Free will

>>129092038
I could walk you down a path that easily establishes free-will exists... I'm not sure why it's such a hard concept for people to grasp. It seems your issue is with (((infinite))) free will. The thing about that is, you can't even define infinite. So, you're grasping at invisible straws. You have free-will, you use it every-day.

People who are lucky in life like to think they are responsible for their luck, religious people and their cognitive dissonance are a lost cause etc.

>>129092443
He's talking about Hard Determinism, which is pretty much the blackest of black pills.

File: EXID 03.webm (874KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

874KB, 1280x720px

>>129092038
Please define "free will".

>>129092525
Hard determinism is blatantly absurdly wrong. It means that your choice of corn flakes or raisin bran this morning was determined at the big bang. Not to mention your existence (the instant your parents copulated and the one of millions of sperm that won the race).

Without hard determinism you are left with Chalmers' "hard problem" of consciousness, which implies genuine free will.

The silly notion that what we do and what we think is not entirely determined by variables we are ultimately not responsible for

>>129092038
I think it's the context in which free will is presented/argued.

It's just a word to describe something that is conceptual, as is the word unicorn.

You have to make choices and are capable of reasoned decision making.

The "Hard problem" of Chalmers doesn't imply free will at all.

>>129092038
>OP uses free will to not believe free will exists

Next thread, please.

File: meme free will dna.jpg (631KB, 1048x2080px) Image search: [Google]

631KB, 1048x2080px

>>129092038

Free from what though?

You have to be bound by something to be "free" from it. Otherwise it's automated. Are you talking about the magic Jew who created the universe?

>>129092038
What practical difference does it make? People that deny it are generally looking for a rationale for why they are a shitty person

Alright, here's some context.

https://www.theatlantic.com/amp/article/480750/

>The conscious experience of deciding to act, which we usually associate with free will, appears to be an add-on, a post hoc reconstruction of events that occursafterthe brain has already set the act in motion.

So no, you didn't decide to post in this thread. You subconsciously made that decision before you became aware of it.

>>129093005
I don't see how that's absurdly wrong. Your choice of corn flakes or raisin brand is determined by factors that lead you to that choice. What made you choose that brand of cereal? Your mind isn't a closed off system where you can just make shit up out of nothing. Something happened previously that lead you to your choice. Some random chemical reaction, something you saw on TV, what your body was craving. And there were factors that caused those factors. And factors that caused those factors. The reason the big bang got brought into it is because you trace all the factors back to the original source.

>>129093005
>Hard determinism is blatantly absurdly wrong. It means that your choice of corn flakes or raisin bran this morning was determined at the big bang.
>blatantly absurdly wrong

No, its still open to discussion. Ive not done much reading about this but it depends on whether true randomness can exist. It does appear that randomness can exist with electrons or whatever but it could just be more complex than out scientists and equipment can deal with.

How much variance randomness on a quantum mechanical level has on the larger world/universe is also impossibly hard to measure.

...and just because something hasn't been determined doesn't imply free will. A random outcome isnt an outcome that you can have any control over. Free will requires at least some control.

File: 1392355233575.gif (3MB, 360x314px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 360x314px

What you are really saying is...
"I want to be free of the consequences of my actions."

When your philosophical position forms collectives that abuses an individual your subconscious are attempts to find away to offload the guilt YOU deserve to feel.

>>129094185
How did they establish that the brain is acting on its own?

File: pepe.png (2KB, 44x53px) Image search: [Google]

2KB, 44x53px

>>129094185
Fuck off (((order))) shill, free will is chaos, shadilay my brothers

>>129094185

All that meas is he decided earlier.
If i push a button on a crane and there is a mechanical delay before the crane starts moving.

I still moved the crane.

>>129095281

You dont have free will. External factors control everything you do.

YOU ARE THE CRANE!!!

>>129094185
Here's the problem with this "argument". In a hard deterministic universe, nothing experiences anything. It's just atoms. They move around, interact, some fancy chemistry happens, boom man becomes a nazi Larper on a Mongolian earthworm breeding forum.


The fact that you have sense experience. The fact that you experience ANYTHING at all is proof that hard determinism and hard materialism are bullshit.

>>129095281
The point is that free will requires conscious decision making. If, however, every decision is made subconsciously before you become aware of it, free will is just an illusion.

The simple fact that you're able to ask "Do i have free will?" Proves that you do.

File: Hyerin 03.gif (1023KB, 270x300px) Image search: [Google]

1023KB, 270x300px

>>129095720
>The fact that you have sense experience. The fact that you experience ANYTHING at all is proof that hard determinism and hard materialism are bullshit.

Why can't your experience be predetermined?

>>129095720
>The fact that you have sense experience. The fact that you experience ANYTHING at all is proof that hard determinism and hard materialism are bullshit.


No. Your awareness of your life is the same as a person watching a movie. You have no control. You're spectating your life unfold from inside your own head.

File: Brutter.jpg (179KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

179KB, 1920x1080px

>>129096071

>>129092038
Free will is only an illusion to Laplace's demon.

The fact that our perception is limited and that we can't calculate everything means that, for us, the concept of free will is fully valid.

>>129096071
no

I always thought of it like this. What if you could go back in time and observe people without interacting with them? Would they have free will? Everything is going to play out exactly as it did before, but those people would be under the illusion that they have free will. What if someone is currently observing us right now from the future? Do we have free will?

It's just a thought, I'm not fully committed to the idea of hard determinism.

>>129096071
No it doesn't. At the beginning of time it was 'written' and set that at this point and time you will type this statement. We are following and acting out what has been set. There is no changing anything, there is only following what will happen.

The only possible way to get around a hard deterministic universe would be the ability to see into the future. Even then it could be argued you were always meant to see the future eventually, and always meant to use that knowledge to 'change' what you saw in the future, not knowing it was all set to be changed by you since the dawn of existence.

>>129092443
Because they're afraid of figuring out that their individual existence is vapid and illusory.

>>129094521
>Your mind isn't a closed off system where you can just make shit up out of nothing.

define nothing

>>129096403
Yes, or as we have been stating, it is an *illusion*.

>>129092038

Due to the (((Abrahamic))) religions shitting up peoples minds and making them think human will is some sort of supernatural force, when in reality fucking obviously it's just chemical reactions in your brain and if you knew what all those were you could predict what someone would do 100%.

Just like how people find it so hard to understand morals, thinking when you say something or someone is good or evil you are referring to some sort of inescapable law of nature with a cause and effect and not just a code of conduct agreed upon between humans.

>>129092038
well I'll just whip out my free will detector and prove you wrong

the detector is also handy in detecting love and freedom and maths

>>129092443
There are 2 ways to define free will:

1) What is commonly understood as free will: the ability to make decisions without our decision making process being the product of external factors > DOESN'T EXIST

2) "Free" will > The ability to choose between alternatives following an internal decision making process specific to our brain although shaped by external factors >>> EXISTS BUT MEANINGLESS

>>129092038
Who cares? It has no real life consquences, it is completely irrelevant.

>>129096403
>I don't understand it, so it must be real.

>>129096829
I meant it as in the absence of any outside influence.

File: 1380330031343.jpg (71KB, 415x640px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 415x640px

>>129096847
>conduct agreed upon between humans.

this is the part where you attempt to oppose you will on me and I end you and your genetic line

impose*

>>129093005
Hard determinism in this sense is currently mainstream science for anything above the subatomic level, for the record.

Even admitting the impact of truly stochastic processes, it still doesn't mean that free will exists in a strong sense (who gives a shit if the external factors which control you are random or not? You still are their slave.).

File: SISTAR 01.webm (3MB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1280x720px

>>129096718
>It's not that it cant be... its that is not... bu you desperately want it to be so you can avoid feeling guilt for all the negative things you have done to other people

Not an argument

you can never been free on this earth as long as you have to pay property tax and are forbidden to grow and consume certain plants

>>129096463
Well, even if we do not have free will, since everything is determined by the enviroment. Then let me ask you who creates that enviroment?

The fact is that we are talking about free will. We are at this very moment writting our own ideas about ourselves. So do you want to have free will? What is stoping you?

File: 5a9.jpg (227KB, 850x850px) Image search: [Google]

227KB, 850x850px

Why not both?

