Philosophy Now Forum

SpheresOfBalance wrote: I see that free will, as it pertains to man, is the freedom of will WITHIN and BOUND by the constraints of what it is in PHYSICALLY being a human. Which means that as to the mind, within these physical constraints, lies the TRUE sense of freedom of will. Anything else is the nonsense of children or the crazy.

Within this freedom of will that I have outlined, one can use knowledge to change ones will to suit their own needs, such that anything that's physically possible, any man can will himself to do, understand, acknowledge, etc. He has that freedom. It just takes a little time, as it's not as instantaneous as he might prefer.

Mark Question wrote:

SpheresOfBalance wrote: I see that free will, as it pertains to man, is the freedom of will WITHIN and BOUND by the constraints of what it is in PHYSICALLY being a human. Which means that as to the mind, within these physical constraints, lies the TRUE sense of freedom of will. Anything else is the nonsense of children or the crazy.

Within this freedom of will that I have outlined, one can use knowledge to change ones will to suit their own needs, such that anything that's physically possible, any man can will himself to do, understand, acknowledge, etc. He has that freedom. It just takes a little time, as it's not as instantaneous as he might prefer.

how the true sense of freedom of will lies within those physical constraints?
Because to look at freedom as though it's not contained in the physical, is insane!
or should i ask like nonsense-hater g.e. moore: "What exactly do you mean by that?"
logically i see no freedom, within and bound by the constraints of what it is in physically being a human.
Because you're insane and therefore can only see freedom beyond reality. I on the other hand, have both my feet firmly planted on the ground, seeing reality and understanding its constraints, knowing full well that when the term Free Will was coined it was with mans reality in mind, and not some impossibly fantastic, fictitious bit of extreme idealism that could never be attained.

knowledge and mind are the same deterministic universe?
Currently, their maximum boundaries are, but do you know it all? Do you know of everything of the universe, with certainty? Of course not! But with the freedom of your will, is the only way you can even begin, to approach it, or not.

if autonomous learning robot with memory looks very complex, should we have the feeling that there lies some freedom in it?
The difference is that a robot is programmed by another, and cannot program itself. Humans are at "first" programmed by another, but then they start to program themselves, and there is where your freedom of will resides. If there was no freedom of will, we'd still be living in the stone age.
turing test will tell the truth of freedom of will?
Maybe, maybe not.

SpheresOfBalance wrote: knowledge and mind are the same deterministic universe?
Currently, their maximum boundaries are, but do you know it all? Do you know of everything of the universe, with certainty? Of course not! But with the freedom of your will, is the only way you can even begin, to approach it, or not.

if autonomous learning robot with memory looks very complex, should we have the feeling that there lies some freedom in it?
The difference is that a robot is programmed by another, and cannot program itself. Humans are at "first" programmed by another, but then they start to program themselves, and there is where your freedom of will resides. If there was no freedom of will, we'd still be living in the stone age.

Mark Question wrote:

SpheresOfBalance wrote: knowledge and mind are the same deterministic universe?
Currently, their maximum boundaries are, but do you know it all? Do you know of everything of the universe, with certainty? Of course not! But with the freedom of your will, is the only way you can even begin, to approach it, or not.

do science know of everything of the universe?
Of course not!

But with the freedom of your will, is the only way you can even begin, to approach it, not with deterministic theories, predictions and technologies of science?
Theories and predictions are not necessarily deterministic.

is scientifically deterministic freedom of your will logically inconsistent thinking, silly thought from science-free stone age?
Our language barrier is exemplified in the above sentence. Could you please rephrase/expound?

if autonomous learning robot with memory looks very complex, should we have the feeling that there lies some freedom in it?
The difference is that a robot is programmed by another, and cannot program itself. Humans are at "first" programmed by another, but then they start to program themselves, and there is where your freedom of will resides. If there was no freedom of will, we'd still be living in the stone age.

