Total Posts:55|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Week 1: Free Will

dylancatlow
Posts: 12,242
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2015 4:38:44 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
In an effort to improve the philosophy section, Bossy and I are starting a new project intended to promote interesting philosophical discussion. Each week we will make a thread about a philosophical topic, with various questions relating to the issue under consideration. This week we are doing free will. If you have good ideas for future topics, please send them to me or bossy.

1. Do you think free will exists? How do you justify your position?
2. Should the existence/nonexistence of free will affect how we live our lives?
3. Should the existence/nonexistence of free will affect our governmental policies?
4. Is free will compatible with determinism?
bossyburrito
Posts: 14,075
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2015 4:46:32 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
1.) The existence of free will is axiomatic. Any attempt to refute it negates itself - any chain of reasoning, in order to validate any position, must be chosen, as the primary choice is whether to recognize reality or evade it. If you don't have that choice (i.e. if all your thoughts are determined), you have no way to steer yourself from fallibility.

2.) Again, the main choice is to evade or not - if you do evade, you're basically committing suicide, so you can't consider the question. In that sense, it affects how you live your life if you choose not to evade, but, if you do choose to evade, you can't recognize that choice and therefore cannot base any decisions off the fact that you made it.

3.) Either you have free will and you have rights or you don't have either. Violating the rights of others while you have free will negates your rights and renders you nothing more than an animal to be treated as property, and violating the rights of others while you don't have free will means that you're nothing more than an animal to be treated as property. There's no distinction to be made in terms of punishment.

If you don't have free will, though, you would be treated as property even without violating the rights of others, so, in that sense, free will does make a difference.

4.) Free will is not random. It is, by definition, based on choice - meaning that the cause of an action is chosen, not based off any dicerolls. This means that it is completely caused and does not run into any problems with the laws of causality.
#UnbanTheMadman

"Some will sell their dreams for small desires
Or lose the race to rats
Get caught in ticking traps
And start to dream of somewhere
To relax their restless flight
Somewhere out of a memory of lighted streets on quiet nights..."

~ Rush
1harderthanyouthink
Posts: 13,100
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2015 4:50:50 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
You should ask Max to sticky this like when he tried to make a topic of the week thing in the religion forum.
"It's awfully considerate of you to think of me here,
And I'm much obliged to you for making it clear - that I'm not here."

-Syd Barrett

DDO Risk King
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,242
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2015 4:55:56 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/6/2015 4:46:32 PM, bossyburrito wrote:
1.) The existence of free will is axiomatic. Any attempt to refute it negates itself - any chain of reasoning, in order to validate any position, must be chosen, as the primary choice is whether to recognize reality or evade it. If you don't have that choice (i.e. if all your thoughts are determined), you have no way to steer yourself from fallibility.

But if I'm determined to think correctly, then I don't need to worry about being forced to think incorrectly. And if I am, in fact, thinking correctly, then obviously I was determined to think correctly (assuming determinism is true). Of course, you could argue that I was determined to falsely assume I was thinking correctly, but that assumes logic isn't self-evident. Is it your position that it is impossible to construct an awareness that is conscious of a fixed train of thought? Why would it be impossible to construct it, and how can we be sure we aren't such an entity?

4.) Free will is not random. It is, by definition, based on choice - meaning that the cause of an action is chosen, not based off any dicerolls. This means that it is completely caused and does not run into any problems with the laws of causality.

What causes you to choose one path over another? Yourself? What causes you to do that?
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,242
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2015 4:56:34 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/6/2015 4:50:50 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
You should ask Max to sticky this like when he tried to make a topic of the week thing in the religion forum.

We'll do that if it becomes popular enough.
Bennett91
Posts: 4,205
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2015 5:06:14 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/6/2015 4:38:44 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
In an effort to improve the philosophy section, Bossy and I are starting a new project intended to promote interesting philosophical discussion. Each week we will make a thread about a philosophical topic, with various questions relating to the issue under consideration. This week we are doing free will. If you have good ideas for future topics, please send them to me or bossy.

1. Do you think free will exists? How do you justify your position?

No, it probably doesn't exist. If God exists free will definitely doesn't exist. Given that God is all knowing God already knows what will and will be, a mortal can not deviate from his fate that is already known by God. Without God, free will probably doesn't exist due to humans being subject to their neuro-chemsitry and various biases.

