(August 1, 2016 at 11:47 am)RozKek Wrote: Nope, go check a Sam Harris debate. He is one of the biggest free will debaters and he debates the free will I'm talking about, go watch his debate if you're interested.

Your brain is part of the environment. What differs you from a planet? Are you a special little snowflake because you're a human? You're built of the same things, you follow the same laws, you are a part of the universe, you're just particles, nothing more.

You are still strawmanning. Exactly who are you speaking to has contradicted any of this?

Quote:Why are you free only if you're not being constricted by a foreign agent? Why a foreign agent, can you adress this? You're constrained by the laws of physics. "Will is the expression of intent, a kind of decision, and free will is the capacity to express intent without compulsion or obstruction." Well then, even by your definition a free will doesn't exist. You're constricted by the laws of physics, by the fact that you're physical. I'm still wondering why in order for your will to not be free you must be constricted by a foreign agent.

. . . because some of the stuff in the universe is me, and other stuff is not-me. When the not-me stuff isn't preventing me from manifesting intent into it, then I have free will.

Quote:The way he forms and acts on intent isn't his decision ultimately. Why his intention is to do what he intends to do is not ultimately not his decision either. And it does matter if it traces back to the Big Bang even if it's far fetched, even if you dislike the idea. Even your definition of free will plays by the rules of my definition of free will. Intention, expression everything is ultimately not your decision either. I don't like repeating myself, I've said this several times and you adress it in the exact same way.

I think we are probably done here. One more trip around the merry-go-round and I may lose my philosophical lunch.

Quote:Exactly, of course we should hold them responsible but not in same sense we do in the everyday life. It wasn't possible for them to act any other way than they did, we accept that and instead of giving them the electric chair or lifetime prison it would be correct if we instead reconditioned their brains so their intentions become good and make them contribute to society in a positive way. The did form and act on improper intent. But the way they formed, the way the acted, and their intention, none of that was ultimately under their control. It doesn't matter if you think your view is better than my view. Your view is not correct, therefore we don't go by your view.

Except that the law totally DOES go by my view. It does not involve a philosophical outlook about the nature of reality. The buck stops at the human experience, as it should, since we are humans judging humans. And in the law, it's all about intent, and the degree to which intent is freely formed.

(August 1, 2016 at 11:59 am)RozKek Wrote: It doesn't really matter what other people are debating. Let's say no one is debating the free will I'm talking about, but I am and I think it's important and has a basis in reality. And what gets more objective than physics? I'm using physics, the physical reality and the laws of physics to argue against free will, it doesn't get more objective than that. You're made of particles just like planet earth is, both of you are governed by the laws of physics, both of you are going to move and act only in one possible way, but you can always dream of other things you could've done, sure.

Are you sure about this? Tell me, what physical laws, exactly, are you basing your views on? What known and incontrovertible facts make you so sure of your position?

(August 1, 2016 at 12:14 pm)RozKek Wrote:

(August 1, 2016 at 12:02 pm)Irrational Wrote: Rozkek, the laws of physics don't tell you what constitutes freedom, though. Come on.

Also, freedom is just a concept made by humans, it's just an idea. There's no deeper meaning to it.

Except concepts have deep meaning with people. This is borderline nihilism now.

(August 1, 2016 at 12:22 pm)bennyboy Wrote:

(August 1, 2016 at 11:47 am)RozKek Wrote: Nope, go check a Sam Harris debate. He is one of the biggest free will debaters and he debates the free will I'm talking about, go watch his debate if you're interested.

Your brain is part of the environment. What differs you from a planet? Are you a special little snowflake because you're a human? You're built of the same things, you follow the same laws, you are a part of the universe, you're just particles, nothing more.

You are still strawmanning.  Exactly who are you speaking to has contradicted any of this?

Quote:Why are you free only if you're not being constricted by a foreign agent? Why a foreign agent, can you adress this? You're constrained by the laws of physics. "Will is the expression of intent, a kind of decision, and free will is the capacity to express intent without compulsion or obstruction." Well then, even by your definition a free will doesn't exist. You're constricted by the laws of physics, by the fact that you're physical. I'm still wondering why in order for your will to not be free you must be constricted by a foreign agent.

. . . because some of the stuff in the universe is me, and other stuff is not-me.  When the not-me stuff isn't preventing me from manifesting intent into it, then I have free will.

Quote:The way he forms and acts on intent isn't his decision ultimately. Why his intention is to do what he intends to do is not ultimately not his decision either. And it does matter if it traces back to the Big Bang even if it's far fetched, even if you dislike the idea. Even your definition of free will plays by the rules of my definition of free will. Intention, expression everything is ultimately not your decision either. I don't like repeating myself, I've said this several times and you adress it in the exact same way.

I think we are probably done here.  One more trip around the merry-go-round and I may lose my philosophical lunch.

