First  Prev  1  2  3  4  Next  Last
Post Reply Science and Freewill
13618 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / Australia
Offline
Posted 7/3/15

gvblackmoon wrote:

Science no belief needed just look at the proof and the facts.



Hello my friend, in order for you to hold something to be true you must have a conscious acceptance of it. That is to say you have a thought about it being true. This is basically the same thing as having a "belief".
Posted 7/3/15 , edited 7/3/15
Well technically some theories on space time has it where the future already exists, so does the past. Time isn't as we actually see it. If you could travel to the future, the future must be already there, Every moment in time is already laid out apparently.
Quantum Mechanics too have have have instantaneous time.You can say we don't have freewill but that's like saying a circle isn't a circle. It's just a sided figure with an infinite amount of sides. See how that sounds kind of ridiculous? Technically correct but pointless. Circles are circles. Freewill is what freewill is.
We could probably change the future if we could see it, but there are paradoxes that are not solved and the power to actually see the future isn't in our realm of possibility yet.

There was also test done with particles, where the scientist would send a particle and try to measure. I honestly forgot what exactly what they were testing. Though the particles actually were detected before they were even sent. Meaning that the future actually effects the past. Pretty mind blowing stuff if you actually try to dig into what reality actually is.

It's a lot more than just calculating oh say, numbers to find what I will do next or how the ball will actually fall.

EDIT: To base it on religion is silly though. God? The loving caring being that helps humans? Doesn't exist, sorry to say.
Creators? Higher beings that are on a different level than us? That created this universe or has manipulated it? Yeah I'd say that's pretty possible in the realms of science.
49109 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 7/3/15 , edited 7/3/15
Free will is just a Christian paradigm.God sets down the rules and you have the free will to either follow or not.It's a constant biblical theme.If this thread isn't about religion, why is it necessary for us to know you're a Christian?
Posted 7/3/15
Don't know why people are always debating about the existence of the world. Lol
People claim this and that.
Don't care, don't want to know.
Never needed to know.

Believe in now, you and the people you love.
19089 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M
Offline
Posted 7/3/15
I'm not even going to read the whole thread, but think of it this way: The way you're describing scientific thought is what's referred to as linear regression. "If X happens, do Y" isn't how humans, or animals in general work, there's usually a whole list of other things that could happen, and a list of things that go into it, and a list of things that could go differently. Even in that list there are different ways to go about that things that yield different results, and the simple consumption of time may make their significance vary. From a grand scope you're right, but from the understanding and perspective of a human being, free will exists simply because there's nobody there to observe the grand scheme of things and coordinate, and nobody adept enough at coordination to pull it off, meaning that humans functionally have free will simply because they can't perceive that they don't.

The only difference between the scientific thought and the creationist thought is that creationists don't want to believe that it's all by pure chance, someone must be responsible.
47864 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M
Offline
Posted 7/3/15 , edited 7/3/15
Here's how I think about it:

First, do we even want free-will? Consider this--you are sitting at work, and want to figure out whether you have the option of killing the next person that walks into your office. I claim you do not, even on the Christian view. Your choices, even if not determined by physical nature, will be determined by the "mechanics" of your soul. To put it differently, your choice will be determined by

1) Reason, which is not under your discretion (you can never decide, for instance, that contradictions are true)
2) Your emotional state, which is dependent on your beliefs and personality, which results in part from your initial make-up (the eternal "you" that God gave you to begin with, the core of your soul, which is by definition eternal/unchanging), and in part from:
3) The experiences of the world that have accumulated change in your initial personality (since the outside world is contained outside of the soul/will, it should be clear that this is also outside of one's discretion)

To put it another way, under what conditions does the possibility "I kill my co-worker" come to pass? Is it possible, or even desirable, that reason, our beliefs, desires, and mental state all tell us not to kill our co-worker, but that that possibility still occurs? If not, then our actions are determined by those things. In order to kill your co-worker, you would need to "decide" that those things would be different. It could come to pass, for instance, that you were born with psychopathic tendencies, or your experiences made you have a love of violence, or your co-worker killed your wife, or you never discovered God, or something else. But you don't have any of the conditions that lead you to kill your co-worker, so it's not actually a possibility, even if it's conceivable to complete. The personality you were given, along with the past that you were given, determines what you will do, and neither of those things are under your control. Can you ever "decide" to be born to a different family, for instance? Can you "decide" to simply have a different past? Can you decide to have been given a different brain at birth? None of the things that lead to the decision to kill your co-worker are under your control, and are thus mechanically determined.