The difference is that a robot is at "first" programmed by other, but then they start to learn themselves, where free humans start to program themselves, and there is where your freedom of will resides? does that sound silly, or what? deterministic robots learn and free humans program themselves? is that inconsistent thinking, or what?
It would seem that our language barrier has again reared it's ugly head, but this time it's you that didn't understand me. I never said robots learn, you did! But I see that it's impossible for a robot to ask the next question, that is begged, after finding answers for those that lead up to that potential begged question, necessarily like that of a human, as the will comes a bit from desire, which no robot could possibly have, that parallels that of humans; that of human interests.

SpheresOfBalance wrote: But with the freedom of your will, is the only way you can even begin, to approach it, not with deterministic theories, predictions and technologies of science?
Theories and predictions are not necessarily deterministic.

is scientifically deterministic freedom of your will logically inconsistent thinking, silly thought from science-free stone age?
Our language barrier is exemplified in the above sentence. Could you please rephrase/expound?

It would seem that our language barrier has again reared it's ugly head, but this time it's you that didn't understand me. I never said robots learn, you did! But I see that it's impossible for a robot to ask the next question, that is begged, after finding answers for those that lead up to that potential begged question, necessarily like that of a human, as the will comes a bit from desire, which no robot could possibly have, that parallels that of humans; that of human interests.

Mark Question wrote:

SpheresOfBalance wrote: But with the freedom of your will, is the only way you can even begin, to approach it, not with deterministic theories, predictions and technologies of science?
Theories and predictions are not necessarily deterministic.

is scientifically deterministic freedom of your will logically inconsistent thinking, silly thought from science-free stone age?
Our language barrier is exemplified in the above sentence. Could you please rephrase/expound?

scientific systematic logical theories and predictions are not necessarily deterministic?
Not 'necessarily!' One cannot know they are absolutely correct. They demand proof, empirical evidence.
deterministic is not necessarily deterministic?
I don't know what you're getting at here. Determinism as far as it pertains to freewill, does not mean that one's life is predetermined, everyone has a choice, to decide for them selves. Everyone has the freedom to will their course, thus their will is free. Again, humans are bound by what it is in physically being human, but ones mind can choose from any number of solutions or stop trying to solve, until they find additional solutions to consider, thus ones course in life is not determined, it is freely willed. This is the only question of any significance as to free will, as to ones life.

It would seem that our language barrier has again reared it's ugly head, but this time it's you that didn't understand me. I never said robots learn, you did! But I see that it's impossible for a robot to ask the next question, that is begged, after finding answers for those that lead up to that potential begged question, necessarily like that of a human, as the will comes a bit from desire, which no robot could possibly have, that parallels that of humans; that of human interests.

robots can not have learning algorithms? robots can never be as complex physical structures as humans? or even more complex than humans? robots can not be intentional talking machines? or are you demanding robots desiring soap operas and crimes of passion, smoking and having cancers like humans? robots are not humans? what is the point?

(robots can not run...oops...
Programmed to!
robots can not be team players...oops..
Programmed to!
robots can not think better than chess players...oops..
Programmed to!
robots can not fly jumbo jets...oops...
Programmed to!
robots can not write news and run the stock markets, power plants, etc. whole human infrastructures...?
Programmed to!
And none of those functions were learned, they were programmed to.
future humans can not...? stone age humans could not fly?)

NO! Robots can only be programmed to the extent of the knowledge of the programmer at the time of the programming. One cannot know if the programming considers all potentials at the time of programming. As soon as the programmer has to reprogram due to new concerns, concepts, or mission parameters the robot has failed the test of self learning. It's not the same with humans. A robot cannot evolve like a human can.

