Page 2 of 3
Re: Do you believe in Free will? Determinism?
Posted: Wed Aug 13, 2025 7:33 am
by Fairy
1: Free will only occurs in the artificial dream of separation, the play of maya, the consciousness conscious of the dream story.
2: Determinism however, is what’s really going on behind the illusory veil of duality ( lucid dreaming ) where there’s an apparent sense of a separate reactionary (me) responsible for my actions. In truth, there are only reactions, not actions.
Re: Do you believe in Free will? Determinism?
Posted: Thu Aug 14, 2025 6:47 am
by Noax
Impenitent wrote: ↑Sun Aug 10, 2025 5:50 pm
if there is no free will, there can be no moral responsibility
Nonsense. I can choose good path, or bad path with calculable risk of consequences.
Moral responsibility is simply the enforcement of the consequences in the case of poor choices. Determinism or any lack of free will in no way prevents that enforcement. The responsibility has nothing to do with there actually being a choice in the matter or not.
popeye1945 wrote: ↑Sun Aug 10, 2025 10:32 pm
Society as a protection method must control the agent of a crime, with the understanding that this particular individual is the product of a chaotic process, and it could be you instead of him who needs to be confined for the welfare of the population. It would be a great deal more complicated, but it would lead by reason to a greater compassion.
Much closer to the mark.
MikeNovack wrote: ↑Sun Aug 10, 2025 10:57 pm
There is a problem with "determinism", what do we mean exactly?
We might suggest "determined" if true and perfect knowledge of the current state made fixed, predictable, all states into the future. But what if we can't do that, what if we can't calculate/predict all future states. That's what we mean when we say a system is chaotic.
Determinism has no implication of subjective predictability. It is trivial to prove unpredictability even of a deterministic system. Chaotic systems also are irrelevant since they remain chaotic whether determinism is true or not.
While on the subject, classical Newtonian physics has been shown to be nondeterministic.
The real universe is not classical obviously.
I think it takes but two balls in your elastic box to be a chaotic system.
Re: Do you believe in Free will? Determinism?
Posted: Thu Aug 14, 2025 12:23 pm
by Impenitent
Noax wrote: ↑Thu Aug 14, 2025 6:47 am
Impenitent wrote: ↑Sun Aug 10, 2025 5:50 pm
if there is no free will, there can be no moral responsibility
Nonsense. I can choose good path, or bad path with calculable risk of consequences.
Moral responsibility is simply the enforcement of the consequences in the case of poor choices. Determinism or any lack of free will in no way prevents that enforcement. The responsibility has nothing to do with there actually being a choice in the matter or not.
which is it? "I can choose good path, or bad path
with calculable risk of consequences...." or " responsibility has nothing to do with there actually being a choice in the matter or not."
-Imp
Re: Do you believe in Free will? Determinism?
Posted: Thu Aug 14, 2025 2:22 pm
by Noax
Impenitent wrote: ↑Thu Aug 14, 2025 12:23 pm
which is it? "I can choose good path, or bad path
with calculable risk of consequences...." or " responsibility has nothing to do with there actually being a choice in the matter or not."
It's both, but the 2nd is improperly worded.
The first says that there is choice. Were that not the case, we'd not have evolved brains to make better ones. And don't confuse this with having free choice, the definition of which changes from one poster to the next.
The second part says that enforcement of some moral standard isn't always a function of there being choice or not. It arguably should say that it isn't a function of that choice being free, but that would be incomplete. A tree for instance has a moral obligation to not destroy my house foundation by growing too big too close. So if it threatens to do that, it bears the moral responsibility and is killed (or possibly moved, but rarely that). That's an example of responsibility where there isn't choice much involved.
About free choice: I see very few definitions where determinism or lack thereof make any difference since the alternative is randomness, which makes the choice no more free (less actually) than a deterministic one. All decision making devices, natural or artificial, use deterministic primitives to implement the function. Determinism is your friend since randomness makes for poorer decisions.
