RE: Free Will Debate
November 27, 2021 at 10:13 am
(This post was last modified: November 27, 2021 at 10:18 am by polymath257.)
(November 27, 2021 at 5:24 am)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote:(November 26, 2021 at 9:36 pm)polymath257 Wrote: Is it really a redefinition if the original concept is so vague that nothing can really be said about it?
Exactly what does the term 'free will' mean?
Does it require that there is more than one possible future whenever a choice is made? If so, what about physics suggests that is a real possibility?
They are internal because they are *in me*. In the same sense that the fusion reactions that power the sun are in the sun, not external to it. Sure, the hydrogen in the sun ultimately came from outside of the sun, but that doesn't seem very relevant.
The point is that very minor changes to the internal state would lead to large differences in the results. That means that the 'causal nexus', if you will, is within my brain and body. That is distinct from what happens if, say, the wind blows slightly differently. That *won't* mean that the actions I take will be substantially different.
This ultimately relies on chaotic dynamics: sensitive dependence on initial conditions. The conditions that determine which brand of milk I choose depend mostly on events happening in my brain. Those are part of my interaction with my environment, as it should be. And what happens in my brain *is me*. I am not something distinct from the processes in my brain. At least, my psychology isn't.
What makes you think those are exclusive possibilities? Why cannot something be both willed and pre-determined?
Because there are no married bachelors.
Boru
If I will something, it doesn't stop being willed simply because it was pre-determined.
(November 27, 2021 at 4:37 am)Anomalocaris Wrote:(November 26, 2021 at 9:36 pm)polymath257 Wrote: They are internal because they are *in me*. In the same sense that the fusion reactions that power the sun are in the sun, not external to it. Sure, the hydrogen in the sun ultimately came from outside of the sun, but that doesn't seem very relevant.
The point is that very minor changes to the internal state would lead to large differences in the results. That means that the 'causal nexus', if you will, is within my brain and body. That is distinct from what happens if, say, the wind blows slightly differently. That *won't* mean that the actions I take will be substantially different.
This ultimately relies on chaotic dynamics: sensitive dependence on initial conditions. The conditions that determine which brand of milk I choose depend mostly on events happening in my brain. Those are part of my interaction with my environment, as it should be. And what happens in my brain *is me*. I am not something distinct from the processes in my brain. At least, my psychology isn't.
If the conditions in your brain that determined which brand of milk you choose ultimately depends largely on the totality of your external experience and the genes which were passed externally to the first cell that would become you, is there still really a causal nexus is within you, or your “mind” simply become a convenient accounting bucket in which to place not the cause, but a collection of intermediate processes somewhere in the middle between cause and the effect in question, that so happen to occur within a particular durable configuration of molecules to which we attach particular emotive significance?
Yes, there is. if something had been slightly different within my brain, then I would have made a different decision. If, instead, something in that first cell had been slightly different, I would not have been at the store at all.
Yes, the mind (and will) are intermediate stages in a process going back billions of years. So? that doesn't change the fact that my mind is where the 'decision' was made.
