we have no free will - prove me wrong!

[Polymath257]

I focus on control because it is what we assume. Everyday of our lives even the most staunch "determinist" assumes control. It is ultimately an assumption of free will.

Your use of control is common enough, but more of a metaphoric use. The idea that the switch controls the light is not wrong, but it is wholly different than the way by which I am using the word. In short, you are equivocating.

Well, I guess you might think that, but your sense is something I don't think exists, at least not as you state it. I most certainly do NOT assume it. I assume causal links (at most).

For me, control is *all* about causality and not about the consciousness at all (well, except in those cases where our consciousnesses are part of the causal link). And even when consciousness is involved, I don't see the freedom of the will being connected to it. Our brains control our muscles whether the decision is made freely or not.

/E: as another example, we say that a computer controls an assembly line even though that computer doesn't have free will. We are less inclined to say that the designer of the assembly line or programmer of the computer is the one controlling the situation.

 

[Curious George]

Well, I guess you might think that, but your sense is something I don't think exists, at least not as you state it. I most certainly do NOT assume it. I assume causal links (at most).

For me, control is *all* about causality and not about the consciousness at all (well, except in those cases where our consciousnesses are part of the causal link). And even when consciousness is involved, I don't see the freedom of the will being connected to it. Our brains control our muscles whether the decision is made freely or not.

/E: as another example, we say that a computer controls an assembly line even though that computer doesn't have free will. We are less inclined to say that the designer of the assembly line or programmer of the computer is the one controlling the situation.

Consciousness is always part always part of the causal links with respect to that which we have control. The question is whether or not we have control or whether pur consciousness is also just another link in an infinite predetermined chain.

So when you choose ypur breakfast, or to go without, your actions speak louder than your words. You can claim you lack the belief that you control anything but I imagine you are human still.

 

[Polymath257]

Well, I guess you might think that, but your sense is something I don't think exists, at least not as you state it. I most certainly do NOT assume it.

Consciousness is always part always part of the causal links with respect to that which we have control. The question is whether or not we have control or whether pur consciousness is also just another link in an infinite predetermined chain.

So when you choose ypur breakfast, or to go without, your actions speak louder than your words. You can claim you lack the belief that you control anything but I imagine you are human still.

I control in the sense of the word that I use, not how you use it. I am in the causal link, that I agree with. But that causal link is largely deterministic. The *reasons* for my decisions are the causes for them. They mostly reside inside my brain, so they are *my* reasons. But that is true whether determinism is true or not.

 

[Curious George]

Well, I guess you might think that, but your sense is something I don't think exists, at least not as you state it. I most certainly do NOT assume it.


I control in the sense of the word that I use, not how you use it. I am in the causal link, that I agree with. But that causal link is largely deterministic. The *reasons* for my decisions are the causes for them. They mostly reside inside my brain, so they are *my* reasons. But that is true whether determinism is true or not.

And those reasons are caused and not reasoned?

 

[Polymath257]

And those reasons are caused and not reasoned?

The reasons are the causes. They are the internal aspects of the causality that resides inside of my head.

 

[Curious George]

The reasons are the causes. They are the internal aspects of the causality that resides inside of my head.

Yet they aren't reasoned.

Let us imagine an experiment. You observe me turn on a light switch, and you hear your car start. A little while later I turn off the switch and your car turns off. Does the light switch cause your car to turn on and off? How can you know without free will?

 

[Polymath257]

Yet they aren't reasoned.

Let us imagine an experiment. You observe me turn on a light switch, and you hear your car start. A little while later I turn off the switch and your car turns off. Does the light switch cause your car to turn on and off? How can you know without free will?

I don't see how free will has anything to do with it. You can only determine the causality by repeated trials and testing.

 

[blü 2]

“Everything we do and everything that happens has a cause” is true

Therefore we can say that all things that happen are determined/caused by things that have happened in the past

Not quite. There are two ways things come about. One is through chains of cause+effect and the other is randomly ─ something observed in certain QM situations.

Not that randomness confers the implied dignity of 'free will' any more than cause+effect does.

Equally with divine free will: if God is omnipotent then [he]'s also omniscient (one snap of the fingers will do it) and omnipresent (a second snap). So not only did [he] already know everything that's ever going to happen in the universe, everything each living creature will ever think, say or do, but being omnipresent throughout spacetime [he]'s already seen it, and is seeing it, happen. And[he] created the universe already knowing that, meaning [he]'s already approved it all, down to the last detail, and since [he]'s perfect, there will never arise a need for [him] to change [his] perfect mind, never a need to intervene.

And there's no possibility that anyone could ever act, even in the teensiest degree, differently to what [he] foresaw 14 bn years ago.

But as we know by being humans and getting on with our lives, we have the strong sense of owning our decisions, so whether there's freewill or not (and there isn't), it doesn't actually worry anyone.

 

[Fool]

Among other factors, yes.

pre-conditioning helps us to make better choices, no doubt. but then love is strange. what drives a person to abandon self, become selfless. choose to destroy himself for another?


unconditional love, what a strange choice.


Revelation 17:11
And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition.

 

[Willamena]

Yes, and it's but one of many examples that chip away at the notion of free will. How much of our behavior is of our own will when there is so much going on that seeks to manipulate us? Free will, or the expectations of gender norms and behaviors? Freely chosen, or something you picked up from your parents?

