Do you Think we have Free Will

[leroy]

Now who's being dishonest? Where and when have I ever said that I don't believe in free will?

Ok, I had the impression that you reject free will……………. But given that you grant free will…… and given that you can´t prove free will empirically … it follows that you do grant somethings without empirical evidence.

Indeed. From where I sit, it looks like you do this often. And I'm not the only one to notice it either.



You questioning the comment by @9-10ths_Penguin was done after you granted that exact same point to me.




Is that why you are asking what the other options are?
See... this is one of these instances where you seem to have the options of being honest and then decide not to take that option.

It's right there for all of us to read.

When you say (exact quote) "Ok what other alternative do you propose? And which one would you pick?", that doesn't sound like granting there are other options. Instead, that rather sounds like claiming ignorance of other options since you are asking what other options he thinks there are.
If you would grant other options, you wouldn't have to ask.



Nope. It seems right on the money. It's right there for all of us to read. Including you.
It's right there in the very links you yourself are quoting.
What nerve you have.



I never apologize for telling the truth.

"Ok what other alternative do you propose?

In this context “ok” implies that I am grating other possibilities.

 

[leroy]

We certainly act and perceive as if people make choices, which is why the word choice exists. So I would bet on that as more likely to be true.

agree

 

[PureX]

Then you are using your own definition since you are the one who came up with it. And it is not applicable to the debate concerning free will vs. determinism.

There is no other definition. And you don’t own this debate.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Ok, I had the impression that you reject free will……………. But given that you grant free will…… and given that you can´t prove free will empirically … it follows that you do grant somethings without empirical evidence.

Where have I said that I grant free will?

I believe what I said was that I'm happy to move forward under the assumption that free will exists.
Also I disagree there is no empirical evidence for it.

It's rather trivial to set up experiments to test people's choices and see that there is no statistical significance showing that choices are pre-determined.
I observe myself as well as my peers to make free choices.

It's a common experience all of us agree upon.
I'ld say that is empirical evidence.

Kind of like how we all agree what "red" looks like, eventhough we can't look through eachother's eyes.

Then again, it's also rather trivial to set up experiments to show that it's very trivial to influence people's choices and show statistical significance in being able to manipulate people psychologically.... So who knows.

In this context “ok” implies that I am grating other possibilities.

It rather looks to me like "OK - so you disagree, so explain yourself on why you disagree / why you think it's a false dichotomy"

If you actually granted it, I'ld assume you would have said "yeah I know, it was already pointed out to me that it was a false dichotomy, sorry, my mistake"


But whatever. Play your games.

 

[Koldo]

And you don’t own this debate.

Ditto for you. And this is why the entry fee is not making up a definition, worse yet since it is a definition that no one else uses, and claiming it to be the only definition.

 

[PureX]

Incorrect. Let me use a more apt analogy: when I say that that the future is determined, what I am saying is that script has been written already and nothing will deviate from it.

Even if this were true, and there is no way for any of us to know that it is, WE still perceive choices, and we still choose this or that according to our free will. So as a human asking a human “do we have free will” the answer is clearly, yes we do. As a human proposing to other humans that we do not, you are clearly wrong.

From the perspective of omniscience, all is predetermined. Perhaps. But that is not the perspective that any of us experience, or can know.

A given future F might eventually become present P at which point the movie has been recorded up to P, but the recording only happens at P.

 

[Koldo]

Even if this were true, and there is no way for any of us to know that it is, WE still perceive choices, and we still choose this or that according to our free will. So as a human asking a human “do we have free will” the answer is clearly, yes we do. As a human proposing to other humans that we do not, you are clearly wrong.

From the perspective of omniscience, all is predetermined. Perhaps. But that is not the perspective that any of us experience, or can know.

Once again, you are not using the term 'free will' in a way that is pertinent to the debate.

 

[RestlessSoul]

I don't even care to argue against it.

Just pointing out how logically and obviously incompatible it is to have perfect foreknowledge and free will in the same universe.

Yes, that would be a logical contradiction.

 

[leroy]

Where have I said that I grant free will?

in this sentence for example... (your quote)
"See... this is one of these instances where you seem to have the options of being honest and then decide not to take that option."

I believe what I said was that I'm happy to move forward under the assumption that free will exists.
Also I disagree there is no empirical evidence for it.

It's rather trivial to set up experiments to test people's choices and see that there is no statistical significance showing that choices are pre-determined.
I observe myself as well as my peers to make free choices.

I don’t think is possible to set up those experiments, such that the result shows if a decision is free.

It rather looks to me like "OK - so you disagree, so explain yourself on why you disagree / why you think it's a false dichotomy"

If you actually granted it, I'ld assume you would have said "yeah I know, it was already pointed out to me that it was a false dichotomy, sorry, my mistake"


But whatever. Play your games.

It was an “OK” yes granted logically speaking there are other possible alternatives , that I dismissed for being “non sence”

But if you want to pick any of those alternatives, feel free to do so.

 

[leroy]

???

It is so by definition.
If my choice is free, then what choice I make is only known with certainty once I make it.
If it is known with certainty before hand, then it's predetermined. And hence not free.

I dont think it follows. Please develpe your argument

Premise 1 Somebody knows what I will eat tomorrow

Premise 2 ??????????????

Therefore my decision of what I will eat is not free.

What would be your premise 2 such that the conclusion follows?