>>129096847
>Due to the (((Abrahamic))) religions shitting up peoples minds and making them think human will is some sort of supernatural force, when in reality fucking obviously it's just chemical reactions in your brain and if you knew what all those were you could predict what someone would do 100%.

Even if it were God instead of chemicals, it still wouldn't be free will. Both religious predestination and scientist Newtonian determinism imply free will doesn't exist.

Let's not make this a God debate.

>>129096718
>If I am the crane then...

No, I meant that you are a crane. You are purely responding to external influence. The crane doesn't have free will. It responds to the operator.

You are a crane, all your "choices" are reactions to large and tiny external influences.

>>129097476
Yeah me too i'm into SM stuff.
I never tried a subatomic female.
I heard about this stochastic stuff but i'm a bit pondering about candles and wax.

>>129096999
this thread is exactly split in these two groups.
#1 people and #2 people repeating their points.
but obviously #1 is the only real truth

>>129092038
Suicide.

File: Fuck off.jpg (279KB, 436x500px) Image search: [Google]

279KB, 436x500px

>>129098163
Suicide is related to evil possession; heretic.

>>129096839
Goddamn it, I'm going to need crayons for this.
If you read a book and the main character, at some point, chooses one path over another and ends up at the end of them book, you wouldn't say the character has free will. Ever time you read the book, he obviously makes the same choice.
But from the characters perspective, he chooses it himself. It's his will.

It's the same goddamn thing IRL. Of course your decision is a reaction to your circumstances and has a set result.

But you don't know any of that.You can't see it.
From your perspective as a human being, you have free will, even if on a grander scale, it's all part of the plan.

It doesn't mean you get to take choices lightly and remove yourself from responsibility because "hurr, it's all predestined" does not apply to you if you're part of the game.

In the end, that's what it looks like you want to do. Run away from the responsibility of your own choices by trying to reason that you have none to begin with.

>>129097681
>Then let me ask you who creates that enviroment?

The continuation of Historic motion.

>So do you want to have free will? What is stoping you?
science.

Yes. I will prove it.

Avocado lactation!!!

>>129096718
->
>>129098487

File: novodvor.gif (831KB, 240x180px) Image search: [Google]

831KB, 240x180px

>>129097950
you're trying to define the boundaries of consciousness in what every arbitrary way lets you "win" the argument

the crane touches the finger at the button
the electric impulse surge through synapses my brain

its all consciousness or none of it is consciousness
the "I" has control or the "I" doesn't exist

I think therefore I am.

>>129098487
>Of course your decision is a reaction to your circumstances and has a set result.

So you agree?

>It doesn't mean you get to take choices lightly and remove yourself from responsibility because "hurr, it's all predestined" does not apply to you if you're part of the game.

What does that have to do with the question whether free will exists or not?

>>129092038
Fear

It's another mindless automatons bring up a debate about whether or not they have free will.

While very amusing, these threads creep me out. It's a rude reminder that so many beings that walk this earth do not in fact have souls.

>>129098487

You basically just said "it feels real so it is real". I'm sure that's nice for you, but it doesn't make it correct.

here let me just say this before I go

convincing you that you that you are not in control
is the first step to controlling you

>>129099565
>It's a rude reminder that so many beings that walk this earth do not in fact have souls.

Literally nobody has a soul.

>>129098579
Who creates historic motion? Science/god? Maybe people?

>>129099400
>So you agree?
Of course fucking agree. As long as there's no proof of multiple universes, which there probably won't even be, it's just the truth.

What I'm saying is that it doesn't matter and it doesn't change anything.

>What does that have to do with the question whether free will exists or not?
It has to do with the fact that edgy cunts are using this as an excuse to validate their bad decisions and become either cunts or basement dwellers rather than getting the fuck up and doing something,

>>129099565

Admitting that we don't have free will is an easy redpill and shouldn't even be discussed.

What prevents people from accepting it is that they have to swallow other redpills if they do:

> Individuality doesn't have an autonomous existence; "I" do not exist in the sense I feel I exist
> "Responsibility for your own acts", "merit" etc. only are baseless buzzwords (although it might be useful for society that people believe them)

>>129100111

People, the universe and everything physical, and thats Including a god if there is one. (though I strongly believe there isn't). Everything within the physical universe. Hypothetically speaking even a god is subject to determinism if it lives within the physical realm. I suppose a god could have free will if it lived outside of anything physical.

>>129099684
I could use your argument to claim that nations don't exist, or that the Mona Lisa is just bits of paint stuck together and nothing more.

What I said is that as long as humans are limited then free will exists for us and we can't be absolved of any responsibility regarding our choices.

>>129100124
>It has to do with the fact that edgy cunts are using this as an excuse to validate their bad decisions and become either cunts or basement dwellers rather than getting the fuck up and doing something,

They don't have a choice. (LOL)

>>129100124
>It has to do with the fact that edgy cunts are using this as an excuse to validate their bad decisions and become either cunts or basement dwellers rather than getting the fuck up and doing something,

Another ethical system is possible, beyond "self-responsibility". Whole civilisations have strived while accepting karma / fate / predestination.

>>129101005

You're moving my statement onto a completely different topic that it wasn't intended for in an attempt to invalidate it. It may help you feel like you're winning this debate but its a little ridiculous.

>What I said is...
Yeah, I know what you said. And I'm saying its wrong.

>>129101120
>Another ethical system is possible, beyond "self-responsibility"

Which system? Where is it?
What system will allow man to exist while telling him he's not responsible for his own decisions?

Other than slavery...

>Whole civilisations have strived while accepting karma / fate / predestination.
Sow me a civilization that did not have the concept of choosing between right and wrong.

Other than Africa...

>>129101700
>It may help you feel like you're winning this debate but its a little ridiculous.
Grow the fuck up.

>Yeah, I know what you said. And I'm saying its wrong.
How is it wrong?

now that we (mostly) have agreed upon the fact that free will does not exist, the question that follows is: what is reality? if everything is predetermined, what is it that we are experiencing?
Are we just in a hyperrealistic simulation?
If so, what is base reality?

God gave itself free will in order to experience and discover itself through us, you got some experiencing to do.

>>129101005
>or that the Mona Lisa is just bits of paint stuck together and nothing more.

That's literally what it is.

>>129094556
>but it could just be more complex than out scientists and equipment can deal with.
no, it really couldn't be. Since Einstein's day it was shown that no local hidden variable theory could be more accurate than the current quantum theory and in 2011 the caveat of "local" hidden variables was removed. Quantum field theory is random because the world is random. The only possible escape would be superdeterminism, but that would just be you believing the universe is conspiring against everyone for no good reason just cause you want to hold on to your notion of determinism.

>>129101974
>Sow me a civilization that did not have the concept of choosing between right and wrong.
>Other than Africa...

You are confusing amorality with not believing in free will.

Luther and Calvin were strong moralists and yet believed in predestination.

Knowing that you don't get to decide ultimately does not mean that you don't believe there is a good you should seek and an evil you should avoid with the willpower and life circumstances that fate assigned to you.

Not believing in free will and responsibility philosophically doesn't even prevent you from using them as motivating memes.

I don't believe in free will, yet believe me I do my best to make myself great again.

>>129102470
Again, this is only true at a subatomic level (and the interpretation is debated), and stochasticity of the external processes influencing your brain doesn't mean you have free will.

>>129100971
We are the creator. I think instead of finding reasons and explanations "why i have no free will" we should think what would be best for this world. And many things come down to the moral questions. See i do not believe in god as in a "separate" being "away" from physical realm. All i know, is this expierence im having now. You know when you meet christians and they say "god is everywhere". Ask them if god is what you see. They will say yes. Tell them that you also see them. They will be mad, because "i" cannot be god. Right :D thats sure what jesus and budha said right :D

>>129102272
Yeah, welcome to nihilism.

Except those bits of paint, stuck together in a specific fashion, create an object that was given high value through the actions of humans.

And that is the Mona Lisa. It's the meaning behind the bits of paint.

You can't break shit down so easily.
You start an engine if you take it apart piece by piece. you need the whole engine intact.

a lot of faggots in this thread are also mistaking determism for nihilism or defeatism.
its not.
determinism is just a logical chain of thought, where you look at any current situation, and you will be able to determine the factors that led up to that situation. everything that is happening is based on natural laws and physics.
And because you can determine the pretext of any given situation based on natural laws, the assumption is only logical that with universal knowledge you could also determine any future scenario.

