I will give £500 to anyone who can prove that we have free will

[Jack_Sparrow]

Let me try to focus on the question...
Q0: Do I have freewill?


Rewording...
Q0: Do 'I' have a commodity known as 'will' which is 'free'?


This is equivalent to two simultaneous questions...
Q1: Do 'I' have a commodity known as 'will'?
Q2: Is that 'will' 'free'?


Definitions...
Free = 'Independent from X'
Will = 'internal drive (via process of conciousness and matter-energy laws)'


Expanding...
Q1: Do 'I' have 'internal drive (via process of consciousness and matter-energy laws)'? = YES
Q2: Is that 'internal drive (via process of consciousness and matter-energy laws)' 'independent from X'?


Depends what X is...
If X = matter-energy laws then Q2 = NO and Q0 = NO
If X = everything all inclusive then Q2 = NO and Q0 = NO.
If X = specific external things, then possibly Q2 =YES and Q0 = YES

Thus, before we can usefully debate this, we need to settle on what the question means, that is, what X actually is.

[minorwork]

Quote by: Tycoon You might make one choice the first minute and a different choice the next simply because not all the information was available to you. That does not make it any more free will. A choice is still a chemical reaction that you have no control over. Your senses receive information and send it to the brain where it is processed. You have no control over any of that. No, not at all. You can be completely ignorant of what is going on, but a choice is still a biological process. The nature of the choice does not affect your lack of control over it.

Maybe a demonstration is available showing you are correct that "You have no control over any of that."

Consider the spinning silhouette here: http://i207.photobucket.com/albums/b...lak8/2007b.gif
What is it that you see and are you unable to control? Can you control the direction of spin? Sure. Easiest by looking at the foot shadow. Can you swap symmetry? Yes. The raised leg is her right or left depending on the direction of rotation. Can she not rotate, but change directions and only go back and forth? Again yes. Easiest is while she faces the observer. Very difficult while she faces away.

While some of the above observations of the silhouette are easy to see, others are difficult and require greater exercise of will to overcome the automatic hard wired mind/brain.

[Median]

The reason this issue is so hard to prove is that we have the term "free will" which like jack sparrow so kindly broke down for us is hard to place in terms of humanity.

If we truly are not free and every action we think we choose to take is chemically or mathematically made for us before we choose to take it, then wouldn't our creation and use of the term "Free Will" be just a name for those "chemical reactions" that happen in each of us that make us do the things we do? Meaning we do not judge the chemical ( cause ) reactions we each have, but the outcome ( effect? ). And wouldnt that mean that we accept this as "individual " free will?

[minorwork]

Begging for a definition of free will. The feeling of having a choice. Free will.

Example: Gender preference. If it can be shown by analysis of the genome that a gene for the homosexual phenotype in men exists, then the justification as determined by science, is there for same sex marriages.

Unfortunately there are many who claim it is a choice. The fundamentalist religious crowd for example. They are mistaken that man's nature is one of having a choice, a matter of free will, a test by the almighty to be judged by his followers as to the status of deserving of his love. Nonsense. While there is much that a determined application of concentrated attention can do, it is best to accept what is given by the DNA with the caveat that if surrounded by those that persecute gays, then concealment should be the order of the day until the light of reason shines thru.

Choice is not easily available in every venue, breathing and such, but choices matter for the effect of feeling accepted by life. The daughter that slashes her wrists, who ingests a bottle of pills, who wakes in unknown beds with unknown men, and calls from a jail cell. She does not feel accepted by life. The first thing from her lips is the phrase, "It's not my fault!" Free will is not in her vocabulary. She does not feel she has a choice.

Emotions do not bend to reason in such cases. In order to understand and aid those lost in the pit of despair we must bend reason's concept of free will to deal with our own and other's teeterings on the edge of the abyss.

