Free will

[Edwardo Piet]

Fuck yes. Seen that Gif a few times before and every exposure reinforces the coolness of it in my brain.

[Edwardo Piet]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mere-exposure_effect

[Shadow_Man]

IATIA,

The evidence overwhelmingly says we make choices freely.

You keep saying that. There is no evidence at all that shows we have free will.

I presented evidence. Your assertion that I did not carries no weight. Where is your response to what I presented? Demonstrate that it is not evidence.

Your assertion and belief is not proof of free will.

You do not seem to comprehend the difference between evidence and proof. I unequivocally stated that I have no proof of free will. I am not trying to prove free will. I presented evidence of free will. I believe I have free will because of the evidence. Demonstrate that what I presented is not evidence.

Do you have any reply to any of the other aspects of my post, or do you consider your sound byte adequate?
Where is the evidence that I skimmed over the randomness in your cited articles?
Are those two articles your evidence against Free Will?
If not, can you summarize your evidence?
Where is the proof of your counter-claim?

Shadow_Man

[The Grand Nudger]

Did your evidence consist of anything -more- than the equivocation of choice and free will?  What more needs be said?

[T.J.]

God is a David Cage game.

[Shadow_Man]

Rhythm,

Did your evidence consist of anything -more- than the equivocation of choice and free will?  What more needs be said?

Interesting question.

Foreknowledge precludes freewill in that nothing else -can- happen, but that which said foreknowledge describes, or else it isn't foreknowledge at all.  No choice can be made, no diverging paths of decision. One stream, one outcome, one conclusion, no deviation.

In my version of choice or free will there is at least the possibility that you could choose a - or- b.  This is not the case, in the case of a true claim to foreknowledge.  It's just a, or just b..whichever is described by the subject with foreknowledge.

When I speak of free will, I am speaking of our ability to make up our own minds and make our own choices within our ability to enact them.

From the very start of this thread we have both presented Free Will and choice as basically synonymous. If you wish to now represent them otherwise, then I personally do indeed need a bit more to be said than just a sound byte declaring that to be an equivocation. Please clarify/explain.

While you are at it, I wouldn't mind a reply to post #202.

Regards,
Shadow_Man

[Edwardo Piet]

No one is doubting will or choice, the whole point is the question whether it's free.

[The Grand Nudger]

Interesting question.

That you failed to answer. Instead going for a tenuous TQ.

From the very start of this thread we have both presented Free Will and choice as basically synonymous. If you wish to now represent them otherwise, then I personally do indeed need a bit more to be said than just a sound byte declaring that to be an equivocation. Please clarify/explain.

We most definitely do not.  Regardless of whether or not there is, in actuality, any possible future in which I "choose b"....we still describe going with a as "choosing a".  I simply don;t see how I might argue or establish that my choosing A -or- B is an issue of free will, without invoking special sauce, thus scuttling my argument just as effectively and for the same reason as equivocating between choice and free will. It's sloppy and uninformative thinking. That's -regardless- of whether or not any being posessess foreknowledge, or foreknowledge is possible.

While you are at it, I wouldn't mind a reply to post #202.

Sure, lemme give her a look.

[The Grand Nudger]

The conditions are irrelevant. In an absurdist universe where there is no cause or condition..a true claim to foreknowledge is still true. In a fatalist universe where the only cause or condition is that outcomes are fatalistic, a true claim to foreknowledge is still true. In a closed loop of causal determinism, a true claim to foreknowledge is still true. This is a demand of the claim regardless of the circumstances which led to it, even if there -are- no circumstances which led to it...which is why discussing those circumstances is an irrelevancy with regards to the claims being considered for compatibility.

I don't think you realize the import of your statements. If the conditions producing an outcome are irrelevant to true foreknowledge of the outcome, then any conditions are possible, and no conditions can be ruled out. Thus, free will as the condition that produces the outcome cannot be ruled out, but you have been claiming throughout this entire thread that free will must necessarily be ruled out.

There -are- no conditions in an absurdist universe. It's not an issue of possibility. That;s one of the things that distinguishes absurdist universes from fatalistic universes, deterministic universes, or "other" in context. In a fatalistic universe, similarly, there is no condition -for such and such being true-, such and such is true because such and such is fated. Deterministic universes have conditions, they are defined by them...but in a deterministic universe we have no free will regardless of our possession of choices, or options.

My comments concern what is true regardless in -any- of these types of universes (whichever ours may be). Your response only speaks to the one type of universe in which free will is false by default, a universe of conditions for such and such, a deterministic universe. I don;t doubt that our choices form the conditions for some event "x" - I wonder in what way they can be said to be free, and of what.

If this all sounds familiar, that's because it's a restatement of the post -you quoted- in response. Making me wonder whether or not you had any free will in responding the way you did? Could you have "freely willed" otherwise, or was your choice to object, and object in such a manner, a consequence of conditions beyond your ability to influence?

For my part, I can accept and communicate to others that I am personally, unable to influence my choice of a hard determinists universe. It wouldn't even matter if I -wanted- to believe otherwise (which I do, it would be much more comforting), I can't. I must "choose A"...and not only that, I must object to B, and I must do so in the manner that I have done.

I don't think that there's a quantitative difference between "me" and other computational architectures, and I don;t even have a choice in that, let alone a free will choice. While I can appreciate that some or all of this may sound counter-intuitive to you (and hey...me too!), I can only state, before you ask... that our intuitions - whatever they may be and however they may be arrived at - appear to be in the business of producing -useful- conclusions, their accuracy being an entirely separate issue.