>>129092443
Please walk us all through it. I'm a philosophy major so I know plenty of useless bullshit. Free will is bullshit.

Why are people saying the idea of free will is irrelevant? If we assume that the hard deterministic argument is correct, then there is no argument for the existence of a legal system, or culpability, or responsibility, under the law. If people's actions are predetermined, then the concept of a legal system where people are punished for crimes is incoherent. Free will is the strongest argument in favor of the existence of God, but it's important to understand the long term logical conclusions of the denial of the existence of free will.

>>129103338
Infinite free will* hume's definition is not bullshit

>>129102489
>I don't believe in free will, yet believe me I do my best to make myself great again.

Bitch, you can't have good and evil without free will.
If you act like everything is predestined, ultimately good and evil are meaningless to you.

>>129102214
Truth

>>129103544
>Bitch, you can't have good and evil without free will.
>If you act like everything is predestined, ultimately good and evil are meaningless to you.

Of course you can. Because as mentioned earlier, you have free will in sense #2 : choosing between alternatives following a decision making process specific to yourself. Such a process can be influenced by your conceptions about good and evil.

The fact that you know that your conceptions about good and evil are not really "yours" but the product of external factors doesn't prevent you to act on them.

It also doesn't make them meaningless: you don't have to believe that something comes from you to believe it is right.

>>129102470
>no, it really couldn't be. Since Einstein's day it was shown that no local hidden variable theory could be more accurate than the current quantum theory

Ok, As I said, I've not done much reading on this. I'm not a physicist. For all I know that is correct, I'm not arguing with you. But to say its "Blatantly, absurdly wrong" is a little harsh. I made my point on the basis that our understanding of the universe has improved dramatically in the last 10,000 years and in another 10,000 years (assuming humanity can continue to prosper etc) we would be in a much better position to understand things than we do now. The vast majority of scientific knowledge is improved upon over time.

>>129102142
How is it wrong?

see:
>>129102489

>>129102779
I wasn't arguing for free will, I was only correcting the scientific statement being made.
>and the interpretation is debated
no it's not. are you even sure of what i'm talking about? it sounds like you're talking about the physical meaning of certain mathematical constructions of quantum effects i.e. the collapse of the wave function.
>this is only true at a subatomic level
I don't see how you can claim this. It would be trivial to design any number of scenarios where a machine would be triggered by quantum effects and take action in the macro-world.

>>129100805
Oh the acrobatics an evil and prideful person goes through to escape their sin and guilt. Enjoy hell cuck.

>>129104186
If you don't have free will it means you're nor responsible for your actions.

If you go out there and slaughter and rape little children, then meh, it' not your fault, it was predestined, like everything else.

You can't be accused of doing evil if it's not your fault.

Since good and evil exist in the eyes of the individual, and the individual has no choice, he's not committing evil by raping and slaughtering little children.

Good and evil are on the same fucking level as free will.

>>129104407
->
>>129103544

>>129103428
Retribution is not the only justification for punishment, though. It wouldn't really change anything in regards to deterrence, rehabilitation, and incapacitation.

>>129092038
Quantum Mechanics proves that nothing is deterministic.

File: trinity.png (58KB, 580x600px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 580x600px

>>129092038
The very essence of free will is the human spirit

Our physical bodies are the only part of us that don't have a choice to exist.

The soul lies somewhere in between. Keep in mind that destiny is predetermined and fate is consequence of action. They apply differently to each aspect of our lives.

Time merely the past, present, and future as we constantly clashing with itself at once. This is also a characteristic of the Holy Trinity (pic related) which wherein God is, all at once and in every moment in time that you exist, the Father the Son and the holy spirit.

>>129103544
>ultimately good and evil are meaningless to you.

Yep.

>>129092038
>OP makes makes a choice in making gay thread about how there is no free will instead of actually doing something in his life

Okay

>>129092038
You are currently experiencing life as a human being. Hence you have the free will to exist. If you can't deal with this use your free will.
>and kill youself

>>129103428
Wrong.
Determinism doesn't mean you can read the future like you can read a book.
The environmental factors are infinite, so realistically it's impossible to ever determine the future based on our observations in the present.
But even in determinism, you can alter or shape the future in a way you prefer.
So because humans are averse to pain, murder, loss, take any crime, they will put it under legal punishment.
By doing that, they reduce future crimes.
That does not touch determinism though.
A deterministic observer with ultimate knowledge could have just told you before, that since humans are averse of pain, they will put up systems to reduce the occurence of such.
Determinism is just a play of mind, it does not mean you have to jump off the bridge because you have no free will.

>>129092038
Humans generally behave selfishly, instead of as mindless slaves but they can also choose to be altruistic.

Free will exists, at least to the extent that a human mind can imagine it.

>>129105717
Well in that case, it doesn't really matter what your believe. You're just looking for a way to justify your bad decisions and escape any responsibility.

>>129105577
Yes it would. Because determinism would find no reason to incarcerate someone who murdered his wife, for example. The probability argument doesn't hold up, because without the existence of free will, morality and human rights don't have any basis, and don't need to be adhered to for the overall "well being" of humanity. Someone who murdered his wife could not have done otherwise and is not legally culpable for his action, and morally speaking it makes no difference.

>>129092038
>Why do so many people refuse to believe free will is an illusion, yet aren't able to provide any solid evidence free will exists?
Duality.
It both exists and doesn't exist.

On the one hand, we interpret our surroundings.
On the other hand, it's also tethered to that environment.

>>129093005
>It means that your choice of corn flakes or raisin bran this morning was determined at the big bang
Oh anon.

But it was.

>>129105883
Determinism does not mean there are infinite possibilities, it means there is only one possibility because the universe only adheres to physical laws that have absolute, calculated outcomes.

>>129094556
>Ive not done much reading about this but it depends on whether true randomness can exist.
If the author get's an idea, he writes it down.
There are endless ideas.

>>129106042
>You're just looking for a way to justify your bad decisions and escape any responsibility.

I'm not. I'm interested in scientific accuracy. I just find this stuff interesting.

>>129106685
Flaws in human reasoning and the ability to choose a non rational response guarantee free will.

Saying free will is an illusion is meaningless. It's like saying dreaming is an illusion. Free will is a subjective phenomenon by definition.

>>129092480
God is the determined system anon.
That is god.
Well that and more.

>>129106912
>If the author get's an idea

But he didn't choose to get an Idea.

>>129096847
>making them think human will is some sort of supernatural force, when in reality fucking obviously it's just chemical reactions in your brain
>he sees the magic
>doesn't see the magician

>>129106840
yes, thats correct.
i was just saying that mankind will never have the calculating power to precisely look in the future, but if we had, we could.

File: 1495674515995.jpg (86KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 1000x1000px

>>129092038

It's information, like a program.

If you don't believe in and exercise freewill.exe in your head than it doesn't exist.

>>129096999
>>129096718

there are cases of people who damage a specific part of their brain, and can no longer make choices.

they will actually spend the rest of their life trying to decide which bread to buy if no one intervenes.

and that's just one small facet of "will". taking into account how much of our personalities are determined by DNA (as per twin studies), and how the rest is environmental, there's not a lot of wiggle room for having free will.

even our sensory system is totally binary. our vision is basically just nerve impulses that respond to constrast and edges. it's the most basic shit ever, we just evolved over so many 100s of millions of years to actually do something with those signals.

free will is for suckers who are scared to face the truth.

as far as 'not taking responsibility for my actions', i am a humanist and i still want to have a good life, and to see people around me happy, so that is bullshit.

>>129107038
>Free will is a subjective phenomenon by definition.

Nah, Its hard Physics.

>>129097945
Newton was a firm believer of God as the determiner.
In fact so was Einstein and many pantheistic scientists.

For largely the same reason that they believe they can accurate assess their identities.
Limited senses are easily convinced, and it's more efficient for the mind to believe there is free-will to conduct survival-oriented behavior, rather than exhaust them with extensive introspection.

>>129092038

>choose to believe your a product of your environment and take no owner ship for your actions

Vs

>be the exception and a constant in your universe

>>129107380
So you want to dismantle the legal system and the rule of law?

