How On Earth Can We Be Free?

[psycho]

Yet we do things in spite of not being aware of the future to 100% degree. A deterministic system cannot decide. Therefore, we are free.

Decision is a human concept.

It is not. It is real. As I argued, a deterministic cannot resolve a situation where there are two options. By definition, a deterministic system gets one state of affair and give another state of affair. So we are free unless you argue that options are not approacable to a level of certainty.

The factors point the arrow of our actions and yet we consider that the arrow could have pointed in any direction.

That is an illusion. The arrow points where the factors force it, even if we suppose there was another possibility.

Trying to prove that other possibilities were equivalent is hopeless.

You have options? Don't you?

"Decision" is the idea that supposes that when an agent is presented with several options to act, he can choose one following the directives of his will (which is not obliged to respond to any of the factors that form it).

That's not real. It is an illusion.

Assuming that reality is not deterministic does not imply the existence of free will.

How do you expect to prove that you could choose a different cube than the one you chose, when you are presented with two of those forms, hoping that you will choose one of them?

[bahman]

Decision is a human concept.

It is not. It is real. As I argued, a deterministic cannot resolve a situation where there are two options. By definition, a deterministic system gets one state of affair and give another state of affair. So we are free unless you argue that options are not approacable to a level of certainty.

The factors point the arrow of our actions and yet we consider that the arrow could have pointed in any direction.

That is an illusion. The arrow points where the factors force it, even if we suppose there was another possibility.

Trying to prove that other possibilities were equivalent is hopeless.

You have options? Don't you?

"Decision" is the idea that supposes that when an agent is presented with several options to act, he can choose one following the directives of his will (which is not obliged to respond to any of the factors that form it).

Are options real?

That's not real. It is an illusion.

It is not.

Assuming that reality is not deterministic does not imply the existence of the free will.

A system is either deterministic or non-deterministic (including free, or chaotic).

How do you expect to prove that you could choose a different cube than the one you chose, when you are presented with two of those forms, hoping that you will choose one of them?

The very existence of the feeling of the decision in the period that you are exposed to options and when you decide indicates that you are exposed to options. Otherwise, your attention was elsewhere.

[henry quirk]

It is an illusion.

a free willed man asserts he's a robot

abandon all hope: we live in a world

[psycho]

It is not. It is real. As I argued, a deterministic cannot resolve a situation where there are two options. By definition, a deterministic system gets one state of affair and give another state of affair. So we are free unless you argue that options are not approacable to a level of certainty.


You have options? Don't you?

"Decision" is the idea that supposes that when an agent is presented with several options to act, he can choose one following the directives of his will (which is not obliged to respond to any of the factors that form it).

Are options real?

That's not real. It is an illusion.

It is not.

Assuming that reality is not deterministic does not imply the existence of the free will.

A system is either deterministic or non-deterministic (including free, or chaotic).

How do you expect to prove that you could choose a different cube than the one you chose, when you are presented with two of those forms, hoping that you will choose one of them?

The very existence of the feeling of the decision in the period that you are exposed to options and when you decide indicates that you are exposed to options. Otherwise, your attention was elsewhere.

The existence of "options" is a human interpretation.

Reality is not deterministic (with equal factors the same consequences will not be repeated) because random factors appear intermittently in it.

In the case of the arrow, among all the factors that determine where it will point, from time to time a random factor is added.

But your idea of ​​"decision" is that the agent has a quality different from the natural one that allows him to skip at his whim, the original factors of a circumstance.

You do not consider "human will" to be a random fluctuation. You suppose that the human will "decides" according to its understanding.

No. The feeling of choosing does not prove the reality of the "decision" phenomenon.

Just as your feeling of immobility (being still) does not prove that you are not moving thousands of miles per hour through space.

[Advocate]

Will is meaningful to represent our experience of choice, but free will is not meaningful, even potentially.

[bahman]

"Decision" is the idea that supposes that when an agent is presented with several options to act, he can choose one following the directives of his will (which is not obliged to respond to any of the factors that form it).

Are options real?

That's not real. It is an illusion.

It is not.

Assuming that reality is not deterministic does not imply the existence of the free will.

A system is either deterministic or non-deterministic (including free, or chaotic).

How do you expect to prove that you could choose a different cube than the one you chose, when you are presented with two of those forms, hoping that you will choose one of them?