SpheresOfBalance wrote: scientific systematic logical theories and predictions are not necessarily deterministic?
Not 'necessarily!' One cannot know they are absolutely correct. They demand proof, empirical evidence.
deterministic is not necessarily deterministic?
I don't know what you're getting at here. Determinism as far as it pertains to freewill, does not mean that one's life is predetermined, everyone has a choice, to decide for them selves. Everyone has the freedom to will their course, thus their will is free. Again, humans are bound by what it is in physically being human, but ones mind can choose from any number of solutions or stop trying to solve, until they find additional solutions to consider, thus ones course in life is not determined, it is freely willed. This is the only question of any significance as to free will, as to ones life.

A robot cannot evolve like a human can.

Mark Question wrote:

SpheresOfBalance wrote: scientific systematic logical theories and predictions are not necessarily deterministic?
Not 'necessarily!' One cannot know they are absolutely correct. They demand proof, empirical evidence.
deterministic is not necessarily deterministic?
I don't know what you're getting at here. Determinism as far as it pertains to freewill, does not mean that one's life is predetermined, everyone has a choice, to decide for them selves. Everyone has the freedom to will their course, thus their will is free. Again, humans are bound by what it is in physically being human, but ones mind can choose from any number of solutions or stop trying to solve, until they find additional solutions to consider, thus ones course in life is not determined, it is freely willed. This is the only question of any significance as to free will, as to ones life.

empirically absolutely correct theories and predictions sounds illogical thinking.
maybe determinism, as a metaphysical theory, was not the right word. but logically determined causality, in logic and in all systematical thinking does mean itself, correct thinking.
systematical thinking has determined causal structure. there ain't no such thing as a free lunch in it. or free will. only inaccuracy.

in physics determined systematical theories, whole universe is determined by physical processes. everything in it. all. what is outside the physical theories "universe" is another question. maybe the truth of the god and the free will is out there somewhere, out of boundaries of scientific empiricism?

A robot cannot evolve like a human can.

now or never? what do you know about future robots? do you think word "robot" can not evolve also semantically? like modern "apes" today consists of orangutans, gorillas, chimpanzees, bonobos...and all humans, not only negros?

SpheresOfBalance wrote: We are obviously talking about two separate things, I don't see that free will has anything to do with science, it only has ever been about the human condition, as one looks at human failings/success's.[/color]

So as it pertains to the OP. Free Will exists only, within the framework of what it is, in being a physical human. To entertain any other notion, is fanciful at best, and ridiculous at worst.

Mark Question wrote:

SpheresOfBalance wrote: We are obviously talking about two separate things, I don't see that free will has anything to do with science, it only has ever been about the human condition, as one looks at human failings/success's.

So as it pertains to the OP. Free Will exists only, within the framework of what it is, in being a physical human. To entertain any other notion, is fanciful at best, and ridiculous at worst.

are we talking about the world? are we modelling it? like old days people talk about weather and nowadays people watch scientific forecasts?
is free will the same? making rain dances and stone age style weather forecasts in a modern world? is free will more like astrology than astronomy?

SpheresOfBalance wrote:I hear what you're saying, I understand what you mean, But I see that people that want to discredit free will, as some fictitious belief, do so because they are unrealistic as to what it entails. We are in fact humans of this physical universe, thus we are bound by the laws of this physical universe, they determine the constraints of mankind's free will. The human will is free to do anything that it is capable of, if it seeks to do so.

A lot of the human psyche is determined by other humans as a child grows. Some of the determining factors are good for the child, and some are bad for the child, usually the child, initially, doesn't know which is which, but as an adult they can learn which is which, if they care to, and counteract those determining factors, this is in fact the only truly free will there is, to say there is none because humans can't travel within their minds, throughout the universe, instantaneously, or any other such fanciful notion, as a means to discount free will in the name of determinism, is a fucking joke.

Just because we're not gods, doesn't mean we have no free will. Instead see free will for what it really is, which it that ability to weigh various facts, to arrive at your own solution. This then, shows that free will is bound by knowledge. The more knowledge one can obtain, the freer their will can become, as they understand those determining factors, that have bound them, up to that point, thus having the will to free themselves from the determining factors of their past.

