Total Posts:12|Showing Posts:1-12
Jump to topic:

No Such Thing As Human Free Will

jat93
Posts: 1,440
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/26/2012 6:26:44 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
All humans are constrained by limitations of social status, economic status, our genetic/biological predispositions, the way in which we were raised and shaped by our parents, our time and place in the universe...

Sure, maybe within those confines we have free will, but is that really free will at all, when you consider all our predispositions to certain choices based on all those things I mentioned above?
Cody_Franklin
Posts: 9,484
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/26/2012 6:32:03 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Hurka durka durka, contra-causal free will isn't even coherent, because willing something implies making a decision and commanding something for reasons, which means that there's a cause. If the decision is "free" from causality, then it's just random, in which case you aren't willing jack sh*t. So it doesn't even make sense to talk about free will.

/discussion

Can we please talk about something else now?
jat93
Posts: 1,440
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/26/2012 6:49:52 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/26/2012 6:32:03 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
Hurka durka durka, contra-causal free will isn't even coherent, because willing something implies making a decision and commanding something for reasons, which means that there's a cause. If the decision is "free" from causality, then it's just random, in which case you aren't willing jack sh*t.

I'm a bit confused - those who say free will exists say don't say that decisions must be free from reasons or causality, just that humans have the choice to take those reasons and make a given decision, or not make it. Unless I'm just mistaken about the nature of this whole free will argument.

So it doesn't even make sense to talk about free will.

/discussion

Can we please talk about something else now?

I think the discussion is still worth having. It really gets to the heart of whether humans are rational agents who can control their own destinies, or whether we're basically subject to what we're predetermined to be subject to. I think that's pretty significant in terms of how we view humans, which in turn is pretty significant to one's worldview.
Agent_Orange
Posts: 2,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/27/2012 2:11:27 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/27/2012 12:25:22 AM, FREEDO wrote:
At 6/27/2012 12:23:59 AM, Agent_Orange wrote:
No. We have free will.

BOOM.

Beat that.

Yes. Try to beat that. Cause by doing so you'll be exercising your free will.
#BlackLivesMatter
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/29/2012 12:15:12 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/26/2012 6:26:44 PM, jat93 wrote:
All humans are constrained by limitations of social status, economic status, our genetic/biological predispositions, the way in which we were raised and shaped by our parents, our time and place in the universe...

Sure, maybe within those confines we have free will, but is that really free will at all, when you consider all our predispositions to certain choices based on all those things I mentioned above?

What about those that influence such things? People who influence their parents as well as live despite society (and thus, economic status)?
Cody_Franklin
Posts: 9,484
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/29/2012 12:27:40 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/26/2012 6:49:52 PM, jat93 wrote:
At 6/26/2012 6:32:03 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
Hurka durka durka, contra-causal free will isn't even coherent, because willing something implies making a decision and commanding something for reasons, which means that there's a cause. If the decision is "free" from causality, then it's just random, in which case you aren't willing jack sh*t.

I'm a bit confused - those who say free will exists say don't say that decisions must be free from reasons or causality, just that humans have the choice to take those reasons and make a given decision, or not make it. Unless I'm just mistaken about the nature of this whole free will argument.

You're just mistaken about what free will is, yeah. You could define the concept as something else, but then you're not even having the same conversation anymore. Then you're talking about political liberty or cognition or something. It's just building castles in the air, dawg.

So it doesn't even make sense to talk about free will.

/discussion

Can we please talk about something else now?

I think the discussion is still worth having. It really gets to the heart of whether humans are rational agents who can control their own destinies, or whether we're basically subject to what we're predetermined to be subject to. I think that's pretty significant in terms of how we view humans, which in turn is pretty significant to one's worldview.

Uh, no. If you're a determinist, then there isn't an ontological difference between the interior and the exterior. It's not as if you have "all that stuff out there", which determines everything, vs. "all this stuff in here", which somehow gives you metaphysical liberty. The determinist will tell you that human cognition and rationality and whatever is just another factor in the determinist calculus.

In other words, having the capacity to make decisions isn't "free will". It's a choice mechanism that operates according to particular programs/algorithms.
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/29/2012 12:37:24 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
@Cody_Franklin. As a determinist, do you believe that the future is theoretically predictable if one has infinite knowledge, or just that the concept of free will is incoherent.

There's strong evidence to indicate that things occur randomly so the hard-deterministic position is likely false.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
Cody_Franklin
Posts: 9,484
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/29/2012 12:47:24 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/29/2012 12:37:24 PM, darkkermit wrote:
@Cody_Franklin. As a determinist, do you believe that the future is theoretically predictable if one has infinite knowledge, or just that the concept of free will is incoherent.

If you have infinite knowledge, you don't really have to predict anything. :P

I dunno, though--I'm not really even sure what it would mean to "know everything", so I don't think it makes immediate sense even to posit a Laplace's Demon or something. Same objection to that stuff as to gnosticism about God's properties and stuff. I was just saying that "free will", as non-random contra-causal liberty (i.e., the usual conception), is totes incoherent.

There's strong evidence to indicate that things occur randomly so the hard-deterministic position is likely false.

I'm suspending judgment, because I don't know enough about physics/QM to make that call. I don't want to take the stupid Deepak Chopra line--drop "quantum mechanics", then just derive whatever bullsh*t I want/sells books. I can speak a little bit to the whole "events in the quantum world can really only be assigned probability scores, so it's not hard and fast determinism" thing, though--just enough to say that it doesn't really seem to affect anything on the macro-level, interestingly. It's the same problem they're having with uniting relativity and QM--gravity makes sense at our level, but it isn't really a thing when you're talking about point particles.

tl;dr I have no fuckin' clue, man.
astrocometman
Posts: 86
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/30/2012 6:23:20 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
There are more than a few entanglements we are involved with in decision making. Influences and motives drive us to conclude as we do. There are times when there are no influences but our own interests to satisfy. In satisfying our own interests are we exercising free will in its purest form? Can it be debated that self is in the way of self in decision making, even where the pursuit of our own interests are concerned? It would seen to be a very challenging argument to make.

There is nothing compelling my writing in this domain at 4:00 a.m. but my interests. There are no implications or connections with anything else I may do today.

There are features to this topic that are disarming for any debate. Engaging in activities that have no implications beyond one's own interests is one. What would be subject to question where free will is concerned in that regard? Are there factors that effect the exercise of free will in such situations? Aren't the pursuit of our interests the antidote for questions plaguing the idea of Free Will. I think so. I have no idea there can be a counter argument that can gain any traction.