Do we have free will?

[The Dark Lord]

let the debate begin....

[PJay]

Only when I don't get caught.

Sent from my HTC Wildfire using Tapatalk

[ZodiacKiller]

Depends on how you define it.
My argument is working off the premise that a soul does not exist, so avoid debating me if that basis differs, thats all it will reduce to.
Any action is just the current brain state forcing the body to perform such an action. Brain states are altered by environment and events that occur to the brain/body that the brainstate controls. There is not "choice" as we think of it, because there is no spiritual essence of you. Because of that, humans are purely mechanical, working in reaction to their environments.

In that light, we are compared to machines, which we do not beleive to be "free". However, if we consider the illusion of choice- the simulation of decision making based on comparative statements that both wittingly and unwittingly occur in our brain- free will, then maybe humans are free. Thus, both humans and computers are free (there is easy opposition to this- computers are only reacting to user input, but thats the same as humans reacting to environmental input).

[PJay]

When there is something to react to in my environment I often have choices of action. I can either think about my options or react instinctively without being aware I am thinking about it. Instinct seems to me to be like a subroutine call or a random roll.
You can train yourself to overcome instict like in a fear of spiders I'd something.
So yes the process can involve free will.
Unless we get caught in which case we don't but our mum does.




Sent from my HTC Wildfire using Tapatalk

[ZodiacKiller]

You're missing the point. The point is not that you react automatically from the current brain state. The point is that the brain state is what makes the final decision.
The brain is just unable to determine automatically which choice is best, so it considers more variables into the equation before making the final decision. Thus you have the process of reconsideration. Thus, you have denial of "instinct".

[Azunite]

(So, what I am going to write, I completely made it up 5 seconds ago because Ihavent thought about this subject )
Nobody has free will. Because everyone affects each other, you act according to other people. You think according to the people around you. You think " If I do this this will be bad for that guy so I wont do that"
If you were an ignorant b*stard ( no offense to anyone ) or an outlaw, you would have free will IMO

[PJay]

You're missing the point. The point is not that you react automatically from the current brain state. The point is that the brain state is what makes the final decision.
The brain is just unable to determine automatically which choice is best, so it considers more variables into the equation before making the final decision. Thus you have the process of reconsideration. Thus, you have denial of "instinct".

Which seems to just be another way of saying you (or your "brain state")make a choice, don't use instinct and thus have free will.



Sent from my HTC Wildfire using Tapatalk

[DarkHorses]

Yes, I think that everyone has free will. It's a gift to us from whomever or whatever created the universe. It's what we do with it that determines how our lives will play out, and our afterlives as well. You have the freedom to think as you please, and more often than not to do as you please. You have the right to be yourself, and that's free will.

[ZodiacKiller]

that pretty much sums it up
the only problem is that the brain is a mechanical thing, so the "choice" is only the outcome of a computation, which doesn't fit the standard definition of free will.

[PJay]

that pretty much sums it up
the only problem is that the brain is a mechanical thing, so the "choice" is only the outcome of a computation, which doesn't fit the standard definition of free will.

But your brain is you, since you discount spirit, so you are making a computation (decision) which is precisely what free will is. Again there isn't always one answer. We aren't like the computers in I robot where every input creates a predictable output. This point was made because the robot called sonny HAD free will and thus literally stood out from the crowd.

Sent from my HTC Wildfire using Tapatalk

[ZodiacKiller]

no. we r like computers, we just have more room for data processing. that is, we can interpret more inputs (sight, smell, touch... basically the senses) whereas computers r built to process very few inputs (relatively).

[Amnesiac]

It depends on what the definition of free will is.

Do we have the ability to make decisions and execute those decisions? Yes. Some people call that in itself "free will". However, are we able to do absolutely anything we want without repercussions? No. Some people would say free will is about more than being able to do something; you have to be able to do it without interference.

[PJay]

It doesn't matter if a decision is made on one or a million inputs, there isn't always one right answer, and that is where free will comes in.

[ZodiacKiller]

no. the brain performs a hidden computation on which decision it wants to make based on its current inputs (including the current brainstate- or personality/psychology/whatever u want to call it)

[Andrew0017]

This is kind of difficult to explain. I believe we do technically have free will, however most of the time we don't practice that because we're so busy worrying about what other people think and how our actions will affect them, that we actually end up doing what we think other people would like best. Sort of a type of "approval system", if you will.

[PJay]

no. the brain performs a hidden computation on which decision it wants to make based on its current inputs (including the current brainstate- or personality/psychology/whatever u want to call it)

Hidden from who? If I'm thinking about something then I'm directing the show, if I'm running on instinct its hidden, but only instinct denies you free (or at least conscious) will. Ok the brain might work like a computer, but I AM that computer.