Quote:Exactly, of course we should hold them responsible but not in same sense we do in the everyday life. It wasn't possible for them to act any other way than they did, we accept that and instead of giving them the electric chair or lifetime prison it would be correct if we instead reconditioned their brains so their intentions become good and make them contribute to society in a positive way. The did form and act on improper intent. But the way they formed, the way the acted, and their intention, none of that was ultimately under their control. It doesn't matter if you think your view is better than my view. Your view is not correct, therefore we don't go by your view.

Except that the law totally DOES go by my view.  It does not involve a philosophical outlook about the nature of reality.  The buck stops at the human experience, as it should, since we are humans judging humans.  And in the law, it's all about intent, and the degree to which intent is freely formed.

Nope, you are, just like the universe already determined. You aren't determined, the whole universe is, and you are a part of the universe, the universe whatever you define as you're still already determined. And if it isn't then it's partly random and that doesn't support free will.

And what you don't understand is that intent isn't ultimately our decision and the intent isn't formed freely at all.

(August 1, 2016 at 12:28 pm)bennyboy Wrote:

(August 1, 2016 at 11:59 am)RozKek Wrote: It doesn't really matter what other people are debating. Let's say no one is debating the free will I'm talking about, but I am and I think it's important and has a basis in reality. And what gets more objective than physics? I'm using physics, the physical reality and the laws of physics to argue against free will, it doesn't get more objective than that. You're made of particles just like planet earth is, both of you are governed by the laws of physics, both of you are going to move and act only in one possible way, but you can always dream of other things you could've done, sure.

Are you sure about this?  Tell me, what physical laws, exactly, are you basing your views on?  What known and incontrovertible facts make you so sure of your position?

Well, I'm astonished that I have to repeat this again. Your brain is physical, it follows classical physics, in classical physics everything is caused, in other words everything is determined. Your will is a product of the brain, it's also determined.

(August 1, 2016 at 12:59 pm)Irrational Wrote:

(August 1, 2016 at 12:14 pm)RozKek Wrote: Also, freedom is just a concept made by humans, it's just an idea. There's no deeper meaning to it.

Except concepts have deep meaning with people. This is borderline nihilism now.

And those deep meanings with people are subjective. The deeper meaning is just added onto by humans, it has no basis in the objective reality.

(August 1, 2016 at 4:17 pm)RozKek Wrote:

(August 1, 2016 at 12:59 pm)Irrational Wrote: Except concepts have deep meaning with people. This is borderline nihilism now.

And those deep meanings with people are subjective. The deeper meaning is just added onto by humans, it has no basis in the objective reality.

Subjective does not mean arbitrary, whimsical, or not to be seriously considered at all.

(July 8, 2016 at 3:08 am)Maelstrom Wrote: You made the choice to post here, thus you had the free will to post.

Too many people confuse free will with religious bullshit, when free will is just the free will to choose your own path.

Free will is not even mentioned in the bible. That dunce St Augustine thought it up.

If I had free will I could leap tall buildings in a single bound.

Anyway, long experience has taught me these things go nowhere. So I shall bow out gracefully, like a cow on stilts. 

(July 8, 2016 at 3:08 am)Maelstrom Wrote: You made the choice to post here, thus you had the free will to post.

Too many people confuse free will with religious bullshit, when free will is just the free will to choose your own path.

Well, you're free to employ your will in choosing one particular path among many...though who/what claims the act of choosing, within the limits of any contingently possible set of paths, as being 'free'.  Alas, you're not free from not choosing a path. Paradoxically, 'you' (as a continuum, non static process) are a commingling of the paths you choose and the one's you reject ...as such you'll freely-determine all possible future state of affairs....as per a incidental will.

(August 1, 2016 at 4:21 pm)Irrational Wrote:

(August 1, 2016 at 4:17 pm)RozKek Wrote: And those deep meanings with people are subjective. The deeper meaning is just added onto by humans, it has no basis in the objective reality.

Subjective does not mean arbitrary, whimsical, or not to be seriously considered at all.

Even if that was the case, deep meanings to words don't really change the fact that the universe, including you is determined. That allows no free will. Even the free will where no one is constricting you by holding a gun to your head is not really allowed. You're still constricted, bound by physics. Your will is just a part of the causal chain, there's no free in it. What your will is, what your intention is and will be, what your actions will be, every single movement of your arms, legs, eyes, every twitch is all determined, all of it is in the brain, and the brain is causal i.e determined. It doesn't matter what your experience is, you can't escape causality, determinism, that your brain is physical and such by giving words a deeper meaning. Not that there is something to escape, it's not as if the lack of free will is going to ruin your life, it's not as if you're going to be severely depressed, sitting on your couch, not able to move because you don't have the free will to do so.

Now you can demonstrate how deeper meanings to words somehow allows the existence of a free will.