bahman wrote: ↑Fri Feb 05, 2021 7:43 pm
Dimebag wrote: ↑Fri Feb 05, 2021 11:25 am
If mind exists outside of causality, what principles does it use for decisions?
No principle. The mind can even cause an unconditional situation by making a free decision.
Dimebag wrote: ↑Fri Feb 05, 2021 11:25 am
If these principles are not causally arrived upon, how else could they be other than random chaos?
You want it, therefore, it is not random. There is an element of wanting in it. That is why you are kept responsible for your actions.
But a mind can also be logical. Surely this is an expression of causality, if then statements, etc. That means at minimum, the mind can mimic a logical causally functioning system. But, it may also operate according to other principles according to desires. We would need to determine if those desires were logical and probably causally arrived upon, or not so.
But, desire typically is logical. For example, I desire to eat because I am hungry, I am hungry so as to maintain particular energy levels within the body, which, when those levels go outside certain set points, show as the feeling of hunger, which then trigger in us the need to find food. Now I will admit, we can override those desires, at least once we reach a certain age and maturity of brain development, presumably in the prefrontal cortex which is associated with control and regulation of behaviour. Is this a case of non causal behaviour? I don’t think so, because we learn over time that our immediate desires cannot always be satisfied, for whatever reason, be it that our initial desire is simply not currently available, or maybe our desire doesn’t align with those of for example a parent or authority figure whom we may be beholden to, like your boss or teacher. So the ability to control and change one’s own behaviour is still a case of logical and likely causally consistent behaviour.
Can you give me an example of behaviours which would not be causally determined?
The typical one given is the choice between two equally similar options, which the person has no preference towards either. Obviously it wouldn’t be a case where the person is operating on autopilot, because that is not a case of choice, when we are not aware of our behaviours, so consciousness and awareness are prerequisites for any possible case of free willing.
So imagine a person is put in a white room and told to make a choice between two balls, a blue ball sitting on the left hand side, and a red ball sitting on the right hand side. This particular person has been screened so that they have no preference between blue or red colours, because the experimenters don’t want personal preference to influence the choice, as this would clearly not be an uncaused choice, but would be influenced by colour preference.
Now the problem is, this person also has a handedness, let’s say they are right handed. So they see the ball on the right and somehow this ball seems to have some increased salience and pull to the subject, so they choose the ball on the right.
Now, the experimenters start to notice this pattern of handedness preference, so, they design a different experiment, when they enter the room the balls are placed one above the other, let’s say the blue is placed on top 50% of the time, and the red on top 50% of the time. Now it seems 2/3 of people prefer the ball on top based on the results of their experiment. The experimenters determine that this result seems to coincide with certain “type A” personality traits found on the “OCEAN” personality model, with type A people (more assertive) tending to choose the upper ball almost always compared to non type A personalities, choosing either ball equally.
So now, the experimenters change the experiment again. A person enters a room, and 50% of the time the ball on the left is blue, the other 50% the ball is red. Now it seems, there is still a preference, but it seems to correlate with the particular mood the person is in, with people in a lower mood choosing the blue ball more often, and people in a more positive energetic mood choosing the red ball more often.
So, the experimenters decide to eliminate ball colour altogether, and instead, make both balls white. They label one ball A and one ball b, but, don’t let the participants know which ball is a or b, the label is only visible under a secret UV light which the experimenters have access to. Again, ball A and B are swapped 50% of the time, so as to eliminate handedness preference.
The result is now exactly 50% of people choose ball A (unknowingly) and 50% choose ball B. It seems that now, the participants are choosing completely at random. Now, would you say this is a case of free will? There are two possibilities, to choose for reasons, either known or unknown, or to choose at complete randomness. To choose for reasons, seems to me a case of a causally determined choice. To choose at random seems not to be a case of free will, because if a person has no reason to make a choice, they are not really invested in the choice, and thus there is no motivation to choose, the choice is like flipping a coin, which is random, not choice.
So, choice can either be motivated by
reasons, which seem to be a good case of a causally motivated choice, or they can be completely random, which is not free but simply a case of chance. I don’t see any room for “free will” to exist here. Now, there is obviously choice. Choice is just a case where two or more options exist for a possible action. But, actions are always motivated by reasons. If they weren’t, people would far more often break out in completely illogical random behaviour such as saying nonsensical things, or performing strange bodily motions for no reason. Reasons are the causes of behaviour, and thus, are what determines the outcomes of choices. They aren’t random. And if they seem random, that is because we don’t have access to the information of all the causal factors affecting a choice. Furthermore, the person making the choice might also not have access to the reasons motivating their choices. Their mood might affect whether they make one choice vs another and they might not even be aware of this, not to mention all the other previously mentioned reasons which motivate choices. But, suffice to say, there are reasons, and they exist based on causal conditions. So, the outcome of a choice has to be causally determined.