Does the non-existence of free will change your beliefs?

[Sunstone]

I don't believe that causelessness is required for freewill.

Why not? If everything I do is caused, how can I say that I have free will? Put a little differently, if my will is caused, how can it be free?

 

[Falvlun]

Why not? If everything I do is caused, how can I say that I have free will?

Imagine that you have free-will. You would still be able to point to reasons why you chose what you did. Ergo, causes still exist even if freewill does.

Also imagine that a single cause can have more than one effect. It is not determined which effect a cause will create. The effect still has a cause, but it was not determined. This introduces randomness, not freewill-- we'd need to add more steps to create freewill-- but it's just a thought process to show how causes don't necessarily equate to determinism, nor do they spell the death knell for free-will.

 

[Sunstone]

Imagine that you have free-will. You would still be able to point to reasons why you chose what you did. Ergo, causes still exist even if freewill does.

Maybe I'm just misunderstanding your argument, but I think you may be subtly equivocating on the meaning of "cause", here. For instance, reasons are not causes of a neuron firing in the same sense that signals from other neurons maybe causes of a neuron firing.

Also imagine that a single cause can have more than one effect. It is not determined which effect a cause will create. The effect still has a cause, but it was not determined. This introduces randomness, not freewill-- we'd need to add more steps to create freewill-- but it's just a thought process to show how causes don't necessarily equate to determinism, nor do they spell the death knell for free-will.

Do you have any examples of a signal cause having more than one effect? Not in the sense of a single cause having multiple effects, but in the sense in which you mean it?

 

[crossfire]

I don't think there is any way to positively falsify or disprove determinism. (Can anyone design an experiment or scenerio that might?) If there is no possible way it can be disproved, can it make the claim to be truly scientific?

 

[Sunstone]

I don't think there is any way to positively falsify or disprove determinism. (Can anyone design an experiment or scenerio that might?) If there is no possible way it can be disproved, can it make the claim to be truly scientific?

We might never be able to absolutely rule it out. But it does seem that science has over the years increasingly shown that things we once thought were matters of free will are not. The realm of events that can rationally be ascribed to free will is ever shrinking.

 

[methylatedghosts]

No free will means love beliefs intelligence that has been determined.

So, if free will does not exist
Then my beliefs are already determined
I believe that a flavour of free will exists
This is already, then, given a non-free will existence, determined

So, in a non-free will existence, my beliefs would not change.

 

[crossfire]

I would say that the following definition describes the current state of the determinism doctrine and debate:

indeterminate [ˌɪndɪˈtɜːmɪnɪt]
adj 1. uncertain in extent, amount, or nature
2. not definite; inconclusive an indeterminate reply
3. unable to be predicted, calculated, or deduced
4. (Physics / General Physics) Physics (of an effect) not obeying the law of causality; noncausal
5. (Mathematics) Maths a. having no numerical meaning 0/0
b. (of an equation) having more than one variable and an unlimited number of solutions

6. (Life Sciences & Allied Applications / Botany) Botany another word for indefinite [4]
7. (Engineering / General Engineering) (of a structure, framework, etc.) comprising forces that cannot be fully analysed, esp by vector analysis​

 

[Muffled]

Hey guys,
This time I want to discuss / debate how the lack of any free will may change your beliefs. I mean a reality that is absolutely deterministic (with the exception of God if that is what you happen to believe in, as to many God is outside the laws of reality). Assume that free will does not exist (and realize this is likely true). How does this change your beliefs on, well everything. For example, if you are a person who believes we must accept God, the lack of free will means that rejecting God is not our choice, and how could we be punished for not believing in God when God programmed us not to believe.

Discuss.

Evidently I can't decide to change my beliefs so I will have to go on believing.

 

[Willamena]

Well, randomness at least gives the possibility of choice. The location of a tree branch might be random but certainly not it's choice.

No, it robs us of the possibility of choice as much as determinism does. If something happens randomly, then it wasn't you making that choice.

 

[Willamena]

So far as I know, scientists have yet to find an area of the brain or nervous system in which neural activity has no cause. That is, an area that could reasonably be the seat of free will. I doubt they ever will.

"Freewill" doesn't mean uncaused, it means you-caused.

 

[Muffled]

So far as I know, scientists have yet to find an area of the brain or nervous system in which neural activity has no cause. That is, an area that could reasonably be the seat of free will. I doubt they ever will.

That works fine for the ego which is called in the Bible the will of the flesh but we also have a spirit that is non-corporeal which is often called the super-ego or conscience. It is free from the constrictions of the mind and often informs the mind on which direction it should take. Since it is non-corporeal, scientists will never be able to determine that it is there. Psychologists recognize it but that is only a quasi-science at best.

 

[Gjallarhorn]

That works fine for the ego which is called in the Bible the will of the flesh but we also have a spirit that is non-corporeal which is often called the super-ego or conscience. It is free from the constrictions of the mind and often informs the mind on which direction it should take. Since it is non-corporeal, scientists will never be able to determine that it is there. Psychologists recognize it but that is only a quasi-science at best.

The super-ego is a product of the brain, just like the ego and the id. I don't see why you would think it's spiritual.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

I do not believe that life is predetermined.
Some choices we make may be influenced by stimuli outside our selves, and others preprogrammed by our heritage or genes.
How ever the variables are infinite and can not be said to be preordained in any meaningful way.

Our consciousness and unconscious mind are being influenced by competing stimuli all the time, these events might influence the chances of a particular action, but they never guarantee it.

For all intents and purposes we have free will.

 

[Willamena]

The super-ego is a product of the brain, just like the ego and the id. I don't see why you would think it's spiritual.

Freud's analysis was of personality, not the brain.

 

[Gjallarhorn]

Freud's analysis was of personality, not the brain.

True, but when the left brain shuts down, the super-ego goes with it, so either it's a product of the brain or the soul is only attached to the left hemisphere.

 

[Me Myself]

So, if free will does not exist
Then my beliefs are already determined
I believe that a flavour of free will exists
This is already, then, given a non-free will existence, determined

So, in a non-free will existence, my beliefs would not change.

To be more specific, in a non-free will existence, your beliefs would only change however they are programmed to change with whatever they are programmed to change into whatever the are programmed to turn to.

this thread is merely inviting you to share with us what you think that change would be.

So, say you somehow found out that you will is predetermined and all your decisions are so to predetermined. What do you think you would believe then?

 

[Me Myself]

Evidently I can't decide to change my beliefs so I will have to go on believing.

Why of course you can decide! its just that the choice would be predetermined! as I said a post ago, what we are asking is what do you believe you would think from then on? If somehow you discover there is no free will, what other changes in your belief system do you think would happen as a result of this realization?

 

[1137]

I don't believe that causelessness is required for freewill.

It has to be. If every decision I "choose" to make is caused, then I actually do not have a choice. It also needs to be noted that there is a difference between cause and influence. Influence and free will can exist together splendidly, but there must be causlessness in order for us to have free will.

 

[Willamena]

So, say you somehow found out that you will is predetermined and all your decisions are so to predetermined. What do you think you would believe then?

That your will and all your decisions are predetermined.

 

[crossfire]

It has to be. If every decision I "choose" to make is caused, then I actually do not have a choice. It also needs to be noted that there is a difference between cause and influence. Influence and free will can exist together splendidly, but there must be causlessness in order for us to have free will.

Before you make a decision, the causal factors are indeterminate.

Consider the two-slit experiment.