[starman]

I got into this philosophical debate with a friend of mine yesterday afternoon. I don't agree with her at all, but I thought it would be a good topic for here.

She says that nobody has true free will, that everything we do is a product of our environment, our upbringing, our biology. Everything we do or say is net because we truly want to, but because that's how our brains are "programmed" to react based on past experiences.

Thoughts?

I countered with art, science, philosophy.

[Dakar²]

She sounds like she's studied philosophy.

This came up at the bar once but my friend and I weren't able to get into it, because it was getting late, and because we were debating religion among a bigger group.

Edit: I seem to recall giving an entertaining bullshit answer during another debate a few weeks later. My friend argued that he didn't believe in free will because peoples actions en masse can be predicted and eventually we could perfect it enough to get on par with a concept like psychohistory. I pointed Asimov's concept didn't work on an individual level. I think I mentioned Heisenberg's uncertainty principle as part of my argument for being unable to perfect predicting variables.

[Gossamer]

Originally Posted by starman 

I got into this philosophical debate with a friend of mine yesterday afternoon. I don't agree with her at all, but I thought it would be a good topic for here.

She says that nobody has true free will, that everything we do is a product of our environment, our upbringing, our biology. Everything we do or say is net because we truly want to, but because that's how our brains are "programmed" to react based on past experiences.

Thoughts?

I countered with art, science, philosophy.

This is what my roommate believes based on philosophy courses he's taken. He said if it wasn't for the fact that you can't do anything useful with a philosophy degree, he switch majors. But what is free will. Is it simply the ability to decide your own actions? Are we slaves to our past? If our decisions on an individual level were simply a product of our past, wouldn't there be a way to predict our future?

[Dakar²]

Originally Posted by Gossamer 

But what is free will. Is it simply the ability to decide your own actions? Are we slaves to our past? If our decisions on an individual level were simply a product of our past, wouldn't there be a way to predict our future?

That's what my one friend thinks will be possible, yes.

[mitchell_pgh]

How would she respond to the fact that twins separated at birth generally have the same IQ, similar addictions, etc.

I think it's both nurture and nature... not one or the other.

[starman]

What about indecision? You can't decide if you want chocolate or vanilla. Is indecision predictable?

[wallinbl]

If there is no free will, is it really fair to punish someone for their actions? If they didn't choose to do it, then it's certainly not 'just' to put them in jail.

Let's hope this idea doesn't make it out into the general, non-thinking, public - it would be even more motivation to absolve personal responsibility and blame everyone and everything else.

[wallinbl]

Originally Posted by starman 

What about indecision? You can't decide if you want chocolate or vanilla. Is indecision predictable?

Just get a twisty cone.

[Gossamer]

Originally Posted by mitchell_pgh 

How would she respond to the fact that twins separated at birth generally have the same IQ, similar addictions, etc.

Are there studies that back this up?

Originally Posted by wallinbl 

Just get a twisty cone.

too easy.

[Dakar²]

Originally Posted by mitchell_pgh 

How would she respond to the fact that twins separated at birth generally have the same IQ, similar addictions, etc.

I'd think that's an argument against free will. Genetics is determining things for them.

[OreoCookie]

It's simple.
You cannot distinguish free choice and the illusion of free choice, so the point is moot.

[Dakar²]

You're a ton of fun

[Turias]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

It's simple.
You cannot distinguish free choice and the illusion of free choice, so the point is moot.

It's true.

[rickey939]

Damn, I mis-read the title of this thread as "Free Wii"....I'm so disappointed.

[starman]

Originally Posted by rickey939 

Damn, I mis-read the title of this thread as "Free Wii"....I'm so disappointed.

Who would have predicted that?

[Dakar²]

Originally Posted by rickey939 

Damn, I mis-read the title of this thread as "Free Wii"....I'm so disappointed.

You'll just have to keep playing with the one God gave you.

