I must confess, free will philosophy always confuses the pants off me, and I'm usually capable of understanding at least the basic precepts.
It always seemed to be a matter of what level of observation you are analyzing the problem from. A relative matter.
In terms of omniscient knowledge of all factors governing an action, that action would be absolutely predictable and unchangeable. Anything contrary to this would be due to random factors which again, do not illustrate a free will, quite the opposite. Mentioning quantum indeterminacy for instance seems irrelevant to the point, as it would merely be an unpredictable factor in the outcome of an action, rather than an expression of any free will in the matter.
However, from our vastly less than omniscient point of view, we have choice in what we do, and in the absence of an ability to repeat any action with a perfectly exact circumstance makes it a distinctly unfalsifiable question.
Free Will is the perfect example that self-authenticating private evidence is useless because it is indistinguishable from the illusion of it. (that phrase is so useful
)
Of course, I may have got the whole idea of free will wrong, like I said, its one of the concepts that baffles me.
My point of view, is actually quite heavily determined by my poker playing. I play hundreds of thousands of hands of poker online, and one thing you do learn is that most people do not act in an unpredictable fashion. Gather enough information, statistics, and you can make a reliable probability prediction on what they are likely to do in a given situation and more importantly connecting the dots to their actions to the motivation(in most cases their "hand").
The fact that there is the possibility that they will not act predictably, is in itself a predictable factor which can be taken into consideration. However, this variable itself only becomes apparent in those who are self-aware of their own determinism of action. Theories on successful range merging at higher levels of game (short version: acting in an unpredictable fashion in a repeated situation tuned so that unprofitable actions yield long term profitable results due to an opponents recognition of potential unpredictability and unprofitable) rely on this.
It always seemed to be a matter of what level of observation you are analyzing the problem from. A relative matter.
In terms of omniscient knowledge of all factors governing an action, that action would be absolutely predictable and unchangeable. Anything contrary to this would be due to random factors which again, do not illustrate a free will, quite the opposite. Mentioning quantum indeterminacy for instance seems irrelevant to the point, as it would merely be an unpredictable factor in the outcome of an action, rather than an expression of any free will in the matter.
However, from our vastly less than omniscient point of view, we have choice in what we do, and in the absence of an ability to repeat any action with a perfectly exact circumstance makes it a distinctly unfalsifiable question.
Free Will is the perfect example that self-authenticating private evidence is useless because it is indistinguishable from the illusion of it. (that phrase is so useful
) Of course, I may have got the whole idea of free will wrong, like I said, its one of the concepts that baffles me.
My point of view, is actually quite heavily determined by my poker playing. I play hundreds of thousands of hands of poker online, and one thing you do learn is that most people do not act in an unpredictable fashion. Gather enough information, statistics, and you can make a reliable probability prediction on what they are likely to do in a given situation and more importantly connecting the dots to their actions to the motivation(in most cases their "hand").
The fact that there is the possibility that they will not act predictably, is in itself a predictable factor which can be taken into consideration. However, this variable itself only becomes apparent in those who are self-aware of their own determinism of action. Theories on successful range merging at higher levels of game (short version: acting in an unpredictable fashion in a repeated situation tuned so that unprofitable actions yield long term profitable results due to an opponents recognition of potential unpredictability and unprofitable) rely on this.
Self-authenticating private evidence is useless, because it is indistinguishable from the illusion of it. ― Kel, Kelosophy Blog
If you’re going to watch tele, you should watch Scooby Doo. That show was so cool because every time there’s a church with a ghoul, or a ghost in a school. They looked beneath the mask and what was inside?
The f**king janitor or the dude who runs the waterslide. Throughout history every mystery. Ever solved has turned out to be. Not Magic. ― Tim Minchin, Storm
If you’re going to watch tele, you should watch Scooby Doo. That show was so cool because every time there’s a church with a ghoul, or a ghost in a school. They looked beneath the mask and what was inside?
The f**king janitor or the dude who runs the waterslide. Throughout history every mystery. Ever solved has turned out to be. Not Magic. ― Tim Minchin, Storm