2. Should the existence/nonexistence of free will affect how we live our lives?

No. We still live in this world, we are still accountable to each other no matter what happens.

3. Should the existence/nonexistence of free will affect our governmental policies?

Interesting. It depends on the case, but I think an argument could be made.

4. Is free will compatible with determinism?

No, they are antithetical.
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,242
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2015 5:17:50 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/6/2015 5:06:14 PM, Bennett91 wrote:
At 4/6/2015 4:38:44 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
In an effort to improve the philosophy section, Bossy and I are starting a new project intended to promote interesting philosophical discussion. Each week we will make a thread about a philosophical topic, with various questions relating to the issue under consideration. This week we are doing free will. If you have good ideas for future topics, please send them to me or bossy.

1. Do you think free will exists? How do you justify your position?

No, it probably doesn't exist. If God exists free will definitely doesn't exist. Given that God is all knowing God already knows what will and will be, a mortal can not deviate from his fate that is already known by God. Without God, free will probably doesn't exist due to humans being subject to their neuro-chemsitry and various biases.

Wouldn't this only be true according to a certain view of time? If "now" is only a relative concept, and if God transcends it, then from God's perspective everything happens at once, in which case God knows what choices we will freely make in the future because for him, future events are seen in perfection superposition with everything else.


2. Should the existence/nonexistence of free will affect how we live our lives?

No. We still live in this world, we are still accountable to each other no matter what happens.


3. Should the existence/nonexistence of free will affect our governmental policies?

Interesting. It depends on the case, but I think an argument could be made.

4. Is free will compatible with determinism?

No, they are antithetical.
Bennett91
Posts: 4,205
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2015 5:29:02 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/6/2015 5:17:50 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 4/6/2015 5:06:14 PM, Bennett91 wrote:
At 4/6/2015 4:38:44 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
In an effort to improve the philosophy section, Bossy and I are starting a new project intended to promote interesting philosophical discussion. Each week we will make a thread about a philosophical topic, with various questions relating to the issue under consideration. This week we are doing free will. If you have good ideas for future topics, please send them to me or bossy.

1. Do you think free will exists? How do you justify your position?

No, it probably doesn't exist. If God exists free will definitely doesn't exist. Given that God is all knowing God already knows what will and will be, a mortal can not deviate from his fate that is already known by God. Without God, free will probably doesn't exist due to humans being subject to their neuro-chemsitry and various biases.

Wouldn't this only be true according to a certain view of time? If "now" is only a relative concept, and if God transcends it, then from God's perspective everything happens at once, in which case God knows what choices we will freely make in the future because for him, future events are seen in perfection superposition with everything else.

It still negates free will, even if He sees all timelines and scenarios at once. From His perspective he sees what we will "freely" choose (despite all the factors that limit our freedom and choices/opportunities) and thus what we choose is already going to happen, or has already happened w/e. The point being if God has a plan then it's impossible for humans to deviate from that plan, thus negating free will.
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,242
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2015 5:48:30 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/6/2015 5:29:02 PM, Bennett91 wrote:
At 4/6/2015 5:17:50 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 4/6/2015 5:06:14 PM, Bennett91 wrote:
At 4/6/2015 4:38:44 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
In an effort to improve the philosophy section, Bossy and I are starting a new project intended to promote interesting philosophical discussion. Each week we will make a thread about a philosophical topic, with various questions relating to the issue under consideration. This week we are doing free will. If you have good ideas for future topics, please send them to me or bossy.

1. Do you think free will exists? How do you justify your position?

No, it probably doesn't exist. If God exists free will definitely doesn't exist. Given that God is all knowing God already knows what will and will be, a mortal can not deviate from his fate that is already known by God. Without God, free will probably doesn't exist due to humans being subject to their neuro-chemsitry and various biases.

Wouldn't this only be true according to a certain view of time? If "now" is only a relative concept, and if God transcends it, then from God's perspective everything happens at once, in which case God knows what choices we will freely make in the future because for him, future events are seen in perfection superposition with everything else.

It still negates free will, even if He sees all timelines and scenarios at once. From His perspective he sees what we will "freely" choose (despite all the factors that limit our freedom and choices/opportunities) and thus what we choose is already going to happen, or has already happened w/e.

