Free will

[The Big Daddy C-Master]

Apr 19, 2008 23:25:06 GMT -5 Dja Majista said:

Apr 19, 2008 22:08:35 GMT -5 The Big Daddy C-Master said:

What are you saying determines free will? What makes it free will? What are the requirements?

*sigh* well I was hoping you already had an idea of that considering this statement:

Well the fact that we can't fully control who we influence kinda proves the free will in itself if you think about it.

Don't worry about what I think. I'm wondering what your thinking right now. But if you want to know, here is our working definition again: "The innate ability of the will to ultimately determine the course of one's life through conscientious decision-making, throughout one's lifetime."
Come to think of it "throughout one's lifetime" might be extraneous. But anyway, just tell me what you were thinking constitutes a free-will so I can at least understand your logic.

It has nothing to do with whether I understand it or not, I was asking you what you think. You're making discussions more complex than it has to be on yourself. I was putting us on similar terms for the sake of discussion.

[Dja Majista]

Apr 20, 2008 6:27:38 GMT -5 The Big Daddy C-Master said:

Apr 19, 2008 23:25:06 GMT -5 Dja Majista said:

*sigh* well I was hoping you already had an idea of that considering this statement:


Don't worry about what I think. I'm wondering what your thinking right now. But if you want to know, here is our working definition again: "The innate ability of the will to ultimately determine the course of one's life through conscientious decision-making, throughout one's lifetime."
Come to think of it "throughout one's lifetime" might be extraneous. But anyway, just tell me what you were thinking constitutes a free-will so I can at least understand your logic.

It has nothing to do with whether I understand it or not, I was asking you what you think. You're making discussions more complex than it has to be on yourself. I was putting us on similar terms for the sake of discussion.

"What do you think?"
"No, what do you think?"
"No, what do you think?"
"You first."
"No, you."
"No."

Ok, I think I've already explained my opinion. But some of what your saying is vague. "You're making discussions more complex than it has to be on yourself." That doesn't tell me anything. What about it is complex? How does it need to be simplified? Do I need to explain it better? Is my form of inquiry too liberal? Give me something substantive. Like this:

What are you saying determines free will? What makes it free will? What are the requirements?

Again I'll answer the first two with a working definition: "The innate ability of the will to ultimately determine the course of one's life through conscientious decision-making." As for the requirements, that's really still up for debate. In short, I have said that a free will either needs to be independant of nature's laws to an extent, or natures laws have to allow in them multiple possible contingencies. So that the will has multiple paths to go off of.
But I think you and psyquis are still a bit unsure as to how the supercomputer I was talking about will compensate for how all minds are different. That's a fair question so let me digress a bit. Ideally, most of us (including me) like to believe that there is something great and mystical about the human mind that gives it this sacred thing we call rational capacity. But really, a neurologist will tell you that there is a physical manifestation in the brain for every experience, every thought, every action. That suggests that the brain and all of it's faculties do in fact follow natures laws, and are therefore subject to a single path in life determined entirely by causality.
Am I still making no sense?

[Dja Majista]

Anyway, Cordera, you know more about quantum physics than me. What do you have to say about the possibility of events occurring with an element of randomness in the natural world? I think your testimony might give us a nice lead at least.

[Psyquis52]

Apr 19, 2008 9:15:18 GMT -5 Dja Majista said:

You mean for your experiment? I think the experiment you proposed would work perfectly. Granted we can only speculate on what its results would be. So that's what I'm doing. "Can the computer calculate chaos?" My answer is no. However, if we were to discover a law of physics that allowed for different possible outcomes, then it would calculate just that, all possible human actions. Buy it would never be able to guess which outcome actually happens. So in that sense there are two ways humans might have free-will: the human mind does not follow the causal laws of nature to a sufficient extent; OR one of the laws of nature that governs the mind simply has multiple possible outcomes. Does that work for you?

Thank God. I thought I didn't belong here anymore.

[The Big Daddy C-Master]

Apr 20, 2008 15:32:15 GMT -5 Dja Majista said:

Anyway, Cordera, you know more about quantum physics than me. What do you have to say about the possibility of events occurring with an element of randomness in the natural world? I think your testimony might give us a nice lead at least.

Do you mean in a basic randomness or in a more specific sense (sorry if that is a stupid question, I was just making sure as the basic becomes complex).

[Dja Majista]

umm err...
When I think quantum physics, for some reason I think that it suggests certain events that can actually occur without cause. Is that true? Or do you know?

[The Big Daddy C-Master]

I always thought it was the chances of possible outcomes with a specific determined point, well in a very watered down sense anyways.

[Dja Majista]

Apr 24, 2008 22:13:45 GMT -5 The Big Daddy C-Master said:

I always thought it was the chances of possible outcomes with a specific determined point, well in a very watered down sense anyways.

could you be more elaborate?

[The Big Daddy C-Master]

Elaborate on what point, there's only so far you can go before it gets out there and irrelevant.