[smacintush]

Originally Posted by starman 

She says that nobody has true free will, that everything we do is a product of our environment, our upbringing, our biology. Everything we do or say is net because we truly want to, but because that's how our brains are "programmed" to react based on past experiences.

If we are unable to escape our biology, environment etc. then in the context of our humanity what she is calling "programming" is still our version of free will.

I think that it's true that we are the sum total of those things and they influence everything we do but the idea that we are "programmed" isn't something I can accept.

[starman]

Originally Posted by smacintush 

I think that it's true that we are the sum total of those things and they influence everything we do but the idea that we are "programmed" isn't something I can accept.

Exactly

[Gossamer]

Originally Posted by Dakar² 

You'll just have to keep playing with the one God gave you.

Just try not to ram it into the TV.

[BlueSky]

Our minds are programmed from the instant we're born. Your friend is 100% correct, as far as that goes. But if you stop there, then you've made a self-fulfilling prophecy and self-limiting choice.

The fact that you can SEE your programming is evidence that you are NOT your programming. You always have a choice as to how you will interact with your world. The more self-aware you become, the more you become aware of the programming and are thus able to function apart from it. It's about choice.

If you say "But isn't choice still influenced by your programming?"... I'd say you think too much.

In other words, you are not your programming; it's something you have, not what you are.

[Dakar²]

Originally Posted by Gossamer 

Just try not to ram it into the TV.

I'm not sure I understand the multi-quote.

[wolfen]

Originally Posted by starman 

I got into this philosophical debate with a friend of mine yesterday afternoon. I don't agree with her at all, but I thought it would be a good topic for here.

She says that nobody has true free will, that everything we do is a product of our environment, our upbringing, our biology. Everything we do or say is net because we truly want to, but because that's how our brains are "programmed" to react based on past experiences.

Thoughts?

I countered with art, science, philosophy.

The truth is we cannot discern the origin of a single thought. We can describe a very small % of what happens, but we do not have the means to explain the process of causation preceding the experience of a thought.

Arguments about free will are pretty worthless. Nobody (religious or atheist) wants to accept the reality of not knowing. It's too disorienting to imagine that the concept of "self" is floating atop an ocean of neurological unknowns.

[Gossamer]

Originally Posted by mitchell_pgh 

How would she respond to the fact that twins separated at birth generally have the same IQ, similar addictions, etc.

I think it's both nurture and nature... not one or the other.

Originally Posted by wolfen 

The truth is we cannot discern the origin of a single thought. We can describe a very small % of what happens, but we do not have the means to explain the process of causation preceding the experience of a thought.

Arguments about free will are pretty worthless. Nobody (religious or atheist) wants to accept the reality of not knowing. It's too disorienting to imagine that the concept of "self" is floating atop an ocean of neurological unknowns.

Originally Posted by BlueSky 

Our minds are programmed from the instant we're born. Your friend is 100% correct, as far as that goes. But if you stop there, then you've made a self-fulfilling prophecy and self-limiting choice.

The fact that you can SEE your programming is evidence that you are NOT your programming. You always have a choice as to how you will interact with your world. The more self-aware you become, the more you become aware of the programming and are thus able to function apart from it. It's about choice.

If you say "But isn't choice still influenced by your programming?"... I'd say you think too much.

In other words, you are not your programming; it's something you have, not what you are.

Originally Posted by smacintush 

If we are unable to escape our biology, environment etc. then in the context of our humanity what she is calling "programming" is still our version of free will.

I think that it's true that we are the sum total of those things and they influence everything we do but the idea that we are "programmed" isn't something I can accept.

Originally Posted by starman 

Exactly

Originally Posted by Dakar² 

I'm not sure I understand the multi-quote.

Me either, I guess I must have hit it by accident a while ago.

[Dakar²]

Originally Posted by Gossamer 

Me either, I guess I must have hit it by accident a while ago.

You're clever.

Or at least, that's what your sig is trying to imply.

[smacintush]

Originally Posted by Dakar² 

You're clever.