What if from our perspective, the future isn't decided, but from a timeless perspective, the entire history of the universe was defined as soon as the universe came into being?

The point being if God has a plan then it's impossible for humans to deviate from that plan, thus negating free will.

What if humans play a role in determining God's plan?
Bennett91
Posts: 4,205
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2015 5:57:20 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/6/2015 5:48:30 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 4/6/2015 5:29:02 PM, Bennett91 wrote:
At 4/6/2015 5:17:50 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 4/6/2015 5:06:14 PM, Bennett91 wrote:
At 4/6/2015 4:38:44 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
In an effort to improve the philosophy section, Bossy and I are starting a new project intended to promote interesting philosophical discussion. Each week we will make a thread about a philosophical topic, with various questions relating to the issue under consideration. This week we are doing free will. If you have good ideas for future topics, please send them to me or bossy.

1. Do you think free will exists? How do you justify your position?

No, it probably doesn't exist. If God exists free will definitely doesn't exist. Given that God is all knowing God already knows what will and will be, a mortal can not deviate from his fate that is already known by God. Without God, free will probably doesn't exist due to humans being subject to their neuro-chemsitry and various biases.

Wouldn't this only be true according to a certain view of time? If "now" is only a relative concept, and if God transcends it, then from God's perspective everything happens at once, in which case God knows what choices we will freely make in the future because for him, future events are seen in perfection superposition with everything else.

It still negates free will, even if He sees all timelines and scenarios at once. From His perspective he sees what we will "freely" choose (despite all the factors that limit our freedom and choices/opportunities) and thus what we choose is already going to happen, or has already happened w/e.

What if from our perspective, the future isn't decided, but from a timeless perspective, the entire history of the universe was defined as soon as the universe came into being?

Yes that's how it is and because the history of the universe exists, past, peasant and future, that negates free will. We can't deviate from the predetermined future, even our attempts to resist fate are already a part of our fate.

The point being if God has a plan then it's impossible for humans to deviate from that plan, thus negating free will.

What if humans play a role in determining God's plan?

It's possible humanity is an experiment that God wants to see play out, but in order for this to make sense God can't know the outcome. Such an open ended plan would mean God is not fully in control, negating the omniscience of God.
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,242
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2015 7:54:59 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/6/2015 5:57:20 PM, Bennett91 wrote:
At 4/6/2015 5:48:30 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 4/6/2015 5:29:02 PM, Bennett91 wrote:
At 4/6/2015 5:17:50 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 4/6/2015 5:06:14 PM, Bennett91 wrote:
At 4/6/2015 4:38:44 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
In an effort to improve the philosophy section, Bossy and I are starting a new project intended to promote interesting philosophical discussion. Each week we will make a thread about a philosophical topic, with various questions relating to the issue under consideration. This week we are doing free will. If you have good ideas for future topics, please send them to me or bossy.

1. Do you think free will exists? How do you justify your position?

No, it probably doesn't exist. If God exists free will definitely doesn't exist. Given that God is all knowing God already knows what will and will be, a mortal can not deviate from his fate that is already known by God. Without God, free will probably doesn't exist due to humans being subject to their neuro-chemsitry and various biases.

Wouldn't this only be true according to a certain view of time? If "now" is only a relative concept, and if God transcends it, then from God's perspective everything happens at once, in which case God knows what choices we will freely make in the future because for him, future events are seen in perfection superposition with everything else.

It still negates free will, even if He sees all timelines and scenarios at once. From His perspective he sees what we will "freely" choose (despite all the factors that limit our freedom and choices/opportunities) and thus what we choose is already going to happen, or has already happened w/e.

What if from our perspective, the future isn't decided, but from a timeless perspective, the entire history of the universe was defined as soon as the universe came into being?

Yes that's how it is and because the history of the universe exists, past, peasant and future, that negates free will. We can't deviate from the predetermined future, even our attempts to resist fate are already a part of our fate.

The point is that it's not yet determined from our perspective.

The point being if God has a plan then it's impossible for humans to deviate from that plan, thus negating free will.

What if humans play a role in determining God's plan?

It's possible humanity is an experiment that God wants to see play out, but in order for this to make sense God can't know the outcome. Such an open ended plan would mean God is not fully in control, negating the omniscience of God.

