-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Free Will as Brain Scans Reveal
- Thread starter Hawkeye112200
- Start date
Hawkeye112200
Member
Cute! but, no I meant dogma, sorry.
My only point is, that we are not consciously aware of our decisions when they are being made according to this study, and only carry out what our brain decides in the realm of whatever you want to call it, but for now I am calling it as the article does subconscious.
So, yes once the brain decides, and then 7 seconds later we carry out that order, if you want to call that free will, fine, but it is not at all the same type of free will loosely expressed about many times. In fact, it reduces the term free will to mean very little at all, since we weren't consciously aware of our choices.
It is, as far as I know, pretty much taken for granted that awareness is after-the-fact of reality. Things have to happen before we can possibly become aware of them. "Free will," in its various forms (moral, mortal, metaphysical), arises out of philosophical models that, as far as I know, do not fail to take this into account.
I can't see the fact of them happening 7 seconds earlier than anticipated altering that picture any.
"Man is free to the extent that he knows who he is." Alan Watts
That there is a "me" that takes possession of "consciousness" precedes that there is "my consciousness" that makes "decisions," precedes any outcome of decisions. Freedom is the freedom to be "me" (as opposed to the objective view of the world acting despite me).
As for "will," I looked in the dictionary and my eye was immediately drawn to definition 2:
"Will" is the expression of the ability of that "me" to engage the world.
At what point was awareness giving it's input? The decision we make are conscious decisions based on the data given by the entire brain including the subconscious. There isn't one single neuron that makes the decision it is the entire network that makes the decision and the entire network of neurons is what is considered I.
Simply put, if we are making a conscious decisions then we certainly have input and some control over it. Subconscious input is a reality but it is also a reality that the entire brain is doing things we are not consciously aware of but it in no way takes away from our processing the data and making conscious decisions.
Skwim
Veteran Member
Of course, this isn't what the definition was referring to, and I still have to wonder what this ability to engage the world is free from (if you do, in fact, believe in free will).
cablescavenger
Well-Known Member
I took that from the video too.
Common sense tells us that not every decision is driven by a 6 second delay, or a simple game of tennis would be an impossibility.
PolyHedral
Superabacus Mystic
Further study is that by the time professional tennis players realize they must hit the ball, they already have.
A significant part of athleticism comes from muscle memory and "trained instinct". The primary decisions come before the competition (to train every day, to pick a trainer, to push harder, to use certain techniques, etc.), not during the competition.
There are still choices during a competition of course, but it's not as though every move is thought out.
There are still choices during a competition of course, but it's not as though every move is thought out.
It's free from stubbornly anal objective expressions.
I watched the video per your suggestion.
He chose the right button. His subconcious selected the right button six seconds before his concious mind finished the decision.
It seems to just push the question of free-will farther back. Why did his sub-conscious choose the right button and not the left button? A mystery still remains.
Is this based on the assumption that if there's free-will it only operates on the concious mind. Can free-will not be integrated into the whole brain?
Among other consequences,
-If a lack of free will is accepted, it makes certain emotions like anger obsolete. What is the purpose of things like vengeance or anger towards an individual if it can't be said that individuals have anything we'd call free will? Who, exactly, would I ever be angry towards? This has all sorts of applications in legal systems, too.
-If a lack of free will is accepted, it implies a person should be humble. Suppose I succeed at something- can I take credit? What "self" am I identifying the credit towards, if it cannot be said that I have anything I'd call free will?
-In addition to some positive things, if a lack of free will is accepted, it can conceivably affect a person's level of motivation. Feeling in control of things seems to be a big part of motivation, personal development, relationships, engagement with activities, responsibility, etc.
That's my exact point. Whether free will is real or illusion it is important to keep the idea in place. This is back to my wall example. We know that the wall is made of particals and such all together. It's not really one solid thing. Yet you woukd not run into a wall just because it is an illusion.
Skwim
Veteran Member
Does it really matter if God exists? Does it really matter if we evolved or not? Does it really matter if morals do or do not exist? Does anything REALLY matter?
Not really
Just doing our part is all. Any gratitude expressed for a job well done was determined? We don't sit around like rocks cause we don't have to.
You matter Sum, you and your conceptual nihilism.
Our part for what?
Well that's the question of the thread, isn't it? What else determines it?
I don't see how that's relevant.