File: 1484179622028.jpg (346KB, 850x1159px) Image search: [Google]

346KB, 850x1159px

>>129096999
A conscious being cannot exist in a world with no rules, and rules are a manipulating factor in a decision. However, without a universe of rules then any decision made would be meaningless, so free will does exist, if not simply for the fact that for it to exist there must be definitive factors to decide from.

>>129092038

Wouldn't free will represented mathmatically just be a RNG anyway?

>>129107693
no... i like laws. they help keep me from dying and getting raped.

>>129106976
Then why do you say the same things edgy teens say when they find out that people hold them responsible for what they do?

You want scientific accuracy?
Free will exists for those that within the borders of the laws of nature.
As long as you're not Laplace's demon, and you don't know more than your senses can record, you have free will.

Good and evil exist only for those that have free will. You don't go calling the asteroid evil because it wiped out the dinosaurs.

>>129107380

Classic leaf post

>>129094521
Your choice is influenced by factors, sure, but implying every decision you make is decided by existential circumstances out of your control is ridiculous. Example: My craving for cinnamon leads me to want a cinnamon snack, but I ultimately choose the snack.

Proof of free will: If external factors decided everything, I would never choose anything that I didn't like the best. Say I have a choice between coffee cakes and cinnamon cookies. I know cinnamon cookies are better than coffee cakes, but I choose to eat the cakes because I want something different.

You could say "Well you eating cinnamon cookies so much created your need for something different, and your need for cinnamon cookies stem from this, and that stems from something else"

The problem with this is that the only way that would be true is if I was biologically inclined to make that decision. If I think it through and decide based on circumstances I have created for myself, I have free will.

>>129106993
how so?
nobody in this thread answered the question what really differenciates the human decision making process from that of an animal.
imo, it is exactly the same, just that the human decision making process takes more variables into account.
For animals, the decision making is really straight forward, it`s driven by survival instincts.
The human is driven by those, and additional he is driven by the experiences he has had during his life, and from a mix of these he will take a decision.
That's not free will at all, it`s just a conglomeration of experiences and a simple calculation.
If you knew the ins and outs of a human, you could exactly tell how he reacts in any given scenario, don`t you agree?

>>129092038
ITT: A lot of people who will never be able to understand what the OP is talking about.

>>129106993
>Flaws in human reasoning and the ability to choose a non rational response guarantee free will.
No it does not.
In fact flaws are the reason why our universe exists.
Flaws are the magic that narrates the universe.
Look up the 'demiurge' and 'gnosis'.
https://youtu.be/YnTdOiSJc3U

>>129107213
figuratively

>>129107397
>>129107397
>>>129107038 (You)
>>Free will is a subjective phenomenon by definition.
>Nah, Its hard Physics.
Physics stopped being mechanistic over a century ago. For a long time now we know physical reality is fuzzy and based on probability clouds, there is no hard substance and determination at a fundamental level.

>>129108208
>Then why do you say the same things edgy teens say when they found out that people hold them responsible for what they do.

Different person, but I'd imagine because holding individuals responsible for their actions is a tool of social convenience, but was long established before scientific inquiry began to dismantle the notion of free-will.

>Free will exists for those that within the borders of the laws of nature.

Contemporary scientific evidence suggests that even our concept of self is memetic, and that we make decisions before we are even aware they happen. (i.e., there is a delay between reality and awareness, slight, but slight enough to invalidate the perception you are an active participant rather than a passive receptor)

>>129092038

Can you provide any evidence that my free willie doesn't exist?

>>129106685
>B-But
>I chose the corn flakes... ME!!!
>Just fuck off stop telling me I don't have free will :'(

^ Half the people in this thread

Didn't God tell us that we have free will in the Bible?
Not sure what kind of evidence you'd need when you have the word of God Himself.

>>129106414
>determinism would find no reason to incarcerate someone who murdered his wife, for example
Would you not stop a murderous malfunctioning robot just because you don't think it's morally responsible for its actions? Whether human wants are predetermined or not, we have them and the law works on the large scale to provide them. Besides, if there is no free will, are we really wrong for putting someone in jail if we had no choice in it? The argument is meaningless.
>>129104407
>Blatantly, absurdly wrong" is a little harsh
there's post IDs and I'm not the one who said that. As for your point about understanding improving, you can't just use that to counter every single scientific finding specially not this one. Like I said, it's possible we're wrong but it would take something as absurd as superdeterminism. To bring something like that up would show you're not arguing in good faith because nothing can be 100% proven outside of pure logic so there must be some standard of proof at which you have to consider something a fact. Randomness is therefore as much of a fact as anything else.

>>129104520
I read your comment quickly and I'm tired. I'm also not an expert at all in this field so I might be talking crap in all honesty.

What I meant was referring to determinism. My understanding is that quantum theory questions determinism because equations derived from studying the movements of particles at a microscopic level showed that until it is observed, a particle can be described as a vector of an infinity of states; that the classical's interpretation says that the particle is truly in an infinity of states but Einstein's interpretation is that the particle was truly in the State we finally we observed before we observed it even if we couldn't observe it pre-observation.

And by micro vs macro, I was referring to Schrodinger's cat, as it seems absurd to think that the cat (macro object) is both dead and alive.

But again I only have a very superficial and probably wrong understanding of it.

>>129108686
>Physics stopped being mechanistic over a century ago.
Actually Physics branched out into many forms of religious/philosophical thought

Physics and modern science has it's orgin in religion. It is still a religion with a mask.
A tree with more fine branches than the religion of old.
It needs to reevaluate old teachings to truly understand the macroscopic implications of their finds.

>>129092038

There is a cat in OP's picture.

File: 98469169.jpg (65KB, 575x552px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 575x552px

>>129108942

>>129092038
Yes, free will doesn't exist but many people who think so think it for the wrong reasons. The proper reason free will doesn't exist is because it would violate the laws of physics, specifically the law of conservation of energy. If you have free will, then you have the magical power to move matter (the elementary particles in your brain) via a supernatural force. That would be an input of new energy into the universe, which is physically impossible.

>>129105225
>If you go out there and slaughter and rape little children, then meh, it' not your fault, it was predestined, like everything else

I believe that it's truly not "their fault" in the sense that if humans were purely rational and unbiased actors guided by pure objectivity, they would not choose to rape children.

Anyway, order doesn't require responsibility. Instead of killing him because we pretend he's responsible, we can just kill him because he's dangerous.

File: 1494839212996.jpg (60KB, 720x754px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 720x754px

>>129100893
>not posting the whole thing

>>129092038
There's a cat in this picture

File: C__Data_Users_DefApps_AppData_INTERNETEXPLORER_Temp_Saved Images_1490731436039.gif (1MB, 300x226px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 300x226px

>>129109373
You are my friend

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-slit_experiment

>DOUBLE SPLIT EXPERIMENT

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-slit_experiment

>DOUBLE SPLIT EXPERIMENT

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-slit_experiment

>DOUBLE SPLIT EXPERIMENT

File: 1d3.jpg (41KB, 680x661px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 680x661px

>>129108931
The path of enlightenment only shines when you have lost everything.

>>129107699
If I understand, you say that free will exists but exists in a given context like Sartre.

I think that the context is not the only constraint. How you react to the context comes from being you (for the same reason that the calculator giving 2 as answer to the query 1 + 1 comes from its programming). Being you means having particular genes, a particular hormonal system, particular parents and experiences. It means being the product of things that you don't control.

>>129110199
>If I understand, you say that free will exists but exists in a given context like Sartre
Your will is the will of the determined.
The will of god.

You are god's eyes. His ears. His mouth. His mind.

I feel like this would be easy to prove that people have free will.
There has to be something you could make them do. Maybe give 5000 people a task that has no meaning with 10 different options to pick (maybe color in 10 shapes).
If there's free will there should be an even randomness to the color choices.
If there's no free will we should see a pattern. Something in our chemistry should give us preferences.

File: tmp_26296-14914124539661165111932.jpg (72KB, 500x667px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 500x667px

If we cannot separate reality from illusion what use then is it to speak of such impossible distinctions?

Free will can be easily defended by presenting duality, and duality itself unlimately is argued on Faith, either you have faith in duality or you do not, logic cannot successfully determine the winner.

But ask, what difference does holding one belief or the other make? Will you no longer punish the wicked, will you indeed do anything at all... Or are you just a robot suffering from a hallucination of self? We need the belief in free will to even form a coherent sense of self, those who claim to be hard determist can hardly be called human, if true they are something alien with no sense of self, they are zombies.