The very existence of the feeling of the decision in the period that you are exposed to options and when you decide indicates that you are exposed to options. Otherwise, your attention was elsewhere.

The existence of "options" is a human interpretation.

Options have a causal effect. That is the point.

Reality is not deterministic (with equal factors the same consequences will not be repeated) because random factors appear intermittently in it.

Prove that reality is random without a mind. I mean what causes randomness.

In the case of the arrow, among all the factors that determine where it will point, from time to time a random factor is added.

Why this random factor should be brought to consciousness. Why there is a fantastic correlation between what you experience, the random factor, and what happens, namely your decision and your act.

But your idea of ​​"decision" is that the agent has a quality different from the natural one that allows him to skip at his whim, the original factors of a circumstance.

Of course.

You do not consider "human will" to be a random fluctuation. You suppose that the human will "decides" according to its understanding.

What causes randomness?

No. The feeling of choosing does not prove the reality of the "decision" phenomenon.

It does. Why it should exist from an evolutionary perspective if it does not have any functioning at all?

[bahman]

Will is meaningful to represent our experience of choice, but free will is not meaningful, even potentially.

Are options real?

[psycho]

Are options real?


It is not.


A system is either deterministic or non-deterministic (including free, or chaotic).


The very existence of the feeling of the decision in the period that you are exposed to options and when you decide indicates that you are exposed to options. Otherwise, your attention was elsewhere.

The existence of "options" is a human interpretation.

Options have a causal effect. That is the point.

Reality is not deterministic (with equal factors the same consequences will not be repeated) because random factors appear intermittently in it.

Prove that reality is random without a mind. I mean what causes randomness.

In the case of the arrow, among all the factors that determine where it will point, from time to time a random factor is added.

Why this random factor should be brought to consciousness. Why there is a fantastic correlation between what you experience, the random factor, and what happens, namely your decision and your act.

But your idea of ​​"decision" is that the agent has a quality different from the natural one that allows him to skip at his whim, the original factors of a circumstance.

Of course.

You do not consider "human will" to be a random fluctuation. You suppose that the human will "decides" according to its understanding.

What causes randomness?

No. The feeling of choosing does not prove the reality of the "decision" phenomenon.

It does. Why it should exist from an evolutionary perspective if it does not have any functioning at all?

Actions have an effect. The options have no effect.

-"Prove that reality is random without a mind. I mean what causes randomness."

That is highly controversial. Nobody has any idea what a mind is or what its nature is, so it is incoherent to suppose that what we do not know has a certain effect on reality.

Randomness in reality is not a concept yet misunderstood by science. All reality seems to be probabilistic in nature.

You will never be psychologically aware of random factors.

It is wrong to suppose that all our characteristics exist out of a functional necessity to our species.

Nor is it correct to estimate that cultural developments are based solely on processes of biological evolution.

[Advocate]

[quote=bahman post_id=494041 time=1612303631 user_id=12593]
[quote=Advocate post_id=494038 time=1612302751 user_id=15238]
Will is meaningful to represent our experience of choice, but free will is not meaningful, even potentially.
[/quote]
Are options real?
[/quote]

Options represent a gap in our understanding of causality; an apparent choice counts as a choice.

[bahman]

Will is meaningful to represent our experience of choice, but free will is not meaningful, even potentially.

We are not talking about will but free will. But first, are options real?

[bahman]

The existence of "options" is a human interpretation.

Options have a causal effect. That is the point.

Reality is not deterministic (with equal factors the same consequences will not be repeated) because random factors appear intermittently in it.

Prove that reality is random without a mind. I mean what causes randomness.

In the case of the arrow, among all the factors that determine where it will point, from time to time a random factor is added.

Why this random factor should be brought to consciousness. Why there is a fantastic correlation between what you experience, the random factor, and what happens, namely your decision and your act.

But your idea of ​​"decision" is that the agent has a quality different from the natural one that allows him to skip at his whim, the original factors of a circumstance.

Of course.

You do not consider "human will" to be a random fluctuation. You suppose that the human will "decides" according to its understanding.

What causes randomness?

No. The feeling of choosing does not prove the reality of the "decision" phenomenon.

It does. Why it should exist from an evolutionary perspective if it does not have any functioning at all?

Actions have an effect. The options have no effect.

Of course, options have a causal effect. You pause, decide and only then act.

-"Prove that reality is random without a mind. I mean what causes randomness."