[Median]

Quote by: minorwork Begging for a definition of free will. The feeling of having a choice. Free will. Example: Gender preference. If it can be shown by analysis of the genome that a gene for the homosexual phenotype in men exists, then the justification as determined by science, is there for same sex marriages. Unfortunately there are many who claim it is a choice. The fundamentalist religious crowd for example. They are mistaken that man's nature is one of having a choice, a matter of free will, a test by the almighty to be judged by his followers as to the status of deserving of his love. Nonsense. While there is much that a determined application of concentrated attention can do, it is best to accept what is given by the DNA with the caveat that if surrounded by those that persecute gays, then concealment should be the order of the day until the light of reason shines thru. Choice is not easily available in every venue, breathing and such, but choices matter for the effect of feeling accepted by life. The daughter that slashes her wrists, who ingests a bottle of pills, who wakes in unknown beds with unknown men, and calls from a jail cell. She does not feel accepted by life. The first thing from her lips is the phrase, "It's not my fault!" Free will is not in her vocabulary. She does not feel she has a choice. Emotions do not bend to reason in such cases. In order to understand and aid those lost in the pit of despair we must bend reason's concept of free will to deal with our own and other's teeterings on the edge of the abyss.

You can take that as far as you want, to a point where no man or woman can possibly do any wrong on the count of having a reason for it.
What makes people good, is having temptations and difficulties, and surviving past them, making them stronger.

[minorwork]

Quote by: Median You can take that as far as you want, to a point where no man or woman can possibly do any wrong on the count of having a reason for it. What makes people good, is having temptations and difficulties, and surviving past them, making them stronger.

Don't know if you get my drift. I think that Tycoon, and others thinking there is no free will, open the door for the plea of "It's not my fault." The daughter calling from jail with the same plea has a clear misunderstanding of her position in life. 17 is the magic age where the troubles of the world legally climb on your shoulders and you are presupposed to have "free will" and choice.

I seek an intelligent way to change the daughter's position to that of "I did it. I'm responsible." I don't know, maybe an initiation into adulthood by a rite of passage that is a bit more structured than going out, getting laid, drunk, and high with friends.

What makes people good, is having temptations and difficulties, and surviving past them, making them stronger.

I have trouble with your judgement of what makes people good. I would have no trouble if the wording was; What makes people feel good ...

[Median]

Quote by: minorwork Don't know if you get my drift. I think that Tycoon, and others thinking there is no free will, open the door for the plea of "It's not my fault." The daughter calling from jail with the same plea has a clear misunderstanding of her position in life. 17 is the magic age where the troubles of the world legally climb on your shoulders and you are presupposed to have "free will" and choice. I seek an intelligent way to change the daughter's position to that of "I did it. I'm responsible." I don't know, maybe an initiation into adulthood by a rite of passage that is a bit more structured than going out, getting laid, drunk, and high with friends. I have trouble with your judgement of what makes people good. I would have no trouble if the wording was; What makes people feel good ...

My mistake, I did read it wrong, you are correct, it would seem to give people the ability to say " its not my fault ".

[Shade]

Quote by: Leveller In essence, to have free will, you must be free to do what you want, when you want.

Is this the sum total of your definition of "free will?"

Did you choose to offer £500?

Did you choose when to offer it?

[Matt W]

Shade effectively beat me to it. Did you choose to post this? Did you choose to offer the cash? Are you free to decide whether we have offered significant proof? Even if we have, are you free to not bother sending the cash? Did you choose to lie, or to tell the truth?

By the way, if £500 is too pricy, I'm only down in Reading, a drink'll do fine....

[Tycoon]

Shade effectively beat me to it. Did you choose to post this? Did you choose to offer the cash? Are you free to decide whether we have offered significant proof? Even if we have, are you free to not bother sending the cash? Did you choose to lie, or to tell the truth?

Aaah, but what does it mean to choose to do something?

To choose to do something is to make a choice. A choice is... what? A choice is no more than a chemical reaction in your brain, correct?

All chemical reactions have a cause and an effect. Therefore, your choice had a cause, a cause that you had no control over. You have no control over the chemical reactions that occur in your brain as they are simply responses to external stimuli.

You have no more control over choice than you do your heartbeat.

[oades11]

Would those of you reading this agree that creative intelligence is necessary for 'free will' to exist?

If there were a computer AI with creative intelligence, would it not have free will? The comparison of the development and function of our brains to that of a computer AI is a good vantage point to see the various perspectives of free will versus determinism, I think. Artificial computers are commonly thought to be restricted by their programming and can compute information only as well as the information programmed into them allows, and this is strikingly similar to the way determinism is presented; except, rather than where there is a bunch of data that is the programming of an AI, there is programming that decides the way our brain functions. Since we are virtually the only entities that are commonly considered to have free will, what is it about the way our brains function make us different from a computer program?