>>129110491
People forget that you both catch the will of the environment and CREATE the will of the environment.
There is a duality to a persons will. Both determined yet the determiner.

We collectively have a role in the mind of things. We are tethered to the will of each other, yet can stimulate the will of each other.
A ripple in the pond.

File: 1474944046933.png (690KB, 850x464px) Image search: [Google]

690KB, 850x464px

>>129110199
You never chose to be born, if you got your true free will you could go back in time and delet your existence. Being a living being is subject to a multitude of prerequisites just as a bullet requires a gun to shoot it. We need a world to live in, now you can accept that and begin to ascend past some of our constraints or perish in a descent toward nihilistic determinism.

Build a better world, so that future generations can solve the mysteries you were unable to, and carry on your memory.

>>129110923
>If we cannot separate reality from illusion what use then is it to speak of such impossible distinctions?
Threat perception on a personal level.
Philosophical understanding and enlightenment on another.

It is our purpose to discover. It is our purpose to explore. The universe is god's sandpit. We are all a part of the system that builds the castle, demolishes the castle.

>>129092038
kys OP

its your destiny

you do not have a choice

>>129111418
No our choice creates destiny.
Our purpose is to create destiny.

>>129110923
>If we cannot separate reality from illusion whatever use then is it to speak of such impossible distinctions

Depends on what you mean by "illusion," because we certainly are capable of separate fact from fiction and erroneous beliefs.
Why it would be beneficial to make such distinctions is largely upon your point of view.
Would you hold a schizophrenic accountable for his actions even though the physical membrane between the module in his brain that performs executive functions and the modules that help regulate mood had completely deteriorated?

what it really comes down to is randomness.
i'm convinced hard determinism is truth and there is just one way the universe is playing out, it`s just that humankind will never reach omniscience, which is necessary to predict the future. Our observations will never be precise enough to take all parameters into a global equation.
However, our understanding of physics is getting close to omniscience.
The laws of the universe are not infinite, hence at one point we will have the universal equation of all things. Just we will never be able to fill in actual numeric values.
Yet, if there is actual randomness at a subatomic level, i would let go of all my current believes, because they are based on the assumption that there is no randomness.
I am also not convinced of quantum theory, i think it's more likely that we havent yet grasped the fundamentals of the smallest of things. At one point, CERN might finally shed more light on that matter

>>129092038

Studies have established that more intelligent people are also more likely to believe in individual choice and free will as the biggest impacts on their lives. Whereas stupid people believe that "everything happens for a reason" and the factors of their lives are beyond their control.

That's good enough for me.

>>129112204
To speak the contrary, free will is akin to Dunning-Kruger.
Most people who believe in free will are contaminated by outdated religious thought, and aren't the most intelligent people in the bunch lol.
Or their influenced by social conditions that the initial structure established in the first place, and lack the capacity to understand that connection, so instead react mindlessly to their whims.

If you think you can change someone's mind on something, Or you yourself can change you mind about something, then we have free will.
Not much more to it.

File: Newton.jpg (7KB, 282x179px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 282x179px

>>129109418
Bumping my post until you freewilltards can refute it

>>129108257
>Say I have a choice between coffee cakes and cinnamon cookies. I know cinnamon cookies are better than coffee cakes, but I choose to eat the cakes because I want something different.

..and you want something different because you were previously exposed to cinnamon cookies repeatedly.

Your preferences are determined by past encounters and genetics.

>>129108686
When I said "hard physics" I meant that free will needs to be studied with maths and scientific experiments rather than philosophical debate. The softness or hardness of Determinism can be studied seperatly from free will though. There are many arguments against free will that don't include determinism.

>>129108208
>>129108762
I like this answer^^

>>129109067
This is all getting into subjects way beyond my (our?) understanding, but ok, fine. yeah. I get your point.

File: 1494126710705.jpg (516KB, 788x800px) Image search: [Google]

516KB, 788x800px

>>129092525
this
when i figured this out for myself over a decade ago that was the beginning of my "dark night of the soul" and path into and through existentialism

i'm now a very happy person but going through this understanding and acceptance was the blackest terror i've ever experienced

read Camus
paint your masterpiece in the desert

>>129112645
Ayy, even the structure of our language is embedded with philosophical assumptions that bypass conscious awareness. Ghosts of code, basically. After all, to Westerners, a complete thought is only defined as a subject interacting with a verb.

Knowing that free will doesn't exist doesn't mean that you have to become passive because there is no point living or whatever.

Yes, some people might think that it's better to commit suicide. Other peope can still find meaning in your acts through religion (I am accepting the fate given to me by God by making choices within the constraints he imposed on me, hopefully gaining salute for my soul ultimately) or you can say that you are your own God and define your own values, that your constrained will shaped by external factors is something you should embrace by having faith in your character and your intuitions.

It's a different debate.

>>129109989

Important when discussing determinism but not an argument for or against free will.

>>129112485
>aren't the most intelligent people the bunch
>lol.
>their influenced

Speaking of Dunning and Krueger you reek of their 14 year old nephew.

>>129113282
Is pointing out a grammatical error and example of the fallacy fallacy?
Either way there was that and ad hominem.
I should Stefan Molyneux my way out to fit in now, right?
L O L
O
L

>>129107336
And as has been stated before, it could be argued that receiving the ability to look into the future and using that knowledge to alter events before they happened, was always what the universe had planned for you to do since the start of time, thus still being deterministic.

>>129096999
>1) What is commonly understood as free will: the ability to make decisions without our decision making process being the product of external factors > DOESN'T EXIST
Literally nobody thinks this exists. You'd be a fucking idiot. Everyone realizes upbringing, genetics, situations etc. are an influence.

>2) "Free" will > The ability to choose between alternatives following an internal decision making process specific to our brain although shaped by external factors >>> EXISTS BUT MEANINGLESS
I don't think it's meaningless, and this is why: I think we choose between a lot of alternatives during the day, which are of great influence on our life. I think there is an element of randomness in our choices. Let's say I always take route X to home from work, but also sometimes route Y, whether I choose X or Y, could be of great importance. I could get into an accident, I could get robbed, I could come across a restaurant, choose to go eat there, something happens there, etc. I think our own random choices constantly change certain outcomes.

If you believe that we do have the ability to choose between alternatives in small mundane stuff, then you also have to believe these alternatives could be of great importance in our day-to-day lives.

File: 1477317472967.jpg (177KB, 533x594px) Image search: [Google]

177KB, 533x594px

>>129092038
>everyone ignoring relativity and time dilation
Your life, and possibly the entirety of human existence, has already passed for some matter in the universe. The fact that everything has "already" happened, or was determined at some arbitrary point in the past is irrelevant.

Consciousness exists outside of time. Sleep is a perfect example of this.

>>129112746
>>129109418
it can't be refuted.
it was a precise statement.
i just dont think freewilltards are able to think far enough to even grasp what this thread is talking about, at least judging responses like that >>129112645
>>129112204

>>129092525
>which is pretty much the blackest of black pills
No it's the brightest pill you can find if you can learn to embrace it.

File: butthatswrong.jpg (24KB, 520x494px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 520x494px

>>129109418
>free choice
>supernatural selection
>net energy loss

>>129113166
Are you trying to say you have to be given meaing to have it at all? People can find and set their own purposes.

>>129111094
>You never chose to be born, if you got your true free will you could go back in time and delet your existence.
This has got to be the stupidest thing I have ever read. Just because you have free will, doesn't mean that you are ultimately omnipotent or free to do whatever you will. It means that you can make choices that aren't predetermined.

The argument, there is or there is not free will is itself a metaphysical claim about reality, what evidence could either side bring that would be truly relevant?

Hard determinism is like a simplified story told by a child, it ignores that we know very little, it glosses over complex phenemenon and settleson a very Newtonian view of the world as a mechanical clock.

On the other hand free will is difficult to define in a coherent manner, it is usually assumed everyone knows what we mean when we say it, like God or Love, and other definitions seem unsatisfying, is free will any more free if it's random, and if it isn't random but chosen, chosen on what criteria, does the criteria not itself determine the outcome?

These are all the questions of a child, OP must soon grow into an adult and realize they will live and the they will die, and what happens in-between is defined by their actions, be they freewilled or determined.