But from a timeless perspective, the entire history of the universe can be played out in an instant.
Sidewalker
Posts: 3,713
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2015 7:57:55 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/6/2015 4:38:44 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
If you have good ideas for future topics, please send them to me or bossy.

If someone wants to start a new topic, don't press the "new topic" button, send it to you?

Really?
"It is one of the commonest of mistakes to consider that the limit of our power of perception is also the limit of all there is to perceive." " C. W. Leadbeater
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,242
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2015 8:00:41 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/6/2015 7:57:55 PM, Sidewalker wrote:
At 4/6/2015 4:38:44 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
If you have good ideas for future topics, please send them to me or bossy.

If someone wants to start a new topic, don't press the "new topic" button, send it to you?

Really?

They can create whatever threads they want to of course. But if they want the topic to be featured in this project, then obviously we need to know about it.
Bennett91
Posts: 4,205
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2015 8:03:57 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/6/2015 7:54:59 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 4/6/2015 5:57:20 PM, Bennett91 wrote:
At 4/6/2015 5:48:30 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 4/6/2015 5:29:02 PM, Bennett91 wrote:
At 4/6/2015 5:17:50 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 4/6/2015 5:06:14 PM, Bennett91 wrote:
At 4/6/2015 4:38:44 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
In an effort to improve the philosophy section, Bossy and I are starting a new project intended to promote interesting philosophical discussion. Each week we will make a thread about a philosophical topic, with various questions relating to the issue under consideration. This week we are doing free will. If you have good ideas for future topics, please send them to me or bossy.

1. Do you think free will exists? How do you justify your position?

No, it probably doesn't exist. If God exists free will definitely doesn't exist. Given that God is all knowing God already knows what will and will be, a mortal can not deviate from his fate that is already known by God. Without God, free will probably doesn't exist due to humans being subject to their neuro-chemsitry and various biases.

Wouldn't this only be true according to a certain view of time? If "now" is only a relative concept, and if God transcends it, then from God's perspective everything happens at once, in which case God knows what choices we will freely make in the future because for him, future events are seen in perfection superposition with everything else.

It still negates free will, even if He sees all timelines and scenarios at once. From His perspective he sees what we will "freely" choose (despite all the factors that limit our freedom and choices/opportunities) and thus what we choose is already going to happen, or has already happened w/e.

What if from our perspective, the future isn't decided, but from a timeless perspective, the entire history of the universe was defined as soon as the universe came into being?

Yes that's how it is and because the history of the universe exists, past, peasant and future, that negates free will. We can't deviate from the predetermined future, even our attempts to resist fate are already a part of our fate.

The point is that it's not yet determined from our perspective.

Our perspective is irrelevant to reality. Of course we as mortals do not know our own futures. However if God exists and is omniscient God knows our future and we can't deviate from what he knows.

The point being if God has a plan then it's impossible for humans to deviate from that plan, thus negating free will.

What if humans play a role in determining God's plan?

It's possible humanity is an experiment that God wants to see play out, but in order for this to make sense God can't know the outcome. Such an open ended plan would mean God is not fully in control, negating the omniscience of God.

But from a timeless perspective, the entire history of the universe can be played out in an instant.

So? This does not show we have free will. If all events happen simultaneously in His eyes that still upholds my point about how us mortals don't have free will. From our perspective events happen in an order that we have no control over other than what we think we have control over. If God knows what we're going to do then that action is already done, out of our control.
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,242
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2015 8:13:29 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/6/2015 8:03:57 PM, Bennett91 wrote:
At 4/6/2015 7:54:59 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 4/6/2015 5:57:20 PM, Bennett91 wrote:
At 4/6/2015 5:48:30 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 4/6/2015 5:29:02 PM, Bennett91 wrote:
At 4/6/2015 5:17:50 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 4/6/2015 5:06:14 PM, Bennett91 wrote:
At 4/6/2015 4:38:44 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
In an effort to improve the philosophy section, Bossy and I are starting a new project intended to promote interesting philosophical discussion. Each week we will make a thread about a philosophical topic, with various questions relating to the issue under consideration. This week we are doing free will. If you have good ideas for future topics, please send them to me or bossy.

1. Do you think free will exists? How do you justify your position?

No, it probably doesn't exist. If God exists free will definitely doesn't exist. Given that God is all knowing God already knows what will and will be, a mortal can not deviate from his fate that is already known by God. Without God, free will probably doesn't exist due to humans being subject to their neuro-chemsitry and various biases.

