(December 15, 2016 at 7:10 am)robvalue Wrote:(December 15, 2016 at 6:07 am)operator Wrote: Agreed, rob. Awesome vid btw!
I don't get how this "outside of time" idea is supposed to somehow reconcile this contradiction we have here.
It doesn't, at all. It's just obfuscation.
And thanks very much! I got plenty more where that came from
(December 15, 2016 at 6:15 am)Alex K Wrote: iow, I propose that all logically consistent and well defined notions of free will are compatible with determinism.
I'm not sure what you're saying here. If we're discussing hard determinism, as in everything could be predicted from the word go, then I don't see any kind of "free will" being possible, that means anything.
By "free will", I would mean that intelligent agents have a genuine choice of multiple actions, and they could actually choose any of them. If it can be predicted what the agent will do with complete accuracy, then I no longer see it as any kind of choice. It's just a sequence of causes and effects. All we have is the illusion of choice.
If you define "choice"/"free will" so that it covers no real choice at all, then it's compatible, but meaningless IMO.
I agree completely with this, and I just want to add, even if the universe isn't superdeterministic and there is true randomness, I don't think free will exists in that case either. You have no control over true randomness the same way one has no control over something already determined. But it isn't 'either you're determined or driven by randomness' because the brain isn't quantum and follows cause and effect. Iow the brain is deterministic.
I've met definitions of free will where they've restricted free will to merely acting according to ones intentions with no restrictions from an outside force, in this case outside force being an agent; agent being another person. I don't agree with that definition because our will is clearly affected and determined by literally everything else, not just agents but by how the universe behaves and what we are. Why exclude that fact? Another thing is regarding acting out of your intention with no agent holding a gun to your head, what your intention is isn't your choice nor is they way you decide to approach your intention your choice, it's all determined and that renders that definition of free will pretty much useless. Our will is free when our intention and the way we act according to our intention isn't random nor determined an I don't see that being the case. Right now the only free wills we have are definitions of it that don't take into account things that play a quite big role. Just thought I'd bring this up, since I've seen it discussed.