>>129112485

I'm not sure about the context of religion. But what I read was that more intelligent people tend to believe their position in life is due to their own actions, they tend to try to better themselves through hard work. Stupid people blame everything on various types of factors beyond their control, like white supremacy, patriarchy, and they don't work hard because their view is that they will never get ahead through their own effort because there are external factors, oppression, destiny, w/e keeping them down. Again I'm not sure about the context of religion, but speaking from a secular perspective I'm fairly certain that it has been established that there is a correlation between higher intelligence and the do-it-yourself, free will, accept responsibility mindset.

>>129092038

>yet aren't able to provide any solid evidence free will exists

Because I can influence the will of others.

So many people ITT have no idea what they are talking about. There are only two possibilities: Everything is predetermined down to the smallest molecule all coming from the big bang. Or there is randomness on a quantum level and things are not predetermined. There is no free will in either of these.

If a random particle is created/interacts with something else that small event leads to a cascade of larger structures behaving in a certain way eventually hitting the neuron structures in your head and a choice is made. Did you really choose or was it that randomness that triggered your choice.

People can't handle this or don't want to believe it because it destroys their ego and their place in the universe. A lot of people can accept these truths and that's why we have a growing movement in nihilistic belief. Nihilism let's this all make sense.

>>129113089
>but going through this understanding and acceptance was the blackest terror i've ever experienced
Really?
It was the first time I felt the warm embrace of my existence. The first time I felt the love of the universe.
It might be shocking at first, but it shouldn't be horrific.

>>129113617
You sound like you just discovered fallacies yesterday, your vernacular is atrocious.

>muh ad homobum
after your argument was that your philosophical opponents were less intelligent than you?

tip your fedora harder bud, this website is 18+.

>>129114291
>muh linear perception of time
Come now anon.

>>129113089
Also what camus tome?

>>129112645
no, you are just adding another input to their molecular machine that may change the output on the other side of the transfer function

if you've ever studied control systems you can easily see how we are just complex transfer functions

>>129097738

Someone gets it

>>129100805
>(although it might be useful for society that people believe them)
I wonder what could be cause that???

>>129097738

Echoes are a helluva drug

>>129113132
& each word is like a box filled with multiple possibilities for meaning with a massive majority of users never knowing their etomolgy or how it has changed through use & experience & down right tom foolery from sub-cultures none more so influencial as the internet sub-groups. How the digital communication permiates into the spoken is fascinating as fuck.

>>129114291

Eloquent.

>>129113719
Your entire premise rests on the basis that there ARE alternatives. In a deterministic universe, there is not any other alternatives. Any seemingly alternate choices you could make are not paths you could or would ever take. You will always take one path and that will forever, past, present and future be the path you took. There is no "if I had taken the other route" you will not take the other route, you did not take the other route, you could never take the other route.

You are on the path you are because that is the path you were meant to take. You weren't meant to take other paths, if they were possible, it would be possible, but it is not.

To me, the other "choices" you see at a crossroads, are not alternate paths for you, but rather examples of what other people are meant to be.

>>129097476
This.
There is no free will. Everything is either pre-determined, or chaotic. In any case, we really "choose" nothing.
On the other hand, we have to pretend and behave like if free will existed, otherwise the society would crumble (well, not that it isn't happening anyway...).

>>129114927
You know what, I had a thought the other day.
That esoteric inspiration is like our form of echolocation to discover the universe.

>>129092038
Max Born (one of the founding fathers of Quantum Mechanics) believed Quantum Mechanics provided a new mechanism for free will in a nondeterministic universe. It's actually gained a lot of ground in modern physics circles via Roger Penrose and others. Get your facts straight OP.

>>129092038
thats exactly what a robot would say

>>129114721
myth of sisyphus
the stranger
the plague
basically his whole catalog

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ekxXvgbDr3M

>>129114291
>People can't handle this or don't want to believe it because it destroys their ego and their place in the universe.
Why does it destroy the ego?
If anything it encourages one to become a character with a major role.
It gives them more confidence in their own will.

>>129114721
Read his short stories and lyrical essays. If you like those you can try his more famous work.

>>129092038
why ask why? it's not like they have a choice.

oh, that's right. you can't help but ask why, and I can't help asking why you ask why.

In fact, we're not even transmitting any information. I'm not saying anything. This is all the chance interaction of particles.What you think I am saying, I am not saying, because I don't even exist. I am just a very complex rock, and so are you.

>>129114133
It is common for Westerners to believe that most shit is under their control. That is why Enlightenment religions exist in the East, and probably a good factor into the Wests decline. It's built on a false assumption that's being eroded before their very eyes.
>Blame and excuses
These are familiar terms to me. Inaccurate assessments of reality, useful for behavioral modification, but ultimately empty in their meaning.
>I'm fairly certain that it has been established...
There hasn't been. If anything, the opposite would be true because an interconnected mind is less self-oriented, and interconnection is the prime indicator of intelligence.

Source plz.

>>129114434
I was refuting his position that people who took my position were less intelligent.
Essentially my argument devolves to a resounding NO U, but ultimately his was substantiated by possibly false evidence anyway.

get raked, leaf.

>>129114291
>Nihilism let's this all make sense.
No nihilism is the demon that creates our making sense of things.
But it is also the very thing that eludes our perception.

>>129109418
See
>>129115380

>>129094556
>
How much variance randomness on a quantum mechanical level has on the larger world/universe is also impossibly hard to measure.
>Impossibly hard
Nigger

>>129115131
>we have to pretend and behave as if free will existed

how does one without free will choose to behave as if they had it?

>>129113719
I agree with your comments on point 1.

On point 2, I think it's meaningless in this debate because I'm interested in debating the #1 definition of free will. Many people are persuaded that #1 is true.

>>129092038
Am I choosing to call you a faggot right now?

>>129092038
Free will is not an illusion, but just like everything else there is a price to pay to enact it and it just so happens that free will carries the heftiest price. Most people don't want to pay that price, it's frightening and often dangerous. People are happier to sit inside their sandbox and pretend they have free will because they can make whatever shape sandcastle they like and they'll rationalise this choice by telling themselves that they can't make sandcastles outside of the sandbox.

>>129109418

>implying it is supernatural

Just because you don't understand "why" something happens doesn't disprove its existence. We don't even really know why or how gravity and electromagnetic waves work, and they both also move matter. Science is great as a framework to try to understand physical phenomena, but it's really not a good tool for inferring profound conclusions based off of that, people have been trying to infer profound conclusions from science for hundreds of years and usually they just end up looking stupid.

I'm starting to think every single poster in this thread has a completely different definition of what free will even means...

>>129092038
Sorry, I can't stop refusing to believe it because I don't have any free will. Oh well.

>>129116099
Were those digits predetermined?

>>129115559
Damn this is really gonna district me from exam studies.

Anyone else furiously digging into tomes lately?

>>129114738
There is no controlled system!!! We are amongst chaos & everything we do is to sustain a moment of safety & comfort. We are the only animal that get's to realize it's own impending death as well adding another layer to the already redicoulously universe we live in.
Shit we don't even have a consensus on what consciousness even means.

>>129109170
>the classical's interpretation says that the particle is truly in an infinity of states but Einstein's interpretation is...
Like I mentioned, this is talking about physical interpretations of quantum field theory. A cat that is dead and alive at the same time would be the result of a physical interpretation of the wave function but whether or not the wave function has a physical counterpart to the useful mathematical construct of it would be debatable. The reason quantum mechanics disproves determinism is not just because it uses probabilistic equations and the physical interpretation of that is randomness, It's because no other theory could ever make better predictions than QFT including those with hidden variables. If the world was actually deterministic, then there would be a theory could more accurately describe the world. In other words, QFT is as good as it gets, and since it is probabilistic, then determinism is almost certainly false.
As a side note, Einstein heavily debated the topic with other major scientists and it would not be hard to find explanations for why he was wrong in any of the very specific arguments he used.
>>129112872
>This is all getting into subjects way beyond my (our?) understanding, but ok, fine
Actually, if you care to understand it yourself without any bias, the point about randomness is not very hard to grasp if you research it.