Wouldn't this only be true according to a certain view of time? If "now" is only a relative concept, and if God transcends it, then from God's perspective everything happens at once, in which case God knows what choices we will freely make in the future because for him, future events are seen in perfection superposition with everything else.

It still negates free will, even if He sees all timelines and scenarios at once. From His perspective he sees what we will "freely" choose (despite all the factors that limit our freedom and choices/opportunities) and thus what we choose is already going to happen, or has already happened w/e.

What if from our perspective, the future isn't decided, but from a timeless perspective, the entire history of the universe was defined as soon as the universe came into being?

Yes that's how it is and because the history of the universe exists, past, peasant and future, that negates free will. We can't deviate from the predetermined future, even our attempts to resist fate are already a part of our fate.

The point is that it's not yet determined from our perspective.

Our perspective is irrelevant to reality. Of course we as mortals do not know our own futures. However if God exists and is omniscient God knows our future and we can't deviate from what he knows.

Limited knowledge isn't relevant to my point. The point is that from our perspective, the future is not yet determined at all.

The point being if God has a plan then it's impossible for humans to deviate from that plan, thus negating free will.

What if humans play a role in determining God's plan?

It's possible humanity is an experiment that God wants to see play out, but in order for this to make sense God can't know the outcome. Such an open ended plan would mean God is not fully in control, negating the omniscience of God.

But from a timeless perspective, the entire history of the universe can be played out in an instant.

So? This does not show we have free will. If all events happen simultaneously in His eyes that still upholds my point about how us mortals don't have free will. From our perspective events happen in an order that we have no control over other than what we think we have control over. If God knows what we're going to do then that action is already done, out of our control.

Why does the fact that God knows what we will do prevent us from freely "doing". That only makes sense if we couldn't have done otherwise. God's knowledge is determined by our choices, not the other way around. Also, if it's impossible for God to know what we will do in the future through our own free will, then he doesn't need to know in order to be omniscient, since omniscience doesn't require you to know the yet-to-be-defined, impossible-to-know.
Bennett91
Posts: 4,205
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2015 8:23:01 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/6/2015 8:13:29 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 4/6/2015 8:03:57 PM, Bennett91 wrote:

Our perspective is irrelevant to reality. Of course we as mortals do not know our own futures. However if God exists and is omniscient God knows our future and we can't deviate from what he knows.

Limited knowledge isn't relevant to my point. The point is that from our perspective, the future is not yet determined at all.

I don't get how you're not getting my point. Yes, our limited knowledge is irrelevant to this discussion. What's important is God's unlimited knowledge that predestines our actions. From our perspective we think we have free will, this is irrelevant too. Just because you think you have a choice does not mean you really have one, especially when your choice has already been made for you via God's plan.

So? This does not show we have free will. If all events happen simultaneously in His eyes that still upholds my point about how us mortals don't have free will. From our perspective events happen in an order that we have no control over other than what we think we have control over. If God knows what we're going to do then that action is already done, out of our control.

Why does the fact that God knows what we will do prevent us from freely "doing".

Let me give you a scenario. There is a cupcake in front of you, God knows you're going to eat the cupcake. Can you act on the choice to not eat the cupcake?

That only makes sense if we couldn't have done otherwise. God's knowledge is determined by our choices, not the other way around.

The definition of God is vague. I'll need to know your definition of God before I comment on this. I've been referring to God under the common conception of the Christian variety of a being that watches over us. But if Gods NEEDS humanity for anything that contradicts his omnipotence.

Also, if it's impossible for God to know what we will do in the future through our own free will, then he doesn't need to know in order to be omniscient, since omniscience doesn't require you to know the yet-to-be-defined, impossible-to-know.

Omniscience means all knowing, as in knowing everything there is to know, meaning God would know everything future, past etc. If God is not omniscient then that gives a possibility to free will, which I'd argue against with an argument about neuro-chemistry.
illegalcombatant2.0
Posts: 27
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2015 9:11:44 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/6/2015 4:46:32 PM, bossyburrito wrote:
1.) The existence of free will is axiomatic. Any attempt to refute it negates itself - any chain of reasoning, in order to validate any position, must be chosen, as the primary choice is whether to recognize reality or evade it. If you don't have that choice (i.e. if all your thoughts are determined), you have no way to steer yourself from fallibility.