That is highly controversial. Nobody has any idea what a mind is or what its nature is, so it is incoherent to suppose that what we do not know has a certain effect on reality.

Then prove that reality is random without a cause.

Randomness in reality is not a concept yet misunderstood by science. All reality seems to be probabilistic in nature.

It looks probabilistic when you talk about particle and wave which none are real in the quantum regime. Probabilistic is different from random. The reality is described by the wave function. The wave function carries information. The wave function changes and its change is deterministic (Schrodinger equation).

You will never be psychologically aware of random factors.

Why not?

It is wrong to suppose that all our characteristics exist out of a functional necessity to our species.

What is the utility of decision when you observe in the whole population? What is the utility of consciousness? Nothing?

Nor is it correct to estimate that cultural developments are based solely on processes of biological evolution.

Evolution in the case of humans is a cultural and social phenomenon because we live together. It also partly depends on the environment.

[bahman]

Will is meaningful to represent our experience of choice, but free will is not meaningful, even potentially.

Are options real?

Options represent a gap in our understanding of causality; an apparent choice counts as a choice.

There is nothing wrong in our understanding of causality. A causal system by definition gets a state of affair and always returns a well-defined state of affair afterward. There is no room for options in such a worldview.

[psycho]

Of course, options have a causal effect. You pause, decide and only then act.

"Options" is an interpretation. You interpreted that this dilemma was acceptable and decided to pause.

Others saw that circumstance and did not interpret it as "options" and did not seem necessary to pause and decide.

Then prove that reality is random without a cause.

I do not understand!

It looks probabilistic when you talk about particle and wave which none are real in the quantum regime. Probabilistic is different from random. The reality is described by the wave function. The wave function carries information. The wave function changes and its change is deterministic (Schrodinger equation).

The characteristics of the entities of reality show to depend on probability.

Given the same factors, there are cases where a phenomenon will occur and other cases where the phenomenon will not occur.

Taking 100 cases with the same factors, most of them will give X and fewer times will give Y. But Y is real and unpredictable. And it is a causal factor.

Why not?

You can distinguish random processes in reality but you are not in a position to notice when one of these processes generates a consequence other than the one most likely within your nervous system.

What is the utility of decision when you observe in the whole population? What is the utility of consciousness? Nothing?

"Utility" is a human interpretation.

Evolution in the case of humans is a cultural and social phenomenon because we live together. It also partly depends on the environment.

Biological evolution is biological evolution!

[bahman]

Of course, options have a causal effect. You pause, decide and only then act.

"Options" is an interpretation. You interpreted that this dilemma was acceptable and decided to pause.

Others saw that circumstance and did not interpret it as "options" and did not seem necessary to pause and decide.

Of course, we are talking about the human experience in a situation. By options being real I mean the things that define a situation and they are matter for the future destiny of a human being. Is the option real given the definition?

Then prove that reality is random without a cause.

I do not understand!

Do you believe that randomness is without cause or it is caused?

It looks probabilistic when you talk about particle and wave which none are real in the quantum regime. Probabilistic is different from random. The reality is described by the wave function. The wave function carries information. The wave function changes and its change is deterministic (Schrodinger equation).

The characteristics of the entities of reality show to depend on probability.

Given the same factors, there are cases where a phenomenon will occur and other cases where the phenomenon will not occur.

Taking 100 cases with the same factors, most of them will give X and fewer times will give Y. But Y is real and unpredictable. And it is a causal factor.

Unpredictable is different from random. As I mentioned there is no particle in reality. That is a human interpretation borrowed from the classical regime. That is not accurate in the quantum regime.

Why not?

You can distinguish random processes in reality but you are not in a position to notice when one of these processes generates a consequence other than the one most likely within your nervous system.

I agree.

What is the utility of decision when you observe in the whole population? What is the utility of consciousness? Nothing?

"Utility" is a human interpretation.

Of course, we are talking about human in a situation. So you believe that decision is something real to human?

Evolution in the case of humans is a cultural and social phenomenon because we live together. It also partly depends on the environment.

Biological evolution is biological evolution!

I know. In the case of humans, evolution has a cultural part too. Think of language development.

[Impenitent]

It is an illusion.

a free willed man asserts he's a robot

abandon all hope: we live in a world

dare the ultimate act of revolution...

be a pseudo bozo

-Imp