>>129115560
Because people are brought up with the belief that they are divine creations. They are taught they have free will explicit given to them by God. If you take this away, suddenly they are marionettes and helpless against an uncaring universe. People will fight against this reality. I've read about a study where people were told free will has been disproven and the people ended up depressed and sucked at the tasks they were asked to perform afterwards.

For me it's liberating, if anything bad happens I don't really get mad anymore because I know there is nothing I could have done differently.

free will is a illusion simply looking at a scientific standpoint what makes us man and woman. Our physiological structure and hormones affect our how we behave and act.

>>129115560
i'll be honest with you, anon
i've explained this a lot to people including weak-minded associates that use superstitions and religion to protect themselves from the harsh realities of the universe and i've seen at least a couple people just reel in horror when they start to understand what i'm saying because you know they had an inkling of the notion and i'm filling out the picture of the terror that was lurking
most people cannot psychologically deal with such truths
these are the people that cling to fairytales to make it through the day
the people that tell themselves that hitler MUST be getting tortured in hell because they would fall apart if they admitted to themselves that justice doesn't exist as a law in the universe
the idea of a cold and indifferent universe is literal mind rape to them

>>129092038
A yard full of split firewood is like money in the bank.

>>129092038
I agree to some extent - neuro biology shows that the conscious self that we experience right now is not the absolute ruler of our behaviour.

But I have the feeling most people on the internet treat free-will as absolute control of your destinity, environment, cosmic forces.. religions must've influenced this discussion, changed it forever.

>>129109170
>as it seems absurd to think that the cat (macro object) is both dead and alive
Here's the thing. It is at a microscopic level.
Not at a macroscopic level.

It's subjective to perspective and interpretation.

File: 1458026801580.jpg (9KB, 379x245px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 379x245px

>no replies
At least call me an idiot or something god damn.

File: 1475191221333.jpg (18KB, 279x279px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 279x279px

>>129114066
Your existence is predetermined for you.

>>129092038
well why don't you believe that everywhere out of your field of view is covered in dicks? can you provide any solid evidence? no

fuck off, i tell me what to do and that's free will in my books

>>129116998
Shut up nigger

>>129115908

The "debate" about free will doesn't enter my head on a day to day basis. The world is so complicated that It feels like free will exists even if it doesnt

>>129116558
True that. I've seen people stare into the eyes of the universe and not come back, suicide. I on the other hand enjoy regular staring contests with the bastard. It's quite a run through the primordial jungle we've been blessed with.

>>129117078
Appreciate it anon

>>129116363
>There is no controlled system!!!
your brain is a self-contained computer
your senses are the inputs
your actions are the outputs
your genes and environment assign the initial conditions of the system
every input is translated to a neurochemical reaction that produces some output

you can't claim free will until you can identify a higher control function like a "soul" or whatever

>>129116637
>the people that tell themselves that hitler MUST be getting tortured in hell because they would fall apart if they admitted to themselves that justice doesn't exist as a law in the universe
Hitler was part of the narrative in my mind.
All people have that purpose and place in the universe. No matter how "dark" they are.

God likes to use a puppet called the devil anon.

>>129113735
>Consciousness exists outside of time. Sleep is a perfect example of this.
Sleep operates inside time though, everything we know of does.

>>129116271
yes and no they happened randomly but we as a culture have decided to assign meaning to a random number generator(for the most part random)

>>129116637
>the idea of a cold and indifferent universe is literal mind rape to them
Ah yes.
That might shock them.

It's odd. To them it's cold, to me it's like learning how to garden.

>>129117105
word

Free will is attainable through meditation and ego death, but most people live in darkness. Determinism is the flesh, and autonomy is spirit

>>129108257
>Your choice is influenced by factors, sure, but implying every decision you make is decided by existential circumstances out of your control is ridiculous. Example: My craving for cinnamon leads me to want a cinnamon snack, but I ultimately choose the snack

You don't seem to understand determinism. The idea is that your brain is just a series of physical reactions and inputs.

>If I think it through and decide based on circumstances I have created for myself

Your inclination to think it through in the first place was just a chemical reaction in your brain based on the current input and the previous physical state of your brain.

>>129096272
are you mentally ill by chance?

>>129117503
It's not an RNG though mate, it's incremental.

>>129117105

>It feels like free will exists even if it doesn't

At the end of the day this is what it all boils down to. The whole discussion is pointless because whether or not you believe in free will, you're still going to keep living your life as if you DO believe in it.

>either that or kys
>free will is the only workable assumption to live under

>>129092038
Arrogance

>>129117335
Macroscopically it does not.
As I said early in the thread.

See the magician, not just the magic.
The concrete can blind your eyes.

>>129117253
you mean like our self aware consciousness?

>>129117253
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-theater-the-brain/201403/the-brain-is-not-computer-stuck-top-body

OR

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-superhuman-mind/201211/is-the-brain-computer

Your choice, results depending on the incomprehensibly vast interactions of your amygdalae when attempting to resolve dissonance between previously imprinted reality models.

>>129117335
The action of sleeping itself does, but our perception of time while we sleep completely changes. How else could that be possible?

good thread.
thanks for a night of intriguing talking points, especially the french deterministic godbeliever had some good input

ARE NIGE

>>129117253
Think of a our bodies like a lilies in the pond.
The ripples make it move.

This is just anecdotal but has anyone noticed an increase in talk about subjects like this and existentialism/nihilism on social media? It seems like the 00's and early 10's we saw the rise of atheism on social media. We are at a point where atheism isn't really taboo anymore and I've read as many as 25% of Americans are now atheist.

>>129118039
One's sleep is not macroscopic to oneself. You could argue that it is macroscopic to an outside observer, but not in the first person.

>>129117856

Maybe.

By the way, the past and present don't exist. The past is an abstraction in our minds built from however we interpret neuron patterns as memories. The future is an abstraction in our minds built from extrapolated data into visualized possibility.

Both are experienced in the present.

The deterministic vs free will argument is laughable because it means you don't see time for the conceptualized abstraction that it is.

32 votes lol

>>129118099
Our perception of time changes drastically between when we're bored and when we're excited. So does this not imply awakened states also operate outside of time?

There is a freewill you retards,
if you dont believe me go fuck yourselves because i cannot be blamed for this shitpost

>>129118863
Yes. I meant to add that on to the end of my post actually.

>>129118492
I don't use social media but I've noticed an uptick in this kind of stuff in other areas. Maybe people are tiring of believing in nothing and now want something, anything, to put belief in.

File: 1455075255022.jpg (72KB, 640x640px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 640x640px

>>129118782

File: 1415934341991.png (5KB, 508x497px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 508x497px

>>129118782
Finally

File: 1496587159468.jpg (62KB, 320x371px) Image search: [Google]

62KB, 320x371px

>>129118039
what are you the fucking riddler holy shit

>>129118553
You have a golem anon. It sees certain things. Feels certain things.

But ultimately it interprets the commands of the collective environment.
It's like a movie. Without the camera, without the speakers, without the actors, directors, etc, it cannot be a movie.
But there is an element out side that switches it on. Inspires it's creation. Moves the actors, the directors, plays the visual and the audio.

it's a comfortable belief, it makes people feel better about themselves and make more sense of the world.

For all the liberals who hark on conservatives for "not believing in evolution" they can't wrap their heads around humanity being an organic natural organism. (i.e. liberals understand evolution less than conservatives who deny its existence)

>>129117904
thats why i said mostly, its random in that there are enough people posting right now that i couldnt know what number i got, the system is too big for certainty.

>>129117253
The brain is a computer,
so it is like something the brain created?
Your argument is circular, & if it were true why haven't we created computers that can see? It's not possible.
Our brains have an evolutionary track to survive, procreate & adapt.
If you think you can change my mind, then free will exist.
You kept arguing so it exist, otherwise why did you bother responding?

>>129118782
>By the way, the past and present don't exist.

No it both exists and does not exist.
People fail to understand the duality of this.

>>129118492
>This is just anecdotal but has anyone noticed an increase in talk about subjects like this....

No, but it does make sense. People have much more access to information and discussion with others thanks to the internet.

>>129118782
>The deterministic vs free will argument is laughable because it means you don't see time for the conceptualized abstraction that it is.

Am I the only one who perceives this statement to be a complete non-sequitur?

Free Will and Determinism have virtually nothing to do with our conception of time.

What a bizarre position to laugh from.

>>129119540
Crowd sourced randomness, I get you now.