It seems some of you think free will is a priori knowledge, some inherent truth that's evident with every minor, seemingly arbitrary decision. Yet, you fail to make this simple aforementioned comparison and lose focus of debating the actual topic at hand, because you feel you've already arrived at the conclusion- that is, that free will is evident with every word I'm typing. Sorry, but logic, insofar as it is useful here (and not in the quantum world), doesn't work that way, so let's stick to the premises first.
I went out on a limb in an earlier post to suggest a case for free will, but none of it is really convincing: The idea that our brain's evolution allows us to have free will, that we can subconsciously sort through the random information the quantum world generates and base our thoughts and behavior on that useful information, with every infinitesimal change in atomic behavior creating an alternate universe where the subatomic particles would be observed in a different location at the same point in time, explains away determinism completely.

This is a debate forum of philosophy, and it's intellectually irresponsible for anyone to claim free will or determinism exists with complete certainty. After all, how could any of us know what is outside our own reality, things happening in alternate universe? For the purposes of utility, however, I hardly expect those of you out there to base your behavior on the uncertainty of free will or determinism. It is far more useful, and probably a lot more healthy, to consider that your choices are indeed uniquely chosen by you. That's part of the problem I think- because for this debate to progress beyond what has already been mentioned, we've got to care more about the truth than corporeal conveniences.

[Tycoon]

Would those of you reading this agree that creative intelligence is necessary for 'free will' to exist?

What exactly do you mean by creative intelligence?

If there were a computer AI with creative intelligence, would it not have free will? The comparison of the development and function of our brains to that of a computer AI is a good vantage point to see the various perspectives of free will versus determinism, I think. Artificial computers are commonly thought to be restricted by their programming and can compute information only as well as the information programmed into them allows, and this is strikingly similar to the way determinism is presented; except, rather than where there is a bunch of data that is the programming of an AI, there is programming that decides the way our brain functions. Since we are virtually the only entities that are commonly considered to have free will, what is it about the way our brains function make us different from a computer program?

We ourselves are robots, computers, simply of a different nature. While computers and robots are run by circuits and electricity we are run by chemicals reactions. To be short, if a robot were designed with similar senses to our own and the ability to process the information received and determine a response, it would have the same level of consciousness as ourselves.

The idea that our brain's evolution allows us to have free will, that we can subconsciously sort through the random information the quantum world generates and base our thoughts and behavior on that useful information, with every infinitesimal change in atomic behavior creating an alternate universe where the subatomic particles would be observed in a different location at the same point in time, explains away determinism completely.

But you have defeated your own argument. If all of this is acheived subconsciously then it is no more under our control than the way determinsim describes it. And it certainly isn't acheived consciously.

[minorwork]

Quote by: oades11 Would those of you reading this agree that creative intelligence is necessary for 'free will' to exist?

Shields down.
Maybe, if I knew what free will was. And if I knew what creative intelligence was. And the biggie, exist. Free will cannot "be" in the same manner as a book. Creative intelligence has the same problem. I have a hard enough time with free will as a "feeling of having a choice." We can't point to feelings either but they are more easily part of our day to day experience. I feel hungry, thirsty, horny, drunk, high, angry, like I'm gonna puke.

If there were a computer AI with creative intelligence, would it not have free will? The comparison of the development and function of our brains to that of a computer AI is a good vantage point to see the various perspectives of free will versus determinism, I think. Artificial computers are commonly thought to be restricted by their programming and can compute information only as well as the information programmed into them allows, and this is strikingly similar to the way determinism is presented; except, rather than where there is a bunch of data that is the programming of an AI, there is programming that decides the way our brain functions. Since we are virtually the only entities that are commonly considered to have free will, what is it about the way our brains function make us different from a computer program?

Artificial computer? Are you sure you want to stick with that term? What does it run on artificial electrical energy? Artificial programs created by artificial programmers etc. etc. etc.

It seems some of you think free will is a priori knowledge, some inherent truth that's evident with every minor, seemingly arbitrary decision. Yet, you fail to make this simple aforementioned comparison and lose focus of debating the actual topic at hand, because you feel you've already arrived at the conclusion- that is, that free will is evident with every word I'm typing. Sorry, but logic, insofar as it is useful here (and not in the quantum world), doesn't work that way, so let's stick to the premises first.

I don't kow what the pronoun 'aforementioned' refers to.

