Do you have Free Will?

[dust1n]

I'm not following. Can you explain? When I referred to an outcome, I referred to that produced by the feedback loop. What is the output that "would not match"? What phenomenon is incorrectly assessed?

Certainly.

Imagine if the thermostat had a "free will", and thus created an output that was different then the output suggested by the inputs of the feedback loop, then it would indeed have a free will. Similarly, if and only if the human consciousness worked as a feedback loop, then only deviation from the loop would constitute as a form of free will. Otherwise, it's the loop that is the will.

However, that would be hard to determine, because if the feedback loop is an inaccurate description of the inputs, outputs, and processes between, then there is no way to know if said loop was broken by a will, or if the loop was truly inaccurate. If we want to make better feedback loops, then we would assume the latter if most likely the case.

Edit: The outcome of the furnace system is a regulated temperature. The outcome of the "me" system is a volitive me impacting the world.

I see no difference between the volitive (I like the word) nature of the furnace system and the volitive me. If they are both feedback loops they are similar in that they have a limited number of outputs, and a fixed system for determining the outputs.

Will is free will. The issue of "freedom" revolves around predestination, and predestination is only possible with a destiny, and that requires volition.

I didn't understand the second sentence, but the first I don't know what to make of. If there is no difference between will and free will, why are we calling it free will? What's the qualifier of "free" even there for if there is no unfree will?

 

[Straw Dog]

I believe in probable will. That is, at any given moment, there is a certain range of possibilities at play waiting to be actualized. The environment is so complex, dynamic, and full of potentiality that a simple cause-and-effect model cannot account for the process of becoming. It is compatible with certain forms of determinism, but has nothing to do with fatalism. It's more about which possibility will collapse into actuality within the moment.

 

[Willamena]

Certainly.

Imagine if the thermostat had a "free will", and thus created an output that was different then the output suggested by the inputs of the feedback loop, then it would indeed have a free will. Similarly, if and only if the human consciousness worked as a feedback loop, then only deviation from the loop would constitute as a form of free will. Otherwise, it's the loop that is the will.

However, that would be hard to determine, because if the feedback loop is an inaccurate description of the inputs, outputs, and processes between, then there is no way to know if said loop was broken by a will, or if the loop was truly inaccurate. If we want to make better feedback loops, then we would assume the latter if most likely the case.

I see. The furnace producing a regulated temperature is my analogy for free will. I make no distinction between will and will that is "free." That is how the term is meaningful and useful for me: "will" means freedom for the human consciousness. There is no "unfree" will.

No deviants necessary.

I see no difference between the volitive (I like the word) nature of the furnace system and the volitive me. If they are both feedback loops they are similar in that they have a limited number of outputs, and a fixed system for determining the outputs.

Then it's a potentially workable analogy. I'll keep working on it.

I didn't understand the second sentence, but the first I don't know what to make of. If there is no difference between will and free will, why are we calling it free will? What's the qualifier of "free" even there for if there is no unfree will?

The qualifier "free" is an emphasis, it's used to emphasize the non-freedom of the other side of the debate. In discussions about predestination, and more recently determinism, "free" is used to emphasize that without will we are essentially automatons, programmed by circumstances other than our lovely personal feedback loop ("me") that would leave us operating at nothing more than ambient temperature.

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

There is no "unfree" will.

The hart he loves the high wood
The hare she loves the hill
The knight he loves his bright sword
The lady loves her will

- Anonymous (I think; it was in one of the poetry collections for children that my parents read to us from when we were children)

 

[Awoon]

The Re Run is on now...Science Channel

 

[Skwim]

I speculate that free will must be involved when planning to become a universe, when the laws that bind us finally break down.

What is doing this planning, god? And what speculation led you to this conclusion? From where I stand, god has no more freewill than you, I, and the flower pot on my patio.

 

[idav]

What is doing this planning, god? And what speculation led you to this conclusion? From where I stand, god has no more freewill than you, I, and the flower pot on my patio.

For god to have freewill it would have to be omniscient and be first cause and it wouldnt hurt to be all powerful too.

 

[I.S.L.A.M617]

For god to have freewill it would have to be omniscient and be first cause and it wouldnt hurt to be all powerful too.

Omniscience wouldn't allow for free will.

 

[Skwim]

Omniscience wouldn't allow for free will.

Nor would first cause and being all powerful. Taint nothing that allows for free will.

 

[idav]

Omniscience wouldn't allow for free will.

The choice was made in the beginning which is the only room for true free will, when it was decided how things are and will be. Out of the potential realities one path was taken followed by the rest of the choices that were due to having freewill.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

The only thing that we have freewill over is our outlook on the things that are determined.

 

[Skwim]

The only thing that we have freewill over is our outlook on the things that are determined.

And how does this outlook come about, randomly or does it have a cause?

 

[Willamena]

And how does this outlook come about, randomly or does it have a cause?

Contrary to popular belief, randomness is not the antithesis of causation.

 

[Skwim]

Contrary to popular belief, randomness is not the antithesis of causation.

And I agree, just like water is not the antithesis of dirt.

 

[Sculelos]

I'm a slave to myself.

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

Taint nothing that allows for free will.

How about functional emergence capable of more than simple self-organization (even non-living systems do this) but self-determination? Is there something that allows for that?

 

[gerrywilson]

Very rare people have free will. Every one do things with expectations. Main important thing in life is positive attitude and positive thinking.

 

[Willamena]

How about functional emergence capable of more than simple self-organization (even non-living systems do this) but self-determination? Is there something that allows for that?

:areyoucra That sounds suspiciously like free will.

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

:areyoucra That sounds suspiciously like free will.

"Then there's a pair of us — don't tell!
They'd banish us you know."
- Emily Dickinson

 

[Skwim]

How about functional emergence capable of more than simple self-organization (even non-living systems do this) but self-determination? Is there something that allows for that?

Sure the "self-determination" is either a causal operation, or arises randomly. Take your pick.