decades of study, concludes: We don't have free will

2 points by hochmartinez 3y ago

pmdulaney 3y ago
Well, he had to say that, right?
- AnimalMuppet 3y ago
  He had no ability to reach a different conclusion, given the data. There are people who don't think reaching an accurate conclusion requires free will, though I think it does. But it occurs to me that if this guy is right, the people committing scientific fraud also had no choice but to do so. That claim is going to be corrosive to whatever scientific ethics still remain.
  - mindcrime 3y ago
    Think about what it means in terms of the justice system. If people really don't have free will, should be they really be punished for the crimes they commit? OTOH, if it's really true that none of us have free will, then all of this is moot, because everything that is going to happen is what's going to happen, no more, no less. Of course I had no choice but to say that...
mindcrime 3y ago
I don't claim to have studied this question in any formal sense, but I've indirectly studied some related areas due to happenstance overlap with my other interests. And while I can't say I know a definitive answer one way or the other, I will say that the more time I've spent pondering this, the less and less I find myself believing in free will. It's just very hard to come up with any kind of mechanism that allows for it, given what we (think?) we know about the world we live in. Unless there is truly some "magic" in the brain, the brain appears to be just another deterministic bio-physical system, operating according to the rules of physics, chemistry, etc. And if the mind is just an epiphenomenon of the activities of the brain... well... where does the "free will" part come from? Saying this brings me no joy. I like the idea of free will, and would prefer to think that we do have free will. But I feel like if I'm intellectually honest with myself, there's little support for the idea.
31337Logic 3y ago
Back to work, everybody!!

2 points by hochmartinez 3y ago

pmdulaney 3y ago

Well, he had to say that, right?

AnimalMuppet 3y ago
He had no ability to reach a different conclusion, given the data. There are people who don't think reaching an accurate conclusion requires free will, though I think it does. But it occurs to me that if this guy is right, the people committing scientific fraud also had no choice but to do so. That claim is going to be corrosive to whatever scientific ethics still remain.
- mindcrime 3y ago
  Think about what it means in terms of the justice system. If people really don't have free will, should be they really be punished for the crimes they commit? OTOH, if it's really true that none of us have free will, then all of this is moot, because everything that is going to happen is what's going to happen, no more, no less. Of course I had no choice but to say that...

mindcrime 3y ago

I don't claim to have studied this question in any formal sense, but I've indirectly studied some related areas due to happenstance overlap with my other interests. And while I can't say I know a definitive answer one way or the other, I will say that the more time I've spent pondering this, the less and less I find myself believing in free will. It's just very hard to come up with any kind of mechanism that allows for it, given what we (think?) we know about the world we live in. Unless there is truly some "magic" in the brain, the brain appears to be just another deterministic bio-physical system, operating according to the rules of physics, chemistry, etc. And if the mind is just an epiphenomenon of the activities of the brain... well... where does the "free will" part come from? Saying this brings me no joy. I like the idea of free will, and would prefer to think that we do have free will. But I feel like if I'm intellectually honest with myself, there's little support for the idea.

31337Logic 3y ago

Back to work, everybody!!