Philosophy Now Forum

henry quirk wrote: ↑Wed Apr 18, 2018 8:41 pm Okay, now that that's all cleared up...

Free will (choosing, self-direction) is (as) real (as the nose on your face).

Your experience of yourself in the world confirms this.

So: why do so many here deny what they know in their bones is true?

You ask an incisive question.

It's because Free Will is an uncaused cause of one's choices. Normally a choice is caused by simple causes such as hunger, thirst, addiction, affection, being a slave, being a free and happy man, blindness, and so on. The 'Free Will' which philosophers talk about and which many object to on moral grounds is not caused by any previous circumstance or law of nature and is truly random.

henry quirk wrote: ↑Wed Apr 18, 2018 8:41 pm Okay, now that that's all cleared up...

Free will (choosing, self-direction) is (as) real (as the nose on your face).

Your experience of yourself in the world confirms this.

So: why do so many here deny what they know in their bones is true?

I don’t mean to sound simplistic, but I don’t see a flaw in the following.
You’re a straight shooter so I ask.
Do you?

The following:

Take any free-will decision that you make, at the moment you make it, then pause to consider why you made that decision.

Whatever answer you find will have another “why?” attached.

Keep it up and you will you reach the final question.

You did it because you had to. Why?

Belinda,

So, because 'free will' as uncaused is nonsensical, you reject your own on-going experience of being a self-director, yeah?

#

Walker,

The flaw is 'because you had to'.

I don't have to...

...have the next cuppa coffee.

...the next cigarette.

...the next angry moment with a family member.

...and on and on.

Belinda labels "hunger, thirst, addiction, affection, being a slave, being a free and happy man, blindness, and so on" as causes when some are 'reasons' and others are 'circumstances' but not a one is 'cause' (in the basic sense of one toppling domino causeing the next domino in line to topple).

I'm hungry. This is a reason to eat. But I choose whether to eat now, eat later, or to not eat at all. I choose what I'll eat. Sure, there are consequences to my choices (if I don't eat, I starve), and -- yes -- my choices are limited by the world (I want pizza but pizza is not available). But, always, I choose (well, poorly, profitably, costly, etc.). This 'choosing' is what a free will does.

I am not uncaused, but I choose my own paths.

And I'm utterly responsible for my choices, responsible for my responses to circumstance.

Henry Quirk wrote:

So, because 'free will' as uncaused is nonsensical, you reject your own on-going experience of being a self-director, yeah?

I feel responsible for what I do. I can feel shame and remorse if I do wrong. The causes of my being able to feel shame and remorse is that I can sympathise with others and that I've been well socialised. I suppose that these causes of your good behaviour apply to you too, Henry. There is no need to suppose that there is anything random that applies.

Agency is not rooted in randomness, but in intent, deliberation, and action.

As for my 'reasons': I got 'em, but they ain't exactly the same as your 'causes'.

Belinda wrote: ↑Thu Apr 19, 2018 3:44 pm Henry Quirk wrote:

So, because 'free will' as uncaused is nonsensical, you reject your own on-going experience of being a self-director, yeah?

I feel responsible for what I do. I can feel shame and remorse if I do wrong. The causes of my being able to feel shame and remorse is that I can sympathise with others and that I've been well socialised. I suppose that these causes of your good behaviour apply to you too, Henry. There is no need to suppose that there is anything random that applies.

I like your thinking.

henry quirk wrote: ↑Thu Apr 19, 2018 2:53 pm Walker,

The flaw is 'because you had to'.

I don't have to...

...have the next cuppa coffee.

...the next cigarette.

...the next angry moment with a family member.

...and on and on.

You don’t have to, right up until the instant that you sip, that you puff, or that you shout it all out.

At the moment that you do any of those things, you have to, whether cause be hunger or appetite.

Until that moment of doing, until the moment of action (which is movement which is change which is tracks of time), exactly what it is that you might do is a matter of probability dependent upon conditions. One of the conditions is consciousness filtering awareness through the biological assemblage of compounded elements called you, at that moment.

Consciousness is either complete, or partial.
- Partial consciousness is also called, a state of consciousness.
- The less partial the consciousness, the more complete/higher the state of consciousness.

Awareness that mistakenly identifies with any particular state of consciousness, high as it may be, has erroneously assigned permanence to the understanding of reality that was shaped and filtered by the state of consciousness.
- This happens all the time, and accounts for how we end up with yutes doing stupid things under various chemical influences.
- Fortunately for the species but sadly for the individual (given the chemical influences upon consciousness portals these days, Darwin made an award to account for such evolutionary experiments.

Action can flow from many states of consciousness, but not all.

Belinda wrote: ↑Thu Apr 19, 2018 8:53 am

henry quirk wrote: ↑Wed Apr 18, 2018 8:41 pm Okay, now that that's all cleared up...

Free will (choosing, self-direction) is (as) real (as the nose on your face).

Your experience of yourself in the world confirms this.

So: why do so many here deny what they know in their bones is true?

You ask an incisive question.

It's because Free Will is an uncaused cause of one's choices. Normally a choice is caused by simple causes such as hunger, thirst, addiction, affection, being a slave, being a free and happy man, blindness, and so on. The 'Free Will' which philosophers talk about and which many object to on moral grounds is not caused by any previous circumstance or law of nature and is truly random.

Free will:



Freewill/randomness is uncaused because of the infinite regression due to the feedback by being continuous with one's own determining variables, ie circular causation.

Serendipper wrote:

Free will:

Image

Freewill/randomness is uncaused because of the infinite regression due to the feedback by being continuous with one's own determining variables, ie circular causation.

Regret I can;t copy the image.

I agree with Serendipper's description . "Circular causation " is what I've been in the habit of calling 'existence itself'.

Existence itself, or circular causation is the only thing that is the cause of itself. From this the corollary is that every event or every thing is a necessary event or thing and could not have been otherwise than it was.



Believers in Free Will might then ask if everything could not have been otherwise than it was whence human freedom to choose to do good in the future?

My response is that freedom is restricted to what reason and knowledge permits and no more. The more your choices are reasoned choices, that's to say the less they come from raw emotions, the more you are free.

Free will and randomness are both uncaused, but of course randomness doesn't imply free will, these two are basically unrelated concepts. Even if reality is truly random in the physical sense, that doesn't necessarily mean that we can change anything using our will.

"Freewill/randomness is uncaused because of the infinite regression due to the feedback by being continuous with one's own determining variables, ie circular causation."

When I was younger, more feisty, more stupid I argued the same thing: human individuals are recursive. We bend back on ourselves. We assess then we assess our assessments. We reflect on the world using ourselves as the measuring stick.

Now days (being older, less feisty, less stupid) it's enough for me to assert agency is real, ask the opposition to self-interrogate when they object, and take naps when I can.

Okay Henry but all of a sudden people are being friendlier toward me. It's almost like the guy who runs barrel is starting to notice me.

Next week I am going to see the people at PEACE OF MIND. Am I embarrassed?

Why would I be embarrassed? Shit happens.

"people are being friendlier toward me"

Not me.