[Dja Majista]

I always thought it was the chances of possible outcomes with a specific determined point, well in a very watered down sense anyways.

This. I don't understand what your saying. I'm stupid; you need to explain it to me.

[The Big Daddy C-Master]

Hmm... well if I have a determined point that I label "A", it would be (in a nutshell) the chances of possible outcomes possible, given the determined point. Using random probability is different than the total outcomes possible of a certain point.

See it gets... out there, but I'm trying to explain it. Does it make more sense?

[Dja Majista]

Ah that makes a little more sense. I'm still not sure if it conforms to the whole causality thing though. I need to pick up a Quantum Physics for Dummies book or something.

[Psyquis52]

I'm reading along as well but I don't have much to say. I'm not very knowledgable on the subject of Quantum Physics.
Michael Crichton explains Quantum Physics a bit in the book Timeline.
It's kind of an explination for dummies but it does (seemibly) fall in line with C-Master's explanation.

[Dja Majista]

Man I'm gonna go look up an explanation online. Maybe I'll do it later today. I should probably start packing my stuff.

[The Big Daddy C-Master]

May 1, 2008 2:22:01 GMT -5 Psyquis52 said:

I'm reading along as well but I don't have much to say. I'm not very knowledgable on the subject of Quantum Physics.
Michael Crichton explains Quantum Physics a bit in the book Timeline.
It's kind of an explination for dummies but it does (seemibly) fall in line with C-Master's explanation.

Aww, you're so cute, when you're right.

[The Big Daddy C-Master]

May 1, 2008 12:51:46 GMT -5 Dja Majista said:

Man I'm gonna go look up an explanation online. Maybe I'll do it later today. I should probably start packing my stuff.

On your way back?

[Dja Majista]

Yeah I'm coming back later today. I haven't found the answer to that question though. Maybe I'll stop by the library while I'm home.

[Psyquis52]

The Library. Psht!

You won't find anything of interest there.

[The Big Daddy C-Master]

May 6, 2008 21:05:17 GMT -5 Psyquis52 said:

The Library. Psht!

You won't find anything of interest there.

Sometimes cute girls are there.

[Psyquis52]

Not at my library.

[Dja Majista]

Noooooooo...
I haven't gone yet.
I know this is a major disappointment.

[The Big Daddy C-Master]

Gone to the bathroom?

[Dja Majista]

context! context!

[Psyquis52]

I have free will and I can prove it.

I just bought a Coke and chose not to drink it.
How do you like dem apples.

[Dja Majista]

Well the whole idea is:

All voluntary actions--actions you have a choice in--are done for a reason: you're probably not drinking the coke just to prove me wrong (yeah, thought I didn't notice, huh? pfft. )

All reasoning is produced only by influences within the natural world.

Every influence on the brain existing in the natural world occurs strictly by the constant laws of nature.

Laws of nature are inevitable.

Therefore every voluntary action a human is capable of occurs inevitably.

You not drinking your coke was inevitable.

[Psyquis52]

My not drinking a coke was because I wanted a Sprite.

There's nothing inevitable about my ability to be clumsy. It's about as chaotic as one can get.

Two aisles of Sprite in the machine and I get a coke. Hmph.

(Right now I've taken up the ideal of arguing like a bare-faced idiot. Just treat me like one and we'll get along just fine.)

[The Big Daddy C-Master]

Damn, Psy owned.

I hate when machines do that, seriously though.

[Dja Majista]

Just two problems...

May 11, 2008 23:14:23 GMT -5 Psyquis52 said:

My not drinking a coke was because I wanted a Sprite.

ok cool beans. Key word because implies the voluntary action has some kind of reason for it: I wanted a Sprite.

There's nothing inevitable about my ability to be clumsy. It's about as chaotic as one can get.

Well your brain is the organ that determines how clumsy you are. And the brain follows the laws of nature exactly (presumably).

(Right now I've taken up the ideal of arguing like a bare-faced idiot. Just treat me like one and we'll get along just fine.)

[Psyquis52]

May 13, 2008 12:28:52 GMT -5 Dja Majista said:

ok cool beans. Key word because implies the voluntary action has some kind of reason for it: I wanted a Sprite.

What about involuntary action? What if I was sleep-walking?

Oh and by the way, the keyword wasn't because. If you were paying attention you'd notice it was wanted because it's what I desired. Therefore making it my keyword. I wanted to use that word because it was what I desired therefore I wanted it.

Well your brain is the organ that determines how clumsy you are. And the brain follows the laws of nature exactly (presumably).

My brain has nothing to do with the idea of me tripping on something that wasn't there! Which I did just the other day.
Also what does my brain have to do with getting soap in my eyes in the shower? Huh?
My clumsiness is a literal example of chaos personified.

Clearly you are outclassed my friend. My arguing skills are far beyond that of your own.

[The Big Daddy C-Master]

You two are getting along well.