All things considered..

[nietzsche]

do you believe you have free will? Or do you think the future is already determined and you're just enjoying the ride?

[nietzsche]

10 views and no votes? I promise you this is not like the other threads I don't want to debate with you I'm just curious as to what people believe.

[/]

A bit of both, a bit of neither.
I think that there are countless factors that interact and influence probability to make a certain outcome most likely, but all the same, I think that even if we had a perfect understanding of every factor, there is a certain underlying chaos that can never be truly measured constantly changing the system.

[nietzsche]

A bit of both, a bit of neither.
I think that there are countless factors that interact and influence probability to make a certain outcome most likely, but all the same, I think that even if we had a perfect understanding of every factor, there is a certain underlying chaos that can never be truly measured constantly changing the system.

Ok 2 questions.

1. Do you think that if we were able to measure somehow, or someone (hypothetical) outside the universe was able to measure everything, given that he had paused time and introduced all the data to his mega super computer, would he be able to predict what was next, for every particle and subparticle, every bit of energy, to the point to predict your life second after second?

2. In your every day life, you act believing you have free will?

[tkr4lf]

I would say its a mix of things. Some people truly are destined for greatness, while others truly are destined to be janitors the rest of their lives. However, there are always things that can be done to change that.

Somebody can have tons of potential and a great destiny ahead of them, but if they decide to sit around drinking beer and smoking pot and playing video games all the time, then that potential and destiny mean nothing, since nothing will ever happen.

And on the opposite end, I really do believe that with enough hard work and luck and knowing the right people, etc.(all those things that are important for success), anybody can do anything, no matter how shitty their destiny/future may seem.

[DaGip]

i got to poop.

[mrswdk]

If you're looking for excuses that you can give your mom for why you haven't cleaned your room yet, I'm afraid you're going to have to do better than 'fate'.

[/]

A bit of both, a bit of neither.
I think that there are countless factors that interact and influence probability to make a certain outcome most likely, but all the same, I think that even if we had a perfect understanding of every factor, there is a certain underlying chaos that can never be truly measured constantly changing the system.

Ok 2 questions.

1. Do you think that if we were able to measure somehow, or someone (hypothetical) outside the universe was able to measure everything, given that he had paused time and introduced all the data to his mega super computer, would he be able to predict what was next, for every particle and subparticle, every bit of energy, to the point to predict your life second after second?

2. In your every day life, you act believing you have free will?

1.
Well, since I’m not a quantum physicist from the 8th dimension (or as it’s probably known there, elementary school level computer programming), I dunno, my opinion is stupid and useless. Many smart folks over here do suspect randomness does exist on a subatomic level though, such as in waveforms. So no, as best as I can understand, while there are paths that are set in stone through the laws of physics, the precise path everything in the universe takes cannot be predicted.


2.
I voted yes. Though I think it often might not have an immediate effect. It’s true we are to some degree programmed by existing data to take certain actions, so yes, an alien might be able to predict what you’re going to crave for lunch today or whatever, but the chaos in our thoughts grows from moment to moment. Each branch your mind takes creates more potential branches that perhaps never existed before that moment, and the slightest whim eventually snowballs to a new path of your choosing.

[waauw]

1.
Well, since I’m not a quantum physicist from the 8th dimension (or as it’s probably known there, elementary school level computer programming), I dunno, my opinion is stupid and useless. Many smart folks over here do suspect randomness does exist on a subatomic level though, such as in waveforms. So no, as best as I can understand, while there are paths that are set in stone through the laws of physics, the precise path everything in the universe takes cannot be predicted.

I don't know anything about quantum physics either, but I always just interpreted 'randomness' as extreme complexity that we just don't understand yet. So wouldn't that mean this 'randomness' is also predictable given enough knowledge and understanding?

[/]

1.
Well, since I’m not a quantum physicist from the 8th dimension (or as it’s probably known there, elementary school level computer programming), I dunno, my opinion is stupid and useless. Many smart folks over here do suspect randomness does exist on a subatomic level though, such as in waveforms. So no, as best as I can understand, while there are paths that are set in stone through the laws of physics, the precise path everything in the universe takes cannot be predicted.

I don't know anything about quantum physics either, but I always just interpreted 'randomness' as extreme complexity that we just don't understand yet. So wouldn't that mean this 'randomness' is also predictable given enough knowledge and understanding?