Can I find an exception?: A tree is obligated to resist parasites under penalty of death. Randomness allows for some trees to have a gene that does this and other not. Sans randomness, the tree would be less likely to resist the bugs. Evolution leverages randomness. It can't be all bad. But evolution bears no moral responsibility, nor does it make choices, deliberate or otherwise.
Re: Do you believe in Free will? Determinism?
Posted: Thu Aug 14, 2025 4:09 pm
by Impenitent
Noax wrote: ↑Thu Aug 14, 2025 2:22 pm
Impenitent wrote: ↑Thu Aug 14, 2025 12:23 pm
which is it? "I can choose good path, or bad path
with calculable risk of consequences...." or " responsibility has nothing to do with there actually being a choice in the matter or not."
It's both, but the 2nd is improperly worded.
The first says that there is choice. Were that not the case, we'd not have evolved brains to make better ones. And don't confuse this with having free choice, the definition of which changes from one poster to the next.
The second part says that enforcement of some moral standard isn't always a function of there being choice or not. It arguably should say that it isn't a function of that choice being free, but that would be incomplete. A tree for instance has a moral obligation to not destroy my house foundation by growing too big too close. So if it threatens to do that, it bears the moral responsibility and is killed (or possibly moved, but rarely that). That's an example of responsibility where there isn't choice much involved.
About free choice: I see very few definitions where determinism or lack thereof make any difference since the alternative is randomness, which makes the choice no more free (less actually) than a deterministic one. All decision making devices, natural or artificial, use deterministic primitives to implement the function. Determinism is your friend since randomness makes for poorer decisions.
Can I find an exception?: A tree is obligated to resist parasites under penalty of death. Randomness allows for some trees to have a gene that does this and other not. Sans randomness, the tree would be less likely to resist the bugs. Evolution leverages randomness. It can't be all bad. But evolution bears no moral responsibility, nor does it make choices, deliberate or otherwise.
a tree has a moral obligation?
did a tree walk across your yard and decide to root itself next to your foundation?
-Imp
Re: Do you believe in Free will? Determinism?
Posted: Thu Aug 14, 2025 6:32 pm
by Noax
Impenitent wrote: ↑Thu Aug 14, 2025 4:09 pma tree has a moral obligation?
As I defined it, yes. if it doesn't meet the obligation, it is subject to the penalty.
That makes it an obligation of sorts. It it a moral one? That's a harder sell, since morality seems to be a social contract, and there exists only a loose social contract between me and the plants that grow in my vicinity.
Noax wrote: ↑Thu Aug 14, 2025 2:22 pm
That's an example of responsibility where there isn't choice much involved.
Impenitent wrote: ↑Thu Aug 14, 2025 4:09 pmdid a tree walk across your yard and decide to root itself next to your foundation?
See my quote. I chose the example to explicitly illustrate a case where responsibility isn't necessarily a function of choice. And yes, it actually did do that, but 'walk' is probably not its mode of locomotion, but it might have been walked across my yard.
Re: Do you believe in Free will? Determinism?
Posted: Fri Aug 15, 2025 9:02 pm
by Atla
My actual stance is either 5D free will - determinism convergence with multiple layers of conflicting entities (a nested hierarchy of shared infinites), or determinism. I can't choose between the two, since 5D stuff can't be proven, but I hope that the former is the case.
From the standpoint of 4D philosophy I'm just a determinist either way.
Re: Do you believe in Free will? Determinism?
Posted: Sun Oct 26, 2025 2:51 am
by Jori
I think human behavior is determined by many factor such as external forces, instinct, habit, emotion, and cognition – which can overpower each other. When cognition overpowers the other factors, this is thought of as an exercise of free will. I disagree. Like reflex behavior, vision, and digestion, cognition is also automatic consisting of three automatic, uncontrollable steps. First, the brain evaluates options. Second, the brain determines what it perceives to be the best option. Third, the brain acts out the perceived best option. Since all three steps are automatic, then choosing is also automatic. I call this cognitive determinism. Therefore, free will is an illusion.
Re: Do you believe in Free will? Determinism?