Or to put it yet another way, this is one way in which we could conceive of free-will. Instead of letting reason, emotion, or belief dictate our choices, we make the soul work like this: Soul receives sensory information==>soul conceives of possible actions==>soul picks randomly between them==>soul makes body act. This isn't the only way to conceive of free-will, but I think its instructive, and in some sense it is what the quantum mechanics answers above were trying to get at.

Basically, quantum theory doesn't hold that particles are exactly random. They appear in "probability fields" which I don't feel like explaining on Crunchyroll--look it up yourself. In short, particles are more likely to appear in certain places than others, and this is largely what makes the sensible world look so deterministic. In a more classical view, we might say that our thoughts and actions are determined because, say, light enters the eye, collides with particles that make up the retina, which triggers a chain of reactions from neuron to neuron, which is, basically, thought. However, one interpretation of quantum theory asserts what is basically a variation on the previous paragraph. If one or many of the particles end up in a radically different place than probability suggests, then we may have the result of an alternative thought. The same could be said for outside stimuli that trigger the reactions in the first place. This means that our thoughts and actions are dependent on a non-deterministic cause, which results in free-will.

Whether this is in fact what happens, I can't say. Either way, I'd rather have my will determined, or at least very close to it. Anyway I think of it, even if I conceive of the mind as something like a soul (I don't) I'd rather have my thoughts and actions determined by things like reason, feeling, or even God (I actually prefer the possibility where God makes us unable to do evil). Although I'm open to it, I simply haven't found a conception of free-will that results in a state of the world that I'd find desirable. Of course, I don't really think I have much of an option anyway

Edit: As an interesting aside, even the "random" quantum mechanical view doesn't imply free-will. Some theorists have made the claim that perhaps the leeway in the behavior of particles, the indeterminate probability, is the means through which God works miracles and influences the world. It's said, in this view, that God is the one that sets and determines the actual occurrence of the particles in the world. I don't believe in God, so I can't say what a Theist might say, but I nonetheless find the conception interesting.
Posted 7/3/15
Posted 7/3/15 , edited 7/3/15

Is there a way, scientifically speaking, for anyone to have freewill?


Most things you do is governed by primal instincts. You feel horny because the instinct to keep the species alive is there. You want to protect your offspring because the same instinct is there. (Off-topic, even feelings like racism can be attributed to survival of your own kind, you want your own kind to succeed, not others, humans are animals, animals are visual creatures... we identify our kind mostly by appearances).

You live because the same instinct is telling you to live. You are a slave to your primal instincts. You can't escape it.

On a more molecular level, it's the genetic code that is the main culprit. Even the brain is controlled by genes. Any error in the genetic codes can change a human's personality.

In conclusion, yes you do have some level of free will. You can pick which shirt to wear today or tomorrow, but ultimately, everything else is governed by primal instincts.
75432 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
49 / F / Center of the Uni...
Offline
Posted 7/3/15
I choose, therefore I have freewill.
20695 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
38 / M / Kansas
Offline
Posted 7/3/15

Well said. Those lyrics have been playing in my head as I read this thread.
21448 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
46 / M / Between yesterday...
Online
Posted 7/3/15

GrandMasterTime wrote:


gvblackmoon wrote:

Science no belief needed just look at the proof and the facts.



Hello my friend, in order for you to hold something to be true you must have a conscious acceptance of it. That is to say you have a thought about it being true. This is basically the same thing as having a "belief".


True I was incorrect there is a certain level of belief to have understand but that belief is based on the facts and evidence provided. Faith on the other hand is fact free one of the defining features of it.

A good link that explains it in a reasonable easy format. http://www.philosophynews.com/post/2011/09/22/What-is-Knowledge.aspx/

47864 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M
Offline
Posted 7/3/15 , edited 7/3/15

papagolfwhiskey wrote:

I choose, therefore I have freewill.