It's possible, but according to the widely accepted Copenhagen interpretation, on a quantum level all possible configurations simultaneously exist at once, and only the observation causes the particle to be set into a single configuration. If this is true, then true randomness does most likely exist, since there is no lower hidden mechanism that determines the physics of what does or does not happen, just pure numerical probability.
At least that's how I understood it.

[crispybits]

I always thought of it more as all the possibilities theoretically exist but only one reality actually exists, and we only get knowledge of the reality when we look at it. To use Schroedinger's cat, the cat is either dead or alive as a matter of fact, but until we open the box we can't say anything about the actual state of the cat, so we have to say both possibilities exist simultaneously. But I'm not claiming to be an expert.

[/]

I always thought of it more as all the possibilities theoretically exist but only one reality actually exists, and we only get knowledge of the reality when we look at it. To use Schroedinger's cat, the cat is either dead or alive as a matter of fact, but until we open the box we can't say anything about the actual state of the cat, so we have to say both possibilities exist simultaneously. But I'm not claiming to be an expert.

That's easy, straightforward, and makes complete sense.
So it is definitely not quantum mechanics!

[nietzsche]

Twelve votes, only one person voted determinism.

It would be interesting what scientists believed before Heisenberg introduced the uncertainty principle. Although I know many bright scientists had a religious core.

To me the discussion with myself ends when I consider that even if the universe is completely deterministic somehow, I'm a part of the system and I have my role to play, so it doesn't matter. That is if I was to take the materialistic approach. The belief in free will actually makes me take responsibility for myself, and takes me to an attitude that makes me happier.

Regardless, I've chosen to believe in free will, and those discussion on my head don't come up too often anymore.

WHat interests me more about determinism and materialism is the way most people adopt these thories and then try to incorporate other concepts that are incompatible with them. They seem to be wanting to think or debate or consider other ideas, and they don't notice that their other many ideas have a root in materialism or determinism. I think any clear thought must spring from the recognition of one's metaphysic's beliefs.

[crispybits]

Regardless, I've chosen to believe in free will, and those discussion on my head don't come up too often anymore.

Did you have a choice to believe in it?

That's not so flippant a question as it sounds by the way. You can be persuaded into believing something, but I'm not so sure someone can actually choose to believe something. I could imagine all sorts of hypothetical things that may or may not be true and there's no evidence either way. Say there is a form of submarine life with an intelligence level that equals ours living under the ice layer on one of the ocean moons of Jupiter or Saturn. Can't prove it either way (at least not yet). It's very difficult to even give a decent probability estimate. Can you choose yes or no to believing that proposition? Can you choose to be convinced of either the truth or falseness of it?

[nietzsche]

Regardless, I've chosen to believe in free will, and those discussion on my head don't come up too often anymore.

Did you have a choice to believe in it?

That's not so flippant a question as it sounds by the way. You can be persuaded into believing something, but I'm not so sure someone can actually choose to believe something. I could imagine all sorts of hypothetical things that may or may not be true and there's no evidence either way. Say there is a form of submarine life with an intelligence level that equals ours living under the ice layer on one of the ocean moons of Jupiter or Saturn. Can't prove it either way (at least not yet). It's very difficult to even give a decent probability estimate. Can you choose yes or no to believing that proposition? Can you choose to be convinced of either the truth or falseness of it?

I choose to believe I did have a choice.

An important part of the concept of free will is in the "will". At deep meditative states you can feel your will. This previous sentence means a lot, more than the words, it tries to convey a state of mind.

At the end, our behaviour and thoughts are completely influenced by our beliefs. Our beliefs dictate what we perceive, think, do. So we can influence ourselves strongly as we adopt beliefs.

So in adopting a belief, our world changes accordingly.

I know you can say that those beliefs I adopted were meant to be adopted, given my previous circumstances (and this is talking from the materialistic point of view) , but to my world it doesn't matter, because I have the belief I had a say in the choosing. If, however, I had the belief in my that I valued much more an ultimate materialistic truth, I'd think differently.

But to me my inner life is more important.

[AndyDufresne]

I vote Star Trek.


--Andy

[crispybits]

nietzsche do you believe that your free will is a conscious thing? Suppose someone showed you evidence that at best all of our choices are made subconciously (so concious intention to choose doesn't factor in) would that alter your view at all?

[DaGip]

I vote Star Trek.


--Andy

f*ck off!