Free will is free of external influences, not free of yourself.

 

[Willamena]

pre-conditioning helps us to make better choices, no doubt. but then love is strange. what drives a person to abandon self, become selfless. choose to destroy himself for another?


unconditional love, what a strange choice.


Revelation 17:11
And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition.

I don't think that one's a choice. Letting go of all the obstacles between you and it, that's a choice.

 

[Willamena]

Consciousness is always part always part of the causal links with respect to that which we have control. The question is whether or not we have control or whether pur consciousness is also just another link in an infinite predetermined chain.

The narrative could be seen either way, hence both are the case. On one hand the world described objectively, and on the other subjectively.

 

[sealchan]

Free will is the influence a pot hole has on the road of life.

The road is the nervous system, the sensory neural input is the road ahead and the motor neural output is this road behind. The pothole is the human personality intertwined with that person's memories and experiences. The personality derives expectations out of the memories and experiences it has had. How all of those memories and experiences and the current impact of the states of the body will impact travelling down that road is based on so many interconnected factors that predictability becomes practically incalculable. In this realm causal order moves towards the edge of chaos especially when conflicting neural signals from the sensory input tangle up in the personality and memory and fail to resolve into decisive motor output.

In this causal morass some long ago experience may have as much influence as recent learning. Maybe the person is just coming down with a cold and their thinking has been subtly affected. The causal web is so filled with the potential for twists and turns that it no longer makes sense to think of any set of causal events as providing a reliable guide as to the outcome of that person's thinking and motivation. The person, the pothole of neural activity, becomes the focus of causal understanding, they become an "agent" of a self-centered (not selfish) "will" and understanding how that person has acted in the past is more telling than any practicable understanding of all the causal influences at work within that person's body when it comes to understanding how that person will act in the present.

Free will is the playwright who watches as they write their own play wondering how it will turn out in the end.

 

[Polymath257]

pre-conditioning helps us to make better choices, no doubt. but then love is strange. what drives a person to abandon self, become selfless. choose to destroy himself for another?

unconditional love, what a strange choice.

Revelation 17:11
And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition.

Well, love is another set of reactions in the emotional centers of our brain. Again, I see that as one possible internal cause, but I hardly see that as saying we have free will.

 

[Fool]

Well, love is another set of reactions in the emotional centers of our brain. Again, I see that as one possible internal cause, but I hardly see that as saying we have free will.

its an aspect of consciousness, a brain isn't necessary for consciousness. electro-magnetic fields are necessary. brains need electro-magnetic fields, electro-magnetic fields don't need a brain..

consciousness is physical phenomena and not necessarily a fixed form of matter vs some other state of matter


dualistic thinking

 

[Polymath257]

its an aspect of consciousness, a brain isn't necessary for consciousness. electro-magnetic fields are necessary. brains need electro-magnetic fields, electro-magnetic fields don't need brains.

On the contrary, light (an electro-magnetic field) is not conscious. Consciousness needs complexity of structure to allow for the required processing of thoughts, emotions, etc.

 

[Fool]

On the contrary, light (an electro-magnetic field) is not conscious. Consciousness needs complexity of structure to allow for the required processing of thoughts, emotions, etc.

but it doesn't require a brain even if it is a complex structure of force.

mind and matter are inexorably intertwined, monism

 

[Polymath257]

but it doesn't require a brain even if it is a complex structure of force.

mind and matter are inexorably intertwined, monism

To have the desired complexity, yes, it does require matter, not just E&M fields. Whether it actually requires brains or if it can be done in silicon is another issue.

 

[Fool]

To have the desired complexity, yes, it does require matter, not just E&M fields. Whether it actually requires brains or if it can be done in silicon is another issue.

in my understanding there are three things necessary for the ONE. consciousness(mind), matter, force

 

[12jtartar]

Been doing some thinking...

“Everything we do and everything that happens has a cause” is true

Therefore we can say that all things that happen are determined/caused by things that have happened in the past

Therefore there is no free will as it is impossible to carry out any action that does not have a cause – all actions have and must have a cause

Free will would require being able to act without a cause, which I think would be impossible. No matter how complex the human mind is, its workings are still governed by cause and effect, by things both external and internal to it

Free will is therefore an illusion, as things that come about by “free will” are truly caused by the past

I still believe we have wills, just not free wills!

I like the idea of having free will so please, prove me wrong

Eddie,
What you say makes no sense to me. Who says that everything has a cause? Natural laws say that every effect has a cause! The Almighty God was the First Cause, Jesus was the Second Cause. What caused God Almighty? Nothing, because God always existed. Causes can begin in the mind, because we can think and imagine.
Your posits are called Paromologia, which just depends on a play on words, like saying the Almighty God cannot create a rock to heavy for Him to lift.
What is the difference between freewill, and just will of any kind?
I believe that Ecclesiastes 11:9 shows that we all have freewill. Notice, the Scripture says that we can choose to walk in the ways of our heart and in the sight of your eyes, BUT know that you will be brought to Judgement for all the things you do. God does not want you to do the bad things of your youth, but you have freewill to do things that God does not approve of. People have until Jesus comes back to earth to make up their mind to obey God.
Genesis 6:5,6.