It's not axiomatic, not by a long shot.

You don't choose your thoughts, that would require you to think your thought before you thought it.

If you can't even choose your thoughts, if you can't even choose the first thought that popped into your head while reading this, where is your free will ?
bossyburrito
Posts: 14,075
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2015 9:23:14 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/6/2015 9:11:44 PM, illegalcombatant2.0 wrote:
At 4/6/2015 4:46:32 PM, bossyburrito wrote:
1.) The existence of free will is axiomatic. Any attempt to refute it negates itself - any chain of reasoning, in order to validate any position, must be chosen, as the primary choice is whether to recognize reality or evade it. If you don't have that choice (i.e. if all your thoughts are determined), you have no way to steer yourself from fallibility.

It's not axiomatic, not by a long shot.

You don't choose your thoughts, that would require you to think your thought before you thought it.
The point is that the choice is pre-thought. You wouldn't have to "think your thought before you thought it" - it would just happen prior to the concept of "thought" in general.
If you can't even choose your thoughts, if you can't even choose the first thought that popped into your head while reading this, where is your free will ?
#UnbanTheMadman

"Some will sell their dreams for small desires
Or lose the race to rats
Get caught in ticking traps
And start to dream of somewhere
To relax their restless flight
Somewhere out of a memory of lighted streets on quiet nights..."

~ Rush
illegalcombatant2.0
Posts: 27
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2015 9:24:16 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/6/2015 9:23:14 PM, bossyburrito wrote:
At 4/6/2015 9:11:44 PM, illegalcombatant2.0 wrote:
At 4/6/2015 4:46:32 PM, bossyburrito wrote:
1.) The existence of free will is axiomatic. Any attempt to refute it negates itself - any chain of reasoning, in order to validate any position, must be chosen, as the primary choice is whether to recognize reality or evade it. If you don't have that choice (i.e. if all your thoughts are determined), you have no way to steer yourself from fallibility.

It's not axiomatic, not by a long shot.

You don't choose your thoughts, that would require you to think your thought before you thought it.
The point is that the choice is pre-thought. You wouldn't have to "think your thought before you thought it" - it would just happen prior to the concept of "thought" in general.

What ? you don't pre thought a thought. It's just emerges.

If you can't even choose your thoughts, if you can't even choose the first thought that popped into your head while reading this, where is your free will ?
bossyburrito
Posts: 14,075
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2015 9:26:09 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/6/2015 9:24:16 PM, illegalcombatant2.0 wrote:
At 4/6/2015 9:23:14 PM, bossyburrito wrote:
At 4/6/2015 9:11:44 PM, illegalcombatant2.0 wrote:
At 4/6/2015 4:46:32 PM, bossyburrito wrote:
1.) The existence of free will is axiomatic. Any attempt to refute it negates itself - any chain of reasoning, in order to validate any position, must be chosen, as the primary choice is whether to recognize reality or evade it. If you don't have that choice (i.e. if all your thoughts are determined), you have no way to steer yourself from fallibility.

It's not axiomatic, not by a long shot.

You don't choose your thoughts, that would require you to think your thought before you thought it.
The point is that the choice is pre-thought. You wouldn't have to "think your thought before you thought it" - it would just happen prior to the concept of "thought" in general.

What ? you don't pre thought a thought. It's just emerges.
I mean pre-thought as in it's prior to thought. The choosing of a thought does not have to be done via thought.
#UnbanTheMadman

"Some will sell their dreams for small desires
Or lose the race to rats
Get caught in ticking traps
And start to dream of somewhere
To relax their restless flight
Somewhere out of a memory of lighted streets on quiet nights..."

~ Rush
illegalcombatant2.0
Posts: 27
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2015 9:32:24 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/6/2015 4:38:44 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
In an effort to improve the philosophy section, Bossy and I are starting a new project intended to promote interesting philosophical discussion. Each week we will make a thread about a philosophical topic, with various questions relating to the issue under consideration. This week we are doing free will. If you have good ideas for future topics, please send them to me or bossy.

1. Do you think free will exists? How do you justify your position?

On the surface it would appear so. I choose to eat chocolate over vanilla.