[nietzsche]

nietzsche do you believe that your free will is a conscious thing? Suppose someone showed you evidence that at best all of our choices are made subconciously (so concious intention to choose doesn't factor in) would that alter your view at all?

I answer this in two parts.

Firstly, the line between what's conscious and "subconscious" is not fixed. You can move it. So, that something is subconscious to some doesn't mean it's to others. However, a lot of people buy into the idea that the subconscious is out of reach because there's a barrier well established. By changing this belief, you can access more and more and "re-program" yourself or simply be aware of more of what's in there and even be aware of decisions that are made and alter them.

Secondly, yes, it's the way it is otherwise we'd go insane trying to consciously make decisions second after second of what's next. But, given the right mental tools, you can change all this by adopting and adapting beliefs.

[TA1LGUNN3R]

1.
Well, since I’m not a quantum physicist from the 8th dimension (or as it’s probably known there, elementary school level computer programming), I dunno, my opinion is stupid and useless. Many smart folks over here do suspect randomness does exist on a subatomic level though, such as in waveforms. So no, as best as I can understand, while there are paths that are set in stone through the laws of physics, the precise path everything in the universe takes cannot be predicted.

I don't know anything about quantum physics either, but I always just interpreted 'randomness' as extreme complexity that we just don't understand yet. So wouldn't that mean this 'randomness' is also predictable given enough knowledge and understanding?

That's precisely what it is. We only call it random because we don't have a mathematical or logic system which can correctly quantify what's going on (if you're referring to things like tunneling, etc.) We have to use assumptions and estimations, like the Hartree-Fock and variational method, to simplify complex equations that otherwise can't be derived.

So no, I don't think free will is real. I believe in a deterministic universe (atoms/particles only move in response to forces and collisions). However, I'm willing to admit that's a belief, and it's so awesomely huge and complex that we have an illusion of free will, or a functional one, I guess.

I always thought of it more as all the possibilities theoretically exist but only one reality actually exists, and we only get knowledge of the reality when we look at it. To use Schroedinger's cat, the cat is either dead or alive as a matter of fact, but until we open the box we can't say anything about the actual state of the cat, so we have to say both possibilities exist simultaneously. But I'm not claiming to be an expert.

That's correct. Schrodinger utilized that thought exercise to highlight the absurdity of some of the willy-nilly hypothesis being thrown out at the time in regards to quantum theory. The cat can't be in both states, we just can't know which he's in unless we peek in there and change the experiment, a la the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle.

A bit of both, a bit of neither.
I think that there are countless factors that interact and influence probability to make a certain outcome most likely, but all the same, I think that even if we had a perfect understanding of every factor, there is a certain underlying chaos that can never be truly measured constantly changing the system.

Ok 2 questions.

1. Do you think that if we were able to measure somehow, or someone (hypothetical) outside the universe was able to measure everything, given that he had paused time and introduced all the data to his mega super computer, would he be able to predict what was next, for every particle and subparticle, every bit of energy, to the point to predict your life second after second?

Yes, if such a thing were possible.

-TG

[nietzsche]

So you're the one that voted for determinism?

I'm curious to know if that belief affects your decision making processes and how.

[TA1LGUNN3R]

Actually , I didn't vote. And not much, really. Like I said, I think there's at least a functional free will, so I don't think a deterministic universe should guide your decisions (or lack thereof). I don't think a criminal could rightly say "it's not my fault, it's the universe's!"

I guess it's like the majority of religious people. They think there's a god but they don't actually strictly adhere to the tenets. They just see an unknowable force that guides them and they have a desire to live forever.

-TG

[Army of GOD]

if you put a gun to my head I'd say determinism but it doesn't matter, there's the illusion of free will and that's good enough.

[BigBallinStalin]

Here's the true but vague answer: some aspects of one's life are deterministic, while other aspects are left to one's free will. It's on some spectrum, and the dichotomy is likely insufficient to explain the range of outcomes from human behavior (due to problems of measurement and definition). So, please end this awful debate forever and ever.

[TA1LGUNN3R]

Here's the true but vague answer: some aspects of one's life are deterministic, while other aspects are left to one's free will. It's on some spectrum, and the dichotomy is likely insufficient to explain the range of outcomes from human behavior (due to problems of measurement and definition). So, please end this awful debate forever and ever.

If it brings you back, sugar, it's the best debate in the world.

-TG