[Science] - Free will could all be an illusion

I dont know if me choosing stuff is considered Free will , but i do the choosing , and the choices may be limited , but they are still my choices , even if it is between the devil and the deep blue sea.

MartaLina wrote: I dont know if me choosing stuff is considered Free will , but i do the choosing , and the choices may be limited , but they are still my choices , even if it is between the devil and the deep blue sea.

perfect!

OB1Shinobi wrote:

MartaLina wrote: I dont know if me choosing stuff is considered Free will , but i do the choosing , and the choices may be limited , but they are still my choices , even if it is between the devil and the deep blue sea.

perfect!

Yep thats my lovelife in a song :laugh: no free will in miles to come ...

Lightstrider wrote:

Gisteron wrote: If you had two beings, identical in appearance and behaviour, one with free will and one without, how could you possibly tell them apart?

The being that has free will thinks about or evaluates options presented to it and makes a choice based on it's own reasoning and inner processes.

The being that doesn't have free will is a passive being, a blade of grass bending whichever way the wind blows.

Yet, how do we tell the difference? Does one of them think and evaluate because nature and nurture, stimuli of the moment or random parameters made them respond in this way? Or do they react as they do of their own accord? What does it mean to have a choice? What do we mean when we say someone has free will and how do we tell it from not having any? The term itself is semantically defunct. It is used either to refer to something trivial and irrelevant or to something we know for a fact we don't actually have.
In a sense Khaos is right in that it doesn't matter. One way or another, we live our lives and we are faced with alternatives. The recognition that every impulse we have is either determined or heavily influenced by things beyond the control of a mystical soul-esque kind of "self" leaves us with but one more thought that may or may not influence the choice without that self's having a say in it but the outcome is what ever it is.
If someone is going so far as to claim that there is in fact some kind of self that makes decisions outside of the bounds of biochemistry, it is their burden to propose what that alternative, effectively supernatural, mechanism is and how to test for it, i.e. in what way a world without tinkering souls would look different from our own.

i chose to hit the THANK YOU button :silly:

Gisteron wrote: Jestor, I'd love to give you examples I have, yet I do not know of what. The passage of mine you quoted was not proposing any sort of mechanism or postulate any kind of model at all.

Oh, sorry....

I wasn't calling you out, I was just hopeful....

OK, thanks.....

Khaos wrote: So, going with the flow cannot be a choice? Based on reasoning and inner processes?

How would you know it was or wasnt?

To which, it doesnt matter.

We do what we do and for myself, I give no time to whether its free will or not, because im doing it anyway.

Of course, lol....

"Going with the flow" is a TOTJO Jedi Maxim....

Intervention: To know when not to act.

A Jedi knows how inaction can have as great an impact as action and how some of the greatest lessons are self-taught. To be a victor is also taking that victory from those you protect. A Jedi intervenes only when a Jedi's intervention is required

Also a favorite of mine....

Gisteron wrote:

Lightstrider wrote:

Gisteron wrote: .
In a sense Khaos is right in that it doesn't matter. One way or another, we live our lives and we are faced with alternatives. The recognition that every impulse we have is either determined or heavily influenced by things beyond the control of a mystical soul-esque kind of "self" leaves us with but one more thought that may or may not influence the choice without that self's having a say in it but the outcome is what ever it is.
If someone is going so far as to claim that there is in fact some kind of self that makes decisions outside of the bounds of biochemistry, it is their burden to propose what that alternative, effectively supernatural, mechanism is and how to test for it, i.e. in what way a world without tinkering souls would look different from our own.

It doesn't matter...

But, we are all here on this big blue ball anyway, so what's the harm in speculating?

Doesn't affect my life outside of here, and much more fun than Candy Crush, for me, anyway, lol....

And, maybe one of you smarty-pants will be inspired and figure out how to answer this, or some other currently questionable(?) question.... :lol:....



Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

But, we are all here on this big blue ball anyway, so what's the harm in speculating?

Simply because there is no harm, does not mean it has any worth.

And, maybe one of you smarty-pants will be inspired and figure out how to answer this, or some other currently questionable(?) question

While I do not mind the appeal to my intellectual vanity, I am not so egotistical to think that I have the ability to figure something like this out.

First and foremost because it doesnt matter.

There seems to be a ton of potential in awareness, management and refinement of cognitive resources and their processes. Exploring concepts like free will makes one reflect on possible ways thought itself manifests within ourselves, which can allow a person to redefine the way they view and experience the world in various ways IMO.

Again I think I avoided answering the actual question lol, not on purpose, but I think it is an illusion just because the complexity is still beyond our reach so any reason would seem to have to be illusory in some capacity - but I don't think that discounts the possibility of things like 'souls' and 'spirits' etc. As I like to think the pattern of it all could be transferable, as in our selves exist both in the electro-chemical-protein switched physicality we can almost grasp, but also as the state of it as information, it's connections shapes and strengths. If I wanted to wish upon a deathstar I'd hope that the pattern of ones 'self' merged with some ether and we all still manifest within the Force after death
:blink: :lol: :side:
.. though that might then presume that once deceased the pattern cannot change according to its old restrictions, hmmm, to stay the same or to become something new.

Khaos wrote:

But, we are all here on this big blue ball anyway, so what's the harm in speculating?

Simply because there is no harm, does not mean it has any worth.

And, maybe one of you smarty-pants will be inspired and figure out how to answer this, or some other currently questionable(?) question

While I do not mind the appeal to my intellectual vanity, I am not so egotistical to think that I have the ability to figure something like this out.

First and foremost because it doesnt matter.

I do understand your opinion Khaos that it does not matter , but as with Free Speech , Free Will is presented to us as some kind of present that we cannot seem to be able to unwrapp , utterly fascinating , utterly timewasting , and therefore very irresistable to ponder over ...

Let's put it like this. Our understanding of classical and quantum electrodynamics is more than basic. The challenge to engineers is seldom anymore to figure out which things work and which don't. The difficulty lies in developing machines that cost fewer resources to produce and consume less energy per unit of desired output. Our understanding of the inner workings of the brain is so advanced that not only do we have medication to help those with malfunctioning brains, we are beginning to be able to reconstruct moving images from brainscans alone . It is in my opinion feasible that within the lifetimes of some of us things like technology-aided telepathy or a dystopian thought-monitoring network can in principle become a reality. This is not to say that neuroscience is not progressing anymore; rather what lay people like myself and most other users here deem to be deep mysteries yet to be resolved have for the most part been answered numerous times and in a multitude of levels of detail.
Matters of "free will" are not even questions and for all different reasons. In so far as some are willing to define what they are even talking about, nobody could identify it if they saw it. Questions like "Does free will exist?" or "How do we explain it?" make all the same sense as do questions like "Do apples yellow tomorrow?". The sheer magnitude of our understanding can hardly be overstated. Everything that makes us who we are maps to a finite set of bodily functions to the point that the soul is now completely out of gaps to be crammed into. The idea of free will nowadays only exists anymore as a gap so ill-defined that nothing could close it. In so far as it has been defined in even the vaguest of terms, it flies in the face of our intuitions an in the face of what we know.
So no, none of us smarty-pants are going to answer this conundrum somehow, because there isn't a thing to be answered. There just isn't even a "there" there...