..

do you think the B theory of time (if true) would refute the possibility of free will?

 

[Koldo]

I dont think it follows. Please develpe your argument

Premise 1 Somebody knows what I will eat tomorrow

Premise 2 ??????????????

Therefore my decision of what I will eat is not free.

What would be your premise 2 such that the conclusion follows?


..

do you think the B theory of time (if true) would refute the possibility of free will?

P2: If someone knows what I will choose to eat beforehand, my decision of what I will eat is not free.

----

A free willed choice can not be predicted/known beforehand with 100% accuracy. Else, what would explain this accuracy if not pre-determination?

 

[muhammad_isa]

A free choice means I am also free to choose something I don't actually want..

What?
You choose what you choose, because you WANT to .. it's your choice!

Don't know, don't care. It doesn't matter.

No, it doesn't .. but it might help you to understand why you are wrong.

It turns space-time into a movie that you can fast forward to see the end and then rewind.
There is no free will in the movies. It will play out in the exact same way every time you watch it.

It is a recording i.e. history

You just said "History already occurred. You can't change choices made in the past."
Which is correct .. they have already been made.
But note: the choices were made.

If there is true free will in the universe, that would mean that you could "rewind" time and have it play out differently in the next run, since actors would be free to make different choices.

We only get one time-line .. we can see that from history.
The future is no different .. after all, it "becomes" the past.
..but that is all about perception, as I've already said.

Some people cannot get their heads around it .. they cannot see that there is only one possibility.
They see the future has having many possibilities, and the past as only one.

But it really is incorrect. There is only ONE possibility .. and that is called the future.
WHAT WILL BE WILL BE.

What we call 'now' does not exist .. it is a perception .. without a 'now', the timeline is just one continuous
series of events. Simple really .. but that perception .. it is really convincing.

I, for one, can see past it.

 

[muhammad_isa]

A free willed choice can not be predicted/known beforehand with 100% accuracy. Else, what would explain this accuracy if not pre-determination?

That has already been answered.
A Creator of the universe is not PART of the universe, by definition.

The universe is a space-time continuum. G-d sees the whole continuum.
Time is not so absolute as our perception suggests.
We already know that time is relative in this universe, so..

 

[shunyadragon]

Yeah, I haven’t read any of your responses in this thread. I have no idea to what you are referring, or why you took personally something that was not meant to be personal even to the poster to which it was addressed.

Ignorance of my posts with references is not an excuse. Your ignorance does not help the case.

 

[Stevicus]

Free will might be summed up in this cartoon:

This is something we probably have all seen at some point. A fly lands somewhere, then flies around a bit and comes back, just like in this drawing called "Fly whimsy." No apparent reason for it. Who can fathom the mind of a fly?

Does a fly have free will? If the fly decides to feast on potato salad or cow manure, is it making a conscious choice? Does it even matter?

Or is the question of free will only something that applies to humans? Would this suggest a belief that humans are not animals and not products of nature?

 

[shunyadragon]

We certainly act and perceive as if people make choices, which is why the word choice exists. So I would bet on that as more likely to be true.

This view of definitions has nothing to whether Free Will exists or not, or to what degree,

 

[Curious George]

Ignorance of my posts with references is not an excuse. Your ignorance does not help the case.

I am not so sure that your post here is sensical. Either I am missing a joke that was intended at the expense of the person to whom I was replying, or I don’t know. If I remember correctly from previous discussions, unless you have since changed your view, you hold some form of compatablism. I am not fond of that view, but I am not concerning myself with it. If you would like me to reply to a specific point, post that point in a reply to me.

 

[shunyadragon]

I am not so sure that your post here is sensical. Either I am missing a joke that was intended at the expense of the person to whom I was replying, or I don’t know. If I remember correctly from previous discussions, unless you have since changed your view, you hold some form of compatablism. I am not fond of that view, but I am not concerning myself with it. If you would like me to reply to a specific point, post that point in a reply to me.

I have no point in particular to respond at that time. In particular since you have not read nor responded to my posts. I gave my sources and comments concerning Hard Determinism, Determinism, Compatibilism. I do not care for Compatibilism as it is defined. I described my belief as "Possible Limited Free Will," and described it and my reasons for it

We have a Will, but it is not necessarily free.

 

[Bear Wild]

I have no point in particular to respond at that time. In particular since you have not read nor responded to my posts. I gave my sources and comments concerning Hard Determinism, Determinism, Compatibilism. I do not care for Compatibilism as it is defined. I described my belief as "Possible Limited Free Will," and described it and my reasons for it

We have a Will, but it is not necessarily free.

It is absolutely free will but within a fated world. Both free will and fate (deterministic chaos of our world) exist at the same time. This is a paradox of our world. That final choice is ours. It may be influenced by our surroundings but that does not negate it is still ours to make. Fate seems real because of the unfathomable complexity of relations that are around us and Free will seems true because we make decisions about our relationship to this world. Both exist and both are real.

 

[Samael_Khan]

This view of definitions has nothing to whether Free Will exists or not, or to what degree,

I think of it like this:

If everything we do is predetermined, why do we feel, think and act as if we have the concept of choices? Why does society have justice systems to punish certain choices people make? Why did we come up with the concept in the first place? Howcome we experience the feeling and action of choice?

We certainly cannot empirically determine whether we have free will or not. So we might as well go with whatever we feel like believing hey.