I went out on a limb in an earlier post to suggest a case for free will, but none of it is really convincing: The idea that our brain's evolution allows us to have free will, that we can subconsciously sort through the random information the quantum world generates and base our thoughts and behavior on that useful information, with every infinitesimal change in atomic behavior creating an alternate universe where the subatomic particles would be observed in a different location at the same point in time, explains away determinism completely.

What post number was that? I would have no complaints if you would add a bit to your sentence thusly: The idea that our brain's evolution allows us to feel like we have free will... Which interpretation of quantum theory are you working with? I've heard of nine. Copenhagen, Extreme Copenhagen( my preferred interpretation), Decoherence and Consistent Histories, Many Worlds (yours sounds like this), Transactional, Bohm, GRW (Ghirardi, Rimini, and Weber), Ithaca, and Quantum Logic.

This is a debate forum of philosophy, and it's intellectually irresponsible for anyone to claim free will or determinism exists with complete certainty.

Yes or to claim we agree on what the hell they are.

After all, how could any of us know what is outside our own reality, things happening in alternate universe?

Doing great till you admit more than one reality.

For the purposes of utility, however, I hardly expect those of you out there to base your behavior on the uncertainty of free will or determinism. It is far more useful, and probably a lot more healthy, to consider that your choices are indeed uniquely chosen by you. That's part of the problem I think- because for this debate to progress beyond what has already been mentioned, we've got to care more about the truth than corporeal conveniences.

Corporeal. I think I woke up with one after a big party. Oades, I looked it up and still don't know that if one come up and bit me on the ass that I'd know what it was. You sound like a maintenance boss of mine whose philosophy on down time explanations consisted of: If you can't sway them with facts, baffle them with bullshit. You spoke of logic not applying to the quantum world. The Quantum Logic interpretation changes the rules of logic to fit the observed facts. I don't think it is useful as anything could be "explained" by adopting rules of logic to fit. Oh well. If it was easy we'd put it in the dishwasher and forget it.

[Shade]

Quote by: Tycoon A choice is no more than a chemical reaction in your brain...

What is your proof of this?

[Tycoon]

What is your proof of this?

That's the definition of the brain - an organ composed of neurons that receives information from the sensory neurons and process that information to determine the appropriate response.

Here's Wikipedia on the function of the brain:

Brain - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Vertebrate brains receive signals through nerves arriving from the sensors of the organism. These signals are then processed throughout the central nervous system; reactions are formulated based upon reflex and learned experiences. A similarly extensive nerve network delivers signals from a brain to control important muscles throughout the body.

[Winter wind]

Wait, what's our definition of free will first off?

I mean, self-consciousness grants some degree of free-will, no?

[Tycoon]

Wait, what's our definition of free will first off?

Free-will is best defined as your ability to make choices free from outside influence. But choice, when viewed biologically, is a chemical reaction in your brain that you have no control over. Your senses send input to the brain which is processed and then a response is determined.

I mean, self-consciousness grants some degree of free-will, no?

That's a common assumption, but not backed up by anything.

[minorwork]

Quote by: Tycoon Free-will is best defined as your ability to make choices free from outside influence.

Free-will is better described as; the feeling of having a choice. Sometimes you have it, sometimes you don't.

[Tycoon]

Free-will is better described as; the feeling of having a choice.

No, that is the illusion of free-will. Free-will, as I said, is the control to make choices without outside influence. But that cannot be acheived, which is why you have altered the definition.

Sometimes you have it, sometimes you don't.

We never have it, I've explained why several times now.

[minorwork]

Shields up.

Quote by: Tycoon No, that is the illusion of free-will. Free-will, as I said, is the control to make choices without outside influence. But that cannot be acheived, which is why you have altered the definition. We never have it, I've explained why several times now.

Mine is testable within the illusion. My girlfriend got pregnant and I felt I had no choice but to marry her. Or a woman: I'm pregnant and i feel I can terminate or carry to term. This is real life stuff, illusion or whatever you want to define it as. We are seeking definitions that have meaning. Yours, well, is pretty cerebral and is vulnerable as 'a priori' whereas mine is empirically determined by the individual. Mine is capable of recognizing conditions such as Roe v Wade that enable choice. The absence of Roe v Wade would be choice limiting.

Human nature is to crave choice. It's called freedom.