(July 16, 2016 at 1:38 am)Maelstrom Wrote: Free will is nothing more than a choice between one or more choices.  

If free will did not exist, one would not be capable of choosing between Chinese or Mexican for dinner.

It actually is that simple.

You're talking about the illusion of free will now.
Can you account for the reason why you would prefer Mexican over Chinese or viceversa at any given moment? But lets take preference out of it. Suppose you have two identical buttons in front of you. What makes you press #1 and not #2, given the choice? You just don't know. You might rationalize it after the fact, but the reality of it is you have no clue what happened behind the scenes, in your mind, in order for you to make that particular decision at that particular time. It was either a random event, a predetermined one, or both, but nowhere can we make space for this absurd "free will" thing, that I bet you can't even define.

(July 16, 2016 at 1:44 am)Excited Penguin Wrote: You're talking about the illusion of free will now.
Can you account for the reason why you would prefer Mexican over Chinese or viceversa at any given moment? But lets take preference out of it. Suppose you have two identical buttons in front of you. What makes you press #1 and not #2, given the choice? You just don't know. You might rationalize it after the fact, but the reality of it is you have no clue what happened behind the scenes, in your mind, in order for you to make that particular decision at that particular time. It was either a random event, a predetermined one, or both, but nowhere can we make space for this absurd "free will" thing, that I bet you can't even define.

Yes, I can account for choosing one over the other. It is due to me having the free will to choose between two different things.

Arthur Schopenhauer Wrote:Motives are causes from within.

^^^This is why ultimately there is no such thing as "self-motivation".^^^

"You", your conscious self, can only control motives with other motives. Ultimately those motives have to come from elsewhere... the regress leads to all behavior ultimately being caused by things that are not conscious.

(July 16, 2016 at 1:46 am)Maelstrom Wrote:

(July 16, 2016 at 1:44 am)Excited Penguin Wrote: You're talking about the illusion of free will now.
Can you account for the reason why you would prefer Mexican over Chinese or viceversa at any given moment? But lets take preference out of it. Suppose you have two identical buttons in front of you. What makes you press #1 and not #2, given the choice? You just don't know. You might rationalize it after the fact, but the reality of it is you have no clue what happened behind the scenes, in your mind, in order for you to make that particular decision at that particular time. It was either a random event, a predetermined one, or both, but nowhere can we make space for this absurd "free will" thing, that I bet you can't even define.

Yes, I can account for choosing one over the other.  It is due to me having the free will to choose between two different things.

Did you have the free will to choose what genes you were going to have and what environment you were going to be placed in so that your whole life led up to that specific moment in time where you were going to choose between the two buttons, as well?

(July 16, 2016 at 1:49 am)Alasdair Ham Wrote:

Arthur Schopenhauer Wrote:Motives are causes from within.

^^^This is why ultimately there is no such thing as "self-motivation".^^^

"You", your conscious self, can only control motives with other motives. Ultimately those motives have to come from elsewhere... the regress leads to all behavior ultimately being caused by things that are not conscious.

This is more reason to believe that consciousness is an illusion as well. In my mind, consciousness went right out the door with free will, but of course I'm not a philosopher, so I can't explain it better than that, I don't think.

Or, at least, I'm referring to what some people understand by consciousness.

(July 16, 2016 at 1:49 am)Excited Penguin Wrote: Did you have the free will to choose what genes you were going to have and what environment you were going to be placed in so that your whole life led up to that specific moment in time where you were going to choose between the two buttons, as well?

Now you're just being fucking dumb. You are now referring to that which was completely out of my control.

I have control over choosing pop tarts over eggs.

I do not have control over the genes that my parents gave me.

(July 16, 2016 at 1:46 am)Maelstrom Wrote: Yes, I can account for choosing one over the other.  It is due to me having the free will to choose between two different things.

Anyone else notice how if free will is the ability to choose one option over an other and one can account for it by having free will then that's a massively circular argument?

"How do you have free will?"

"By choosing one option over an other."

"How do you choose one option over an other?"

"With free will."

"How is the Bible true?"

"Because God wrote it."

"How can we trust what God writes?"

"Because the Bible says so."

^^^ Equivalents ^^^. It's theist logic.

Anyone else notice that Kitan/Maelstrom is basically saying "I can account for choosing to do otherwise by choosing to do otherwise" or "I can account for free will by using my free will."?

And this guy continues to be dumb.

(July 16, 2016 at 1:51 am)Maelstrom Wrote:

(July 16, 2016 at 1:49 am)Excited Penguin Wrote: Did you have the free will to choose what genes you were going to have and what environment you were going to be placed in so that your whole life led up to that specific moment in time where you were going to choose between the two buttons, as well?

Now you're just being fucking dumb.  You are now referring to that which was completely out of my control.

I have control over choosing pop tarts over eggs.

I do not have control over the genes that my parents gave me.

Ok, you've got no control over your genes.

Now let's think about something else. What do you suppose you are a product of, like without anything being left out? Would it be accurate to say that you are a product of your genes and your environment, and nothing else, as in, your whole being is only a mixture of those two influences?

(July 16, 2016 at 1:53 am)Excited Penguin Wrote: Now let's think about something else. What do you suppose you are a product of, like without anything being left out? Would it be accurate to say that you are a product of your genes and your environment, and nothing else, as in, your whole being is only a mixture of those two influences?

With that line of questioning, you are leaving free will and getting into something else.

I will not derail.