This is kind of difficult to explain. I believe we do technically have free will, however most of the time we don't practice that because we're so busy worrying about what other people think and how our actions will affect them, that we actually end up doing what we think other people would like best. Sort of a type of "approval system", if you will.
Yep agree totally. I suppose you could look at it as a sort of choice in itself to start with but it becomes habit and eventually you sort of self-program to think this way.

[ZodiacKiller]

People who share my beleif interpret the brain like this:
There is you, which is the thinking interpreting you, which is made up of emotions and thoughts, which occur in the cerebral cortex (if i remember right- it might be another part). However, we don't think through every operation that we do- this does include breathing, for example, but more importantly to this debate, it includes the minor variables in decisions we make but we don't really think about. Other parts of our brain manage it, so we don't really think about it "counciously", because it isn't being processed by the parts of our brain which do the "thinking".

[PJay]

Yeah I think it is an interesting view. Computers are not just than based around single CPU cores without supporting chips etc. Even the CPU is divided into different parts. Automatic stuff is like haveing a floating point chip or gpu with built in maths or graphics functions so the main program doesn't need to worry about it. The brain is laid out like this too. That's the hardware which the software runs on. You seen to be saying that "we" are software. I agree. I don't see this stops you having free will though: my points above are about how the software works, the hardware layout doesn't matter.



Sent from my HTC Wildfire using Tapatalk

[ZodiacKiller]

yeah, but the human brain is algorithmic, which doesn't fit the standard definition of free will.

[PJay]

Aha ok. I had to Google what that meant LOL. Well that isn't a barrier. Look up non deterministic algorithm on Wikipedia. Apparently they allow for multiple outcomes, ie choice. And with choice you get free will.



Sent from my HTC Wildfire using Tapatalk

[ZodiacKiller]

i cant do it now cuz theres 2 secs left in lunch, but i will l8r

[Magus]

There is you, which is the thinking interpreting you, which is made up of emotions and thoughts, which occur in the cerebral cortex (if i remember right- it might be another part). However, we don't think through every operation that we do- this does include breathing, for example, but more importantly to this debate, it includes the minor variables in decisions we make but we don't really think about. Other parts of our brain manage it, so we don't really think about it "counciously", because it isn't being processed by the parts of our brain which do the "thinking".
You are too objective, Mr. Animalist. :yes:

Obviously, breathing, eating and everything else are involuntary movements. Exactly as you have said, they are things we don't need to think about.

Human's body is primitive as well as complex.

You put your hands on a burning torch, you move away your hand quickly, not because you are thinking it is dangerous, but it is your body's response to the stimuli. These are the things that are processed in your spinal cord[It is like the 4th brain] - your microglands triggers the nerves around it, by this it sends information to your spinal cord, by which in its turn gives back messages; moving your hand out of fire is nothing but a simple response.

Take breathing for example. If you stop breathing by yourself, you should know that your body has meters, this one is called Carbon-dioxide meter(which is in your brain), once it hits its limit, it will force you into breathing again.

Let us take our protozoan friend, amoeba. It has chemo-sensors to sense food, it then opens up and takes in food. Obviously, it doesn't have brain, here. Whatever organisms it maybe. They all thrive for only one function: To Survive.

Your rest of the body works the same. Hormones and neurchemicals what actually governs your body. Things like fear are completely natural, this is to keep your body away from danger, it will always you gives the physical stance that is necessary for survival[it is the same part[in the brain] where that CO2 sensor is]. Emotion such as love and elation and etc are also goverened by your hormones and neurochemicals, this is as exactly a response to the surroundings.

The the frontal lobe of the left brain does all the filtered thinking and reasoning. It decides whether we are free in will, or not.

[PJay]

In defence Ruleroftherealm some of his examples might not involve the brain but we do have programmed things (like homing instincts in animals) that are in there somewhere, which dont have to be thought about. I have quite a good clock so i usually know when the microwave is going to beep and get up in time to be there just as it does. So I agree these are not conscious or free will things, but i dont think this stops their being free will because these aren't everything a person is.

[ZodiacKiller]

pjay1:
Even in nondeterministic algorithms the brain uses subroutines to make judgements, its just the brain is making more decisions than you expected. For example, with the shopping cart:
You only expected the brain to make the decision to buy the items as read, although that does not mean the brain will. Usually, if a person is at one side of the store and sees something on the list, they won't go to the other side of the store, just because that's the first item on list. The brain is still forming computation to determine it's logical to pick the item there, its just that was an unexpected computation, so it appears nondeterministic.