But when you dig deeper what seems to be happening is that we look at an event AFTER the fact then IMAGINE a different outcome.........but that doesn't establish free will.

Once you get pass the language that presupposes free will in the first place "choice" what you are left with is events happen and some of us tell each other and ourselves well I choose that to happen.

2. Should the existence/nonexistence of free will affect how we live our lives?

3. Should the existence/nonexistence of free will affect our governmental policies?

4. Is free will compatible with determinism?

Nope.
illegalcombatant2.0
Posts: 27
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2015 9:34:16 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/6/2015 9:26:09 PM, bossyburrito wrote:
At 4/6/2015 9:24:16 PM, illegalcombatant2.0 wrote:
At 4/6/2015 9:23:14 PM, bossyburrito wrote:
At 4/6/2015 9:11:44 PM, illegalcombatant2.0 wrote:
At 4/6/2015 4:46:32 PM, bossyburrito wrote:
1.) The existence of free will is axiomatic. Any attempt to refute it negates itself - any chain of reasoning, in order to validate any position, must be chosen, as the primary choice is whether to recognize reality or evade it. If you don't have that choice (i.e. if all your thoughts are determined), you have no way to steer yourself from fallibility.

It's not axiomatic, not by a long shot.

You don't choose your thoughts, that would require you to think your thought before you thought it.
The point is that the choice is pre-thought. You wouldn't have to "think your thought before you thought it" - it would just happen prior to the concept of "thought" in general.

What ? you don't pre thought a thought. It's just emerges.
I mean pre-thought as in it's prior to thought. The choosing of a thought does not have to be done via thought.

This just assumes you are choosing in a free will sense, that is I could of choosen differently.

This may not be the case.
Subutai
Posts: 3,172
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2015 9:55:47 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Free will is certainly not axiomatic. In a purely physical universe, given all the needed information, we can determine the future state of the universe from the current state.

The question that arises is whether the mind can be treated as a physical object. Now there are various answers, all of which have some argument favoring that side with varying degrees of validity. The only way for free will to exist is an an atheistic, non-physical universe, which begs the question of how something non-physical can arise from a seemingly physical universe without divine intervention. Regardless, there's nothing requiring a sentient being to have free will.

In regards to actions, the best thing is to become aware of it. Laws should still be the same, whether someone had a "choice" in doing it. Even if we accept the premise that a murderer is not really at fault for their actions, it is in society's interest to lock that person up.

Now compatibilist theory reconciles mental free will with physical determinism, but it doesn't make a very good connection in explaining how a purely physical universe can lead to something inherently non physical. There must be some connection between the physical and the mental.

I still struggle with the concept a lot, especially concerning what we can do to control our own actions (as you can see, I didn't devote a lot of space to it). I need to do more thinking on that.
I'm becoming less defined as days go by, fading away, and well you might say, I'm losing focus, kinda drifting into the abstract in terms of how I see myself.
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,242
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2015 11:13:40 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/6/2015 9:55:47 PM, Subutai wrote:
Free will is certainly not axiomatic. In a purely physical universe, given all the needed information, we can determine the future state of the universe from the current state.

The question that arises is whether the mind can be treated as a physical object. Now there are various answers, all of which have some argument favoring that side with varying degrees of validity. The only way for free will to exist is an an atheistic, non-physical universe, which begs the question of how something non-physical can arise from a seemingly physical universe without divine intervention. Regardless, there's nothing requiring a sentient being to have free will.

In regards to actions, the best thing is to become aware of it. Laws should still be the same, whether someone had a "choice" in doing it. Even if we accept the premise that a murderer is not really at fault for their actions, it is in society's interest to lock that person up.

Now compatibilist theory reconciles mental free will with physical determinism, but it doesn't make a very good connection in explaining how a purely physical universe can lead to something inherently non physical. There must be some connection between the physical and the mental.

I still struggle with the concept a lot, especially concerning what we can do to control our own actions (as you can see, I didn't devote a lot of space to it). I need to do more thinking on that.

What implications (if any) do you think quantum mechanics has for free will? If correct, the Participatory Anthropic Principle would seem to give the universe a mental quality.
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,242
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2015 11:52:47 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/6/2015 11:52:05 PM, Bennett91 wrote:
At 4/6/2015 11:13:40 PM, dylancatlow wrote:


I hope you plan to respond to my claims.