Or at least, that's what your sig is trying to imply.

I don't get it. I keep clicking but it won't work for me.

[Gossamer]

Originally Posted by smacintush 

I don't get it. I keep clicking but it won't work for me.

Keep trying

[Jawbone54]

Free will is going to Krispy Kreme and getting a glazed, cream-filled donut when I feel like it.

Let that sink in.

[Gossamer]

Originally Posted by Jawbone54 

Free will is going to Krispy Kreme and getting a glazed, cream-filled donut when I feel like it.

Let that sink in.

But past experiences have told you that Krispy Kreme doughnuts are good, and your body desires the pleasure it gets when eating one, so you don't really have a choice.

[nonhuman]

As far as I can tell it all comes down to Quantum Theory. If the Heisenberg uncertainty principle holds, then we have free will. If it doesn't, then our lives are pre-determined.

However, as OreoCookie said, it doesn't really matter outside of a philosophical context because it will always seem as though we have free will even if we really don't.

[Jawbone54]

Originally Posted by Gossamer 

But past experiences have told you that Krispy Kreme doughnuts are good, and your body desires the pleasure it gets when eating one, so you don't really have a choice.

I don't want a donut anymore, just to spite you. Take that.

[smacintush]

Originally Posted by Gossamer 

Keep trying

I have been for an hour. Maybe just a few more clicks…

[imitchellg5]

I think your friend is wrong:
Non-"religous": We do what we want
"Religous": While God has planned everything out in our lives, he still allows us to screw ourselves as much as possible as long as it is ultimately for his glory.

[Gossamer]

Originally Posted by Jawbone54 

I don't want a donut anymore, just to spite you. Take that.

Your past experiences have taught you that it's particularly satisfying to do something to spite people, or that it's humorous to make jokes about wanting to spite people, so you really had no choice but to say that.

[Eug]

[Mithras]

This is a great book with a lousy title:

Freedom Evolves, by Daniel Dennett
Dennett is a philosophy professor at Tufts and a renowned thinker on problems of mind. Essentially, he argues that it is not necessary to have "indeterminism" in order to have "free will" at a higher level of description.

Consider Conway's Game of Life. It is entirely deterministic -- you can write down the "physics" of the Game on a notecard -- yet fantastically complex behavior can emerge. At some point, it makes sense to talk about structures "avoiding" certain outcomes, such as when a wall deflects a rain of gliders. Similarly, even though our world may be entirely deterministic -- or, deterministic except for truly random quantum phenomena -- nevertheless "free will" is the only sensible way to talk about the actions taken by agents in this world.

[slpdLoad]

I felt obligated to post this reply.

Somebody stop me!! </mask>

[amsalpemkcus]

IMHO free will does not exist because if it did there will be no order around us!

[smacintush]

Originally Posted by amsalpemkcus 

IMHO free will does not exist because if it did there will be no order around us!

I don't see how you can make that leap.

[nonhuman]

Originally Posted by smacintush 

I don't see how you can make that leap.

If you ignore the phenomenon of emergent properties.

[Face Ache]

Originally Posted by BlueSky 

Our minds are programmed from the instant we're born. Your friend is 100% correct, as far as that goes. But if you stop there, then you've made a self-fulfilling prophecy and self-limiting choice.

The fact that you can SEE your programming is evidence that you are NOT your programming. You always have a choice as to how you will interact with your world. The more self-aware you become, the more you become aware of the programming and are thus able to function apart from it. It's about choice.

If you say "But isn't choice still influenced by your programming?"... I'd say you think too much.

In other words, you are not your programming; it's something you have, not what you are.

I agree.

Surely free will is what allows us to do/change things despite our environment, upbringing and biology.

I'm not saying everyone has it.

[amsalpemkcus]

Originally Posted by smacintush 

I don't see how you can make that leap.

Give it some extra thought.

[Buckaroo]

Do we have free will. Yes and No.