>>129119446
You're going too fucking meta, even for this topic. What has a golem and a film set got to do with sleep?

>>129118782
It's an abstraction - it's not there.
But it's also an "abstraction" - it's still there.

>>129119560
>why haven't we created computers that can see? It's not possible.

We have you fucking retard.

>>129116172
>implying I don't understand "why" something happens
Face it anon, the conservation of energy rules out the possibility that you can accelerate matter with your magical "free will" force that breaks all the experimentally observed physical laws of this universe.

>>129119292
>what are you the fucking riddler holy shit
kek

Let's call it a fool.

>>129092443
Free will is an illusion though, science shows this (look into brain wave studies into choice and conciousness), basic logic proves this, basic philosophy proves this.

We fight back against this because of the dangerous implications it could have for society, justice and Judeo-Christian values.

>>129119452
hmmm this is interesting, So Conservatives know what evoultion is and say "damn thats oo complicated to be natural" liberals dont know anything because they believe in a subjective reality

>>129119765
You are so fucking grounded anon.
You've got a lot of ground to cover.

>>129119593

Just as free will and determinism are both true and false depending on the scale of observation.

Read some Alan Watts guys.

>>129118863
yeah time is like the sea, all the waves are going thataway but some molecules are moving fast at the top of the wave and some molecules are sinking beneath into the depths yet the wave keeps form and the molecules end up in the same are at the same time. You being excited and time flying by, being met by your friend being bored and time moving at a crawl will take longer for him to meet you than for you to meet him yet you will both meet at the same instance.

>>129120175
Where to start.

>>129120059
What if free will exists but we have been jewed so hard we believe it therefore cementing us in to goyhood

>>129119760

Causation requires an event to occur, and events are perceived as requiring multiple reference points in time.

It has everything to do with this discussion.

>>129120466
is there a begining and does it end?

>>129120566
It's a matter of perspective anon.
And they've been trying to show it.

>>129119560
>if it were true why haven't we created computers that can see
we have autonomous cars on the road right now driving themselves
how do you think they avoid obstacles and obey signs and traffic signals?

>>129120668
Every time I pick up a tome I find another distracting tome.

It's annoying. Eagerness to learn can also be a hindrance.

>>129120594
>Therefore, the moon was not a result of an asteroid colliding with the Earth because the past, like, doesn't exist anymore man.

As I've said, it has virtually nothing.

>>129119560
We have created computers that can see, the entire field is literally called "computer vision".

>>129120154
You're just using pointlessly excessive language abstraction. Express your points as specifically as you can, don't use shit like golems and film sets to describe some aspect of sleep.

>>129120895
>Eagerness to learn can also be a hindrance
Bang on mate.

Well duh.

I discovered this at the age of 14 after developing an interest in Neuroscience, Physics, and Applied Mathematics strangely. Debating the non-existence of Free Will to believers is akin to trying to disprove the divine revelation of the Qur'an with Muslims. It's fruitless. They simply don't have the mental capacity to see the world through a rational lens, or they lack the scientific knowledge to understand how determinism works.

Everything is entirely pre-determined or has random influences. My guess is the former. Free Will is an illusion either way.

>>129120594
youre looking at the problem from the end to the beginning. free will is other way around. I choose to be open and then i am, not time is an abstraction therefore i cannot truly choose anything blah blah...
side note to accept determinism is to accept slavery

>>129092038
Free will is a myth. Religion is a joke.
We are controlled by something greater.
Memes! The DNA of the soul.
Nature encodes into our very being. Try willing yourself not to eat, to provide nourishment in order to sustain your body. You can't it's impossible.
Free will is impeded by your own mind and body, by nature, by your peers.
You are restricted by rules and laws and biology.
There is no such thing as free will.
Only degrees of control.

File: 1467818680295.png (563KB, 933x769px) Image search: [Google]

563KB, 933x769px

>>129121374

>>129121001
>Express your points as specifically as you can, don't use shit like golems and film sets to describe some aspect of sleep.
Just fucking open your eyes anon.
Language is more than words.

>>129120947

Was it a result of the asteroid collision or a result of what set the asteroid in motion on that path?

You are the one attributing causality to specific points, in a subjective fashion.

That's perspective.

File: 1488512059845.jpg (59KB, 750x392px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 750x392px

>>129120064
you really jumped to some conclusions with this, but you're on the right track.

Conservatives who deny evolution use the bible as a reference, which is oddly closer to the origins of species than what Liberals think evolution is about.

Liberals use evolution to "prove" they are right, but evolution is just a theory. Ultimately evolution is as much a conspiracy theory as the flat earth, but yet evolution is taught in schools.

Conservatives using the bible decree God made all living things, meanwhile evolution states nature allowed living things to adapt and become what they are.

It could very easily be argued that God is nature (very easily in fact) and thus if nature made all living things as they are now. This is closer to the truth.

Liberals go way off the deep end when discussing humanity as a natural organic species because they seem to think we're different from animals because we're smart, while Conservatives may argue it is because we have a soul/are created in God's image.

Without a doubt, humans are the top of the food chain, we are powerful for being able to build and create. Whether that be structures or weapons or tools, they are all still natural.

Give me an invention of man and I will show you how it is not at all unique to the animal kingdom. I will trace it back to the origins of invention and then show at least one other species on earth that does something similar.

But, again, Liberals don't like this, because liberals want to be better than they are without trying.

Humans are natural beings, and anytime a species attempts something unnatural it dies off. Liberals don't grasp this concept as much as they'd like to believe, and because of that they will likely kill us all...
or at least all of us in the developed western world.

>>129120895
shit me too i try to constantly stuff my head with more perspectives and knowledge but i just want more. normal life has become boring unless im doing ceramics(takin part in creation) or learning about something new.

File: cb4d61bde24d52b6750178cf08bea3c5.jpg (51KB, 500x694px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 500x694px

>>129092038
Only atheists don't believe in free will. They also have no answer for it either. Get your post-modernism trash the fuck off this board, degenerate.

>>129121499
But you still haven't explained how sleep is macroscopic to the one who is sleeping. Why is it so hard for you to just bloody explain that?

>>129121529
Both. I don't believe the asteroid willed it simply because it was the present at the time it happened.
Our attributions are just that, attributions. Descriptions applied for own understanding, to the fairest degree of certainty that humans are allotted.

It's just seems to be odd that, you know, now, we're still enduring tidal repercussions of an event that happened a long, long time ago.

>>129118492
yeah we are entering the modern age of philosophy

>>129108257
Do you think your thoughts before you think them ?

The simplest way to show that free will doesn't exist is to just give you two choices (doesn't matter what it's about), when asked why you picked the one you picked, if you're honest you would say that you have no idea why.

Or try to pick game title. Of all the games there are why did you pick the one you did ? Of course there is a reason, and you might be more than inclined to tell us a story about why you picked what you picked, but again, if you're intelectually honest you have to admit that you have no idea why did one game appear in your conscious and not some other game for you to pick.

Both nature and nurture give you your needs and wants, and your decisions are dependent and restricted by them as is your knowledge. You can't know what you don't know, and even the things that you know you can't account for why they don't appear instead of something else.

To expect that one can act independently from his own biology and the external influences is preposterous and you should know that.
Surely you don't expect an islamic extremist to just all of a sudden start thinking about philosophy and coming to conclusion that he should stop being a muslim and go live as a buddhist.

Existence of free will would mean that all feelings, desires, reasoning, and choices can be changed at a whim.

>>129120748
i guess youre right, it seems like perspective is where alot of this stops, is there are way to get past this problem? do we have to stop thinkin gof our selves as imperfect observers and more as creators of our own worlds?

File: thanks.jpg (48KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 480x360px

>>129119925
I love that!!
So thoughtful thanks

>>129121819
I don't know anon.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lcWVL4B-4pI

>>129122077
>is there are way to get past this problem?
Why do you think we exist anon?

God probably face this very dilemma.

>>129092443
This. Free will is confined in logic.

>>129122135
You've been upside down for too long.

>>129122539
Maybe it's a rush of blood to the head.
:^)

>>129121329

I'm not deterministic.

>>129121374
How about "Full of Shit"?
Is that a meme?

>>129121499

Explaining a complex subject in a simple way is a sign of intelligence.

Using ridiculous analogies makes you seem like a sperg.