(October 1, 2012 at 3:04 pm)Rhythm Wrote: Precisely, if -you- the claimant of this "free will" business cannot devise a test that could at least distinguish between the two (free will involved vs no free will involved)....-your- view...as the claimant, has what practical value or meaning?

I will attempt to suggest a test if you can tell me what your proposed "no-free-will" is. What controls the will if it is not free? If it is deterministic, then determined by who or what?

And if you think there is no practical value to either side of the issue, what is the point of the non-free-willers bringing it up? Is it just navel gazing?

Does an ape or a cetacea have free-will. If yes, then how far down the ladder does free will extend? How about an amoeba? Where is the cutoff and WHY?

I love this question. And while I think a "Pascal's Wager" approach is reproachable regarding notions of religious compliance, a parallel train of thought addresses this question rather cleverly.

If you believe we are determined, and you are right, then you believe it because you are determined to do so. However, if you are wrong, then you are choosing to believe in determinism.

On the other hand, if you believe we have free will and are right about it, then you are choosing to believe in it, whereas if you're wrong, you're determined to believe in it.

There's only one option where the answer you choose to believe is the right one. Therefore, if it's possible at all for free will to exist, it's preferable to believe that it does.

Keep in mind that I say "preferable" and not "rational." This argument appeals to human motive, not human reason (which admittedly, so does the original Pascals Wager, though to a more disastrous end).

If you don't have free will, are you accountable for your actions? If you don't believe in free will, do you still hold others accountable for their actions? Why or why not?

(October 1, 2012 at 8:17 pm)Tino Wrote: If you don't have free will, are you accountable for your actions? If you don't believe in free will, do you still hold others accountable for their actions? Why or why not?

Technically, no.

Evolution has provided ways to ensure survival of the species and in the case of humans, intelligence has modified our actions differently that most other animals.

Intelligence has allowed us to modify our existence by establishing goals. Survival, however, is still number one on the list and anything detrimental to our existence as a species is aggressively eliminated. Certainly not in all cases, but the overall success of our species shows out intelligence to be an effective survival tool.

(October 1, 2012 at 10:04 pm)IATIA Wrote:

(October 1, 2012 at 8:17 pm)Tino Wrote: If you don't have free will, are you accountable for your actions? If you don't believe in free will, do you still hold others accountable for their actions? Why or why not?

Technically, no.

Why did you qualify it with "technically"?

(October 1, 2012 at 10:04 pm)IATIA Wrote: Intelligence has allowed us to modify our existence by establishing goals. ... but the overall success of our species shows out intelligence to be an effective survival tool.

What does intelligence mean in the absence of free will? Isn't intelligence inextricably tied to sensing and choosing, deciding and taking action? If our will isn't free, what good is being intelligent? How does intelligence help our species survive if the actions we ultimately take aren't based on our free decisions, but rather some non-free-will mechanism?

IATIA, are you a non-free-willer, and if so, I'm wondering about my earlier question - do you hold people accountable for their actions?

(October 1, 2012 at 10:16 pm)Tino Wrote:

(October 1, 2012 at 10:04 pm)IATIA Wrote: Technically, no.

Why did you qualify it with "technically"?

Our laws and the survival of the species require the removal of or adaptation to obstacles, but the instigator is no more responsible for their actions than a tiger on a rampage. The tiger is not at fault, but it still needs to be taken down. Just because a murderer is not 'technically' responsible for their actions, that does not lessen the impact on the survival of the species.

(October 1, 2012 at 10:16 pm)Tino Wrote:

(October 1, 2012 at 10:04 pm)IATIA Wrote: Intelligence has allowed us to modify our existence by establishing goals. ... but the overall success of our species shows out intelligence to be an effective survival tool.

What does intelligence mean in the absence of free will? Isn't intelligence inextricably tied to sensing and choosing, deciding and taking action? If our will isn't free, what good is being intelligent? How does intelligence help our species survive if the actions we ultimately take aren't based on our free decisions, but rather some non-free-will mechanism?

A higher intelligence has given us a higher awareness than other species which allows more sophisticated communication. The downside to this awareness, is that we believe that we have control, whereas we have no more control than a wasp nest or ant colony.

(October 1, 2012 at 10:16 pm)Tino Wrote: IATIA, are you a non-free-willer, and if so, I'm wondering about my earlier question - do you hold people accountable for their actions?

I flip off idiots in traffic. I have found, that no matter how hard I try, I am unable to not feel the frustrations involved. I am incapable of defying my body. I personally hold persons responsible for their actions, whether good or bad, but again, I am totally incapable of defying these feelings.

Humans have free will, but that is not to say that their actions have not been predetermined, but there is free will because unlike the beliefs of the Ancient Greeks, for the most part, people are not knowledge about their fate. The loss of free will is knowing your fate and you not being able to do anything to alter its course.

"The power of acting without the constraint of necessity or fate; the ability to act at one's own discretion."

(October 2, 2012 at 12:37 am)Polaris Wrote: Humans have free will, but that is not to say that their actions have not been predetermined, but there is free will because unlike the beliefs of the Ancient Greeks, for the most part, people are not knowledge about their fate. The loss of free will is knowing your fate and you not being able to do anything to alter its course.

"The power of acting without the constraint of necessity or fate; the ability to act at one's own discretion."

Actually, even if we don't have free will, experiences will still affect our actions. So if we knew what we were going to do in advance, this knowledge would change things and possibly result in a different future (which goes without saying if we do have free will).

(October 1, 2012 at 10:47 pm)IATIA Wrote: Our laws and the survival of the species require the removal of or adaptation to obstacles, but the instigator is no more responsible for their actions than a tiger on a rampage. The tiger is not at fault, but it still needs to be taken down. Just because a murderer is not 'technically' responsible for their actions, that does not lessen the impact on the survival of the species.

Interesting. You're saying that people are not accountable for their actions, but we have to deal with them as if they are, for the protection of society. What about crimes less than murder - everyday crimes - or what about breaking of rules by children? Since they are not responsible for their actions, how do you treat them when they transgress?

Societies worldwide appear (to me) to deal with punishment, from children to criminals, as if people have free will. Our court systems treat people as if they have free will. This is evidence to me that the non-free-will crowd bears the burden of proving their claim.

(October 1, 2012 at 10:47 pm)IATIA Wrote: The downside to this awareness, is that we believe that we have control, whereas we have no more control than a wasp nest or ant colony.

I doubt that this claim would stand up to a test.

(October 1, 2012 at 10:47 pm)IATIA Wrote: I flip off idiots in traffic. I have found, that no matter how hard I try, I am unable to not feel the frustrations involved. I am incapable of defying my body. I personally hold persons responsible for their actions, whether good or bad, but again, I am totally incapable of defying these feelings.

Feelings happen. They are not controlled by the will, which is about making choices and taking actions. In most situations where you feel frustration you are saying that you choose to express it. I could easily devise scenarios where you would choose not to express it.

---

(October 2, 2012 at 12:37 am)Polaris Wrote: Humans have free will, but that is not to say that their actions have not been predetermined, but there is free will because unlike the beliefs of the Ancient Greeks, for the most part, people are not knowledge about their fate. The loss of free will is knowing your fate and you not being able to do anything to alter its course.

I don't understand this. Are you saying that our actions are predetermined? Are you also saying that we have free will?

---

(October 2, 2012 at 12:45 am)Darkstar Wrote: Actually, even if we don't have free will, experiences will still affect our actions. So if we knew what we were going to do in advance, this knowledge would change things and possibly result in a different future

If we change our decisions based on knowledge, how is that different than free will?