The entire universe is nothing but physically determined, but while an asteroids trajectory is determined purely by outside forces, and has no choice in the matter, you can throw that ball that's in your hand, on any trajectory that you will, as your will is free to choose to do so, or not, it's your decision.[/color]

Mark Question wrote:

SpheresOfBalance wrote:I hear what you're saying, I understand what you mean, But I see that people that want to discredit free will, as some fictitious belief, do so because they are unrealistic as to what it entails. We are in fact humans of this physical universe, thus we are bound by the laws of this physical universe, they determine the constraints of mankind's free will. The human will is free to do anything that it is capable of, if it seeks to do so.

thus the physical laws of will, here comes the free will?

A lot of the human psyche is determined by other humans as a child grows. Some of the determining factors are good for the child, and some are bad for the child, usually the child, initially, doesn't know which is which, but as an adult they can learn which is which, if they care to, and counteract those determining factors, this is in fact the only truly free will there is, to say there is none because humans can't travel within their minds, throughout the universe, instantaneously, or any other such fanciful notion, as a means to discount free will in the name of determinism, is a fucking joke.

if they can learn and if they care to, those are determined causal facts in the physical universe theory. those can be predicted in some theoretical accuracy. that is the whole idea in thinking. connections and predictions.

Just because we're not gods, doesn't mean we have no free will. Instead see free will for what it really is, which it that ability to weigh various facts, to arrive at your own solution. This then, shows that free will is bound by knowledge. The more knowledge one can obtain, the freer their will can become, as they understand those determining factors, that have bound them, up to that point, thus having the will to free themselves from the determining factors of their past.

just because were not gods, we cant free our will from itself and from the whole universe it is part of. we cant step outside the causal thinking and its causal world view. only omnipotent god can create a stone so heavy that he cannot lift it. what we can is be less accurate and talk about free will and make a long exiting trip to the moon using astrological maps. but the more knowledge one can obtain, the harder inaccurate thinking will become.

The entire universe is nothing but physically determined, but while an asteroids trajectory is determined purely by outside forces, and has no choice in the matter, you can throw that ball that's in your hand, on any trajectory that you will, as your will is free to choose to do so, or not, it's your decision.[/color]

or more accurate, my will is determined also by physical inside forces? i am determined to choose to do so? it is my universal part, embodiment, history and unknown future, fate?

SpheresOfBalance wrote: Wrong!! The Will is free to the extent that physics allows, or in other words, what is 'meant' by "free will" is that it is free inside the physical container of the universe, which is a no brainer, so I have no idea why you're stuck. Use your "inside forces" that is not your will, and predict where I'll throw the ball.

Mark Question wrote:

SpheresOfBalance wrote: Wrong!! The Will is free to the extent that physics allows, or in other words, what is 'meant' by "free will" is that it is free inside the physical container of the universe, which is a no brainer, so I have no idea why you're stuck. Use your "inside forces" that is not your will, and predict where I'll throw the ball.

if all in known scientific universe is fully determined by inaccurate physical theories in scientific world view, our will and "inside forces" are too.
if we can not predict the fate 100%, does not mean there is no fate in determined physical theories of the scientific view of the whole universe.

SpheresOfBalance wrote: Determine it's fate, coward! Take the challenge! You can't! Because the fate of the ball in my hand, cannot be determined, it's fate is relative to my free will of disposition, of variable determination, which is where free will lies. You are wrong, my son, as to the meaning of the concept of free will. What I have outlined is what it is, nothing more, nor nothing less.

Those at the forefront, as opposed to you and I, say that, at the quantum level, particles disappear and reappear in completely 'arbitrary' relative locations, now speak to me about 'arbitrary' determinism? As to either it's freedom or it's deterministic nature. I'm waiting! Of course I expect your answer to be determined by something, (ego?) but what that something is, is freely debatable amongst the wills of scholars, as humans do not yet know of the theory of everything, if you don't believe me, go ask Stephen Hawking.