I will tomorrow. I haven't read them yet lol
Genghis_Khan
Posts: 480
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/7/2015 12:18:41 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/6/2015 4:38:44 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
In an effort to improve the philosophy section, Bossy and I are starting a new project intended to promote interesting philosophical discussion. Each week we will make a thread about a philosophical topic, with various questions relating to the issue under consideration. This week we are doing free will. If you have good ideas for future topics, please send them to me or bossy.

1. Do you think free will exists? How do you justify your position?

Yes. Consciousness is not sufficiently explained by naturalistic processes. Mind is most likely a separate substance from matter, which leaves plenty of room for free will.

2. Should the existence/nonexistence of free will affect how we live our lives?
3. Should the existence/nonexistence of free will affect our governmental policies?

There is no "should" if free will doesn't exist. Hard determinism goes hand in hand with materialism and nihilism. If free will doesn't exist, then it is meaningless to say that something "should" or "should not" be the case because whatever already is the case invariably is the case already... lol. We might as well be inanimate objects.

4. Is free will compatible with determinism?

No. It could be compatible with off-shoots such as quantum indeterminism, though.
anything your heart desires
Genghis_Khan
Posts: 480
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/7/2015 12:21:44 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/6/2015 9:55:47 PM, Subutai wrote:
Free will is certainly not axiomatic. In a purely physical universe, given all the needed information, we can determine the future state of the universe from the current state.

The question that arises is whether the mind can be treated as a physical object. Now there are various answers, all of which have some argument favoring that side with varying degrees of validity. The only way for free will to exist is an an atheistic, non-physical universe, which begs the question of how something non-physical can arise from a seemingly physical universe without divine intervention. Regardless, there's nothing requiring a sentient being to have free will.

Why atheistic?


In regards to actions, the best thing is to become aware of it. Laws should still be the same, whether someone had a "choice" in doing it. Even if we accept the premise that a murderer is not really at fault for their actions, it is in society's interest to lock that person up.

Now compatibilist theory reconciles mental free will with physical determinism, but it doesn't make a very good connection in explaining how a purely physical universe can lead to something inherently non physical. There must be some connection between the physical and the mental.

I still struggle with the concept a lot, especially concerning what we can do to control our own actions (as you can see, I didn't devote a lot of space to it). I need to do more thinking on that.
anything your heart desires
Subutai
Posts: 3,172
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/7/2015 7:05:10 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/6/2015 11:13:40 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 4/6/2015 9:55:47 PM, Subutai wrote:
Free will is certainly not axiomatic. In a purely physical universe, given all the needed information, we can determine the future state of the universe from the current state.

The question that arises is whether the mind can be treated as a physical object. Now there are various answers, all of which have some argument favoring that side with varying degrees of validity. The only way for free will to exist is an an atheistic, non-physical universe, which begs the question of how something non-physical can arise from a seemingly physical universe without divine intervention. Regardless, there's nothing requiring a sentient being to have free will.

In regards to actions, the best thing is to become aware of it. Laws should still be the same, whether someone had a "choice" in doing it. Even if we accept the premise that a murderer is not really at fault for their actions, it is in society's interest to lock that person up.

Now compatibilist theory reconciles mental free will with physical determinism, but it doesn't make a very good connection in explaining how a purely physical universe can lead to something inherently non physical. There must be some connection between the physical and the mental.

I still struggle with the concept a lot, especially concerning what we can do to control our own actions (as you can see, I didn't devote a lot of space to it). I need to do more thinking on that.

What implications (if any) do you think quantum mechanics has for free will? If correct, the Participatory Anthropic Principle would seem to give the universe a mental quality.

There are deterministic and indeterministic interpretations of quantum mechanics. The Copenhagen interpretation is indeterministic, meaning that, even if we know everything about the universe in state A, we can't predict it in a future state B. But the many world's interpretation is. Every possibility is a distinct world, and we have no control over which one we are in. So quantum mechanics just muddies the water further.

The Participatory Anthropic Principle doesn't make a lot of sense. It takes the idea of an observer changing the outcome of an experiment to its extreme. It's simply an extension of the Copenhagen interpretation, but the universe can still exist without observers.
I'm becoming less defined as days go by, fading away, and well you might say, I'm losing focus, kinda drifting into the abstract in terms of how I see myself.