That only implies a will, not a free one. It's not generally disputed that there is a thing that makes decisions, takes action, considers possibilities, etc. Whether that will can actually arrive at alternative conclusions is what's under dispute, and therefore, saying that you come to conclusions doesn't show the possibility of coming to different ones.

Possibly what it does show, however, is that the whole debate, even if interesting, is pretty fucking pointless, practically speaking.
21448 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
46 / M / Between yesterday...
Online
Posted 7/3/15

furytime wrote:

Well technically some theories on space time has it where the future already exists, so does the past. Time isn't as we actually see it. If you could travel to the future, the future must be already there, Every moment in time is already laid out apparently.
Quantum Mechanics too have have have instantaneous time.You can say we don't have freewill but that's like saying a circle isn't a circle. It's just a sided figure with an infinite amount of sides. See how that sounds kind of ridiculous? Technically correct but pointless. Circles are circles. Freewill is what freewill is.
We could probably change the future if we could see it, but there are paradoxes that are not solved and the power to actually see the future isn't in our realm of possibility yet.

There was also test done with particles, where the scientist would send a particle and try to measure. I honestly forgot what exactly what they were testing. Though the particles actually were detected before they were even sent. Meaning that the future actually effects the past. Pretty mind blowing stuff if you actually try to dig into what reality actually is.

It's a lot more than just calculating oh say, numbers to find what I will do next or how the ball will actually fall.

EDIT: To base it on religion is silly though. God? The loving caring being that helps humans? Doesn't exist, sorry to say.
Creators? Higher beings that are on a different level than us? That created this universe or has manipulated it? Yeah I'd say that's pretty possible in the realms of science.


There are several tests being done right now into this and the whole the universe has already happened and we are simple experiencing it theory isn't fully proven or disproved yet it will be interesting to see what happens since there is also the many world theory which states that all possible events happen and we don't know which it is until be observe it yes even if someone isn't there it still happens confusing yes but that is quantum mechanics for you.

Now the one that is really interesting which is currently being done at the University of Washington is whether of not the universe is even real or simply a hologram.

As for there being a all knowing all powerful creator that sets us on a path that we can not change. More then likely not if there is it what ever it is, is a cruel vindictive monster that has no compassion for it's creation since what sort of good caring being allows the things we do to each other in it's name and others would accept that. don't say the devil made them do it since that would be a thing within it's power to control or remove.
75432 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
49 / F / Center of the Uni...
Offline
Posted 7/3/15

theYchromosome wrote:


papagolfwhiskey wrote:

I choose, therefore I have freewill.


That only implies a will, not a free one. It's not generally disputed that there is a thing that makes decisions, takes action, considers possibilities, etc. Whether that will can actually arrive at alternative conclusions is what's under dispute, and therefore, saying that you come to conclusions doesn't show the possibility of coming to different ones.

Possibly what it does show, however, is that the whole debate, even if interesting, is pretty fucking pointless, practically speaking.


Even if it's an illusion, it's persistent one that won't be penetrated without complete knowledge. When we understand behaviour as well as we do gaseous diffusion then 'free' will might become predictable.

82334 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
38 / M
Online
Posted 7/3/15

theYchromosome wrote:

1) Reason, which is not under your discretion (you can never decide, for instance, that contradictions are true)
2) Your emotional state, which is dependent on your beliefs and personality, which results in part from your initial make-up (the eternal "you" that God gave you to begin with, the core of your soul, which is by definition eternal/unchanging), and in part from:
3) The experiences of the world that have accumulated change in your initial personality (since the outside world is contained outside of the soul/will, it should be clear that this is also outside of one's discretion)


1) You'd be surprised what a person could convince themselves of intentionally or otherwise. That includes being able to convince oneself that contradictions are true.

2) Emotional state changes all the time. Emotional state can be controlled. For instance, I can intentionally elicit a different emotional state in under a minute, from sadness to point of bawling, to happiness, to fuming anger.

3) The experiences one has had are unchangeable, but the way a person views them is not.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.