Deadly Dreamer:
The frontal lobe still works algorithmically, even if not as "hidden" (as i called it previously) as the other parts of the brain. That part of the brain is made up of a series of neurons, which are connected in networks sometimes reffered to as "neuronets". These neurons are connected through synapses. When one group of neurons of neurons is triggered, there is a memory/concept associated with that group. The synapses will travel along the network to nearby neurons which are near that group because we mentally associate them (for example, the color blue makes me think of the sky... presumably they are connected in my neuronet). This is why people's thought's seem "random", although I'm sure you could assume that.
So, our "thought process" itself is algorithmic, although there is one thing I am uncertain of: how does it determine which set of neurons it will travel to next, when there are multiple sets one set of neurons is connected to.

[PJay]

You say the decision was unexpected, but who are we talking about? My choices aren't unexpected by me. A choice may well be influenced by a whole bunch of things we aren't aware of, but it is still me making that choice. For your argument to be proven you would have to simulate every aspect of a person including their body and their memories and their environment in order to guarantee you could predict the outcome of the original. And even that would fail because as soon as you had got your perfect clone, it would start changing the instant some variable changed.
You could well be right, but for practical purposes where computers have random numbers, humans have free will (even if it is partly as a result of eating too much cheese or whatever).





Sent from my HTC Wildfire using Tapatalk

[ZodiacKiller]

What I meant is that the decisions seem unexpected by an observer. An undeucated observer would expect the person to go in order of the list, but that's just because they aren't taking enough variables into the equation, and so cant expect other decisions by the brain. I hope that wasnt a convoluted as I think it was.

Also, this is completely unrelated, but i thought i might as well tell you. You can't program a computer to give random numbers. A computers numbers are pseudorandom. A person can only write a program within a program (called a function- like in mathematics) complex enough to simulate randomness.

[PJay]

I think we are in agreement on that point. Random functions in computers use all sorts of things like values from memory locations, system clock etc to seed the random function, which is why I was going on about cheese earlier lol. To someone who isn't aware of all the possible variables, it will seem random.

So the thing i was going on about with the observer and such like goes back to the Turing test for sentience (if I spelled that right). When you can fake it well enough, for practical purposes its as real as any other person.

[Sage]

If we lack free will then the outcome of this debate is already predetermined and there's no point in continuing.

[Aspiringanonymous]

If we lack free will, then our lives are a process of discovery rather than creation. Determinism doesn't imply meaninglessness.

[The Ninja]

Christians view:
because God gave us the ability to make our own discisions, this wasnt a very good idea seeing as how it ended up leading the whole world into sin and death, but never the less it makes life a lot more fun.

If we lack free will then the outcome of this debate is already predetermined and there's no point in continuing.

this made me laugh. now does this mean there is no such thing as a so called destiney because the only way this could exist is if we didnt have free will.

[Continuum]

I have two answers for you, Yes and no. We can think freely without any bounds, but only within our thoughts of the world. We can choose on the daily events that happen in our life, but our choice should be within a set of regulations from governments, morals, and also from nature. You can't do whatever you want, even if you want it so badly. Dreams often stay as dreams, so that's a no.

[PJay]

Some choices have consequences, but its still your choice. But yeah, that's why I said 'except when I'm caught' ... cos free will includes deciding whether you obey the rules or taboos if your society. Not everyone does.



Sent from my HTC Wildfire using Tapatalk

[ZodiacKiller]

Sage, do you mean to say that there is no point to watching a movie, or reading a book whose outcome is predetermined?

[The Ninja]

Sage, do you mean to say that there is no point to watching a movie, or reading a book whose outcome is predetermined?

Are you comparing life its self to a movie? If so are you saying that we're just here to entertain somebody. If that is the case then what is the point of continuing.

p.s. I think you do make a very good point though.

[Sage]

Sage, do you mean to say that there is no point to watching a movie, or reading a book whose outcome is predetermined?

No, because those are not the same as a debate. Compare these things to an adventure- When reading a book or watching a movie, I believe that the journey is more valuable than the destination- Sure, I could watch The Lord of The Rings and fast forward to the ending scene at Mount Doom, but it'll be nothing compared to the epic adventure that lead up to that.

In a debate, however, I would think that it's the goal of the people debating to convince others of their views- and if it is already predetermined whether or not people will accept a view, then there's no point in debating it.

[ZodiacKiller]

But with that veiw the predetermined outcome is only a lack of outcome; neither sides admits fault or agree to lay arms. Therefore, it is better to let reality play out to the end.

Besides, you dont know at the beginning which side will win, so you should still try to argue your beleifs. You statements depend on this one: "He's not going to change his mind so I won't argue." Sometimes you can tell your opponent is not going to change his/her mind, and neither will you, so this is wise. However, you don't usually know that right off the bat, so you don't know that there is no point; you have to hope not that you have no point in debating, but that they do.