This one will require a lot of thinking.

[smacintush]

Originally Posted by amsalpemkcus 

Give it some extra thought.

I'm thinking not.

[lpkmckenna]

Free will exists. The fact that we are affected by our environment isn't proof of determinism.

Humans are predictable because humans need the same things: food, water, love, etc.

"You cannot distinguish free choice and the illusion of free choice, so the point is moot." That's nonsense. It's pretty easy to tell the difference between someone who's incapacitated and someone who's rational. Besides, it raises the question: why would the illusion of free will necessarily exist?

If anyone ever insists to you that free will doesn't exist, just argue with him, non-stop. Make sure he understands that the only reason you believe in free will and are arguing with him about it is: you can't stop yourself!

[amsalpemkcus]

Originally Posted by smacintush 

I'm thinking not.

due to the absence of free will?

[- - e r i k - -]

I chose not to post in this thread.


… or did I?

[wolfen]

We are like aphids on a leaf. Dust mites. There's a big universe out there, and if it's a multiverse with intersections and crossroads then maybe invisible dragons from Dimension Epsilon have planted a thought or two on their way to another universe. Who knows?

It seems to me that the more important issue down here is what a person is learning. Learning seems to transcend the entire freewill discussion -- making me learn something seems as productive as imagining I'm in charge of the matter. Either way, learning = goodness. And if you're learning very little, then who cares whether or not you have the power of choice -- your choices prolly ain't that good anyway. And if powerful spiritual being(s) are beaming lessons into my skull, more power to them.

[Rev-O]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

It's simple.
You cannot distinguish free choice and the illusion of free choice, so the point is moot.

Ultimately, I agree.
There is no such thing as free will, really. Everything from a quantum state on up exists in a predetermined fashion, just in a system suitably complex enough that it is beyond our understanding. There is no free will because there is no such thing as choice to begin with. Stars don't choose to age and explode or collapse and no one chooses chocolate or vanilla. It is all predetermined. Everything in existence obeys preset laws which define every facet of what their existence can be and will be. People are no different. Just because we can consider the concept of free will does not necessitate it's existence. Free will is like religion: an illusion used by mankind to explain that which is too uncomfortable to accept or too difficult to explain.
The illusion of free choice exists because of a chaotic system that is beyond or understanding and works out in such a way that we might as well believe we have free will, because such a belief damages nothing and is convientient for the furtherance of society. Conversely, the denial of free choice accomplishes nothing, really, and could be a detriment to society. But, keep in mind, if the denial of free choice is detrimental to society and the individual, it is predetermined to be so

[smacintush]

Originally Posted by wolfen 

We are like aphids on a leaf. Dust mites. There's a big universe out there, and if it's a multiverse with intersections and crossroads then maybe invisible dragons from Dimension Epsilon have planted a thought or two on their way to another universe. Who knows?

It seems to me that the more important issue down here is what a person is learning. Learning seems to transcend the entire freewill discussion -- making me learn something seems as productive as imagining I'm in charge of the matter. Either way, learning = goodness. And if you're learning very little, then who cares whether or not you have the power of choice -- your choices prolly ain't that good anyway. And if powerful spiritual being(s) are beaming lessons into my skull, more power to them.

That's opens the discussion up a bit…so what is so great about learning? Many philosophies and religions, and even CG Jung assert that everything we need to know is there in our unconscious (or collective unconscious in the case of Jung).

One view says that it's what we learn in life that gives us difficulty. Or more precisely our fascination and over reliance on our learned knowledge.

[wolfen]

Originally Posted by smacintush 

That's opens the discussion up a bit…so what is so great about learning?

One can avoid the constraints of a freewill problem by recognizing the self intact within this experience of learning. There is an " I " who learns, regardless of whether or not that " I " has power/control. The experience of learning "happens," reinforcing the concept of a distinct and unique selfhood.

So I guess my answer is that learning expands and deepens identity, and without identity the concept of freewill is irrelevant.