Posted: Sun Oct 26, 2025 3:13 am
by SpheresOfBalance
Jodes wrote: ↑Wed Aug 06, 2025 7:15 am
I'm really curious where you all stand!
I was reading "Determined" by Sapolsky. He says most people fall into the category of believing in determinism AND free will, but he and I believe in determinism and not free will. Although I think chaos theory does introduce a practical limit on determinism, and quantum randomness even more so.
Where do you lie? And why?
The people that believe in determinism exclusively, usually only do so for a "get out of jail free card" for all the immoral crap they do. They can just blame all their evil doings on determinism. So you know those are all on the political right, obviously.
Re: Do you believe in Free will? Determinism?
Posted: Sun Oct 26, 2025 4:12 am
by popeye1945
SpheresOfBalance wrote: ↑Sun Oct 26, 2025 3:13 am
Jodes wrote: ↑Wed Aug 06, 2025 7:15 am
I'm really curious where you all stand!
I was reading "Determined" by Sapolsky. He says most people fall into the category of believing in determinism AND free will, but he and I believe in determinism and not free will. Although I think chaos theory does introduce a practical limit on determinism, and quantum randomness even more so.
Where do you lie? And why?
The people that believe in determinism exclusively, usually only do so for a "get out of jail free card" for all the immoral crap they do. They can just blame all their evil doings on determinism. So you know those are all on the political right, obviously.
It is totally egocentric to consider the complexity of the Earth, Cosmos, and biology as having as its goal your free will. You, like every other animal on the planet, are reactive creatures to the larger reality. It is silly to think that any individual is completely responsible for the present state of the being, their psyche. It is so strikingly absurd that I am surprised so many people entertain the thought. I understand that this realization greatly complicates both the sinning of individuals and the difficulties that arise within the legal system. That doesn't mean we allow an individual's damaging behaviours to continue; they, of course, must be dealt with and confined where necessary. The present moment is the summation of the past, and where context has a great deal to do with forming one's identity, we must assume the context has more to do with the individual's behaviour than their present life in the moment. Now you can consider the individual in question disturbed or broken and allow a degree of humanity into the judgment of the individual. The more recent science of Epigenetics should make the above strikingly obvious: what happens to you changes what genetic information is expressed, thus what behaviours are expressed. This new genetic expression not only affects the individual in the present but is passed on to the next generation. I believe most people's belief in free will springs from a lack of appreciation of the mind-blowing complexity of it all. Context defines, think about it, even if we never fully understand it. Accept the reality of this, and you will find your compassion will increase in general.
Re: Do you believe in Free will? Determinism?
Posted: Sun Oct 26, 2025 4:16 am
by SpheresOfBalance
popeye1945 wrote: ↑Sun Oct 26, 2025 4:12 am
SpheresOfBalance wrote: ↑Sun Oct 26, 2025 3:13 am
Jodes wrote: ↑Wed Aug 06, 2025 7:15 am
I'm really curious where you all stand!
I was reading "Determined" by Sapolsky. He says most people fall into the category of believing in determinism AND free will, but he and I believe in determinism and not free will. Although I think chaos theory does introduce a practical limit on determinism, and quantum randomness even more so.
Where do you lie? And why?
The people that believe in determinism exclusively, usually only do so for a "get out of jail free card" for all the immoral crap they do. They can just blame all their evil doings on determinism. So you know those are all on the political right, obviously.
It is totally egocentric to consider the complexity of the Earth, Cosmos, and biology as having as its goal your free will. You, like every other animal on the planet, are reactive creatures to the larger reality. It is silly to think that any individual is completely responsible for the present state of the being, their psyche. It is so strikingly absurd that I am surprised so many people entertain the thought. I understand that this realization greatly complicates both the sinning of individuals and the difficulties that arise within the legal system. That doesn't mean we allow an individual's damaging behaviours to continue; they, of course, must be dealt with and confined where necessary. The present moment is the summation of the past, and where context has a great deal to do with forming one's identity, we must assume the context has more to do with the individual's behaviour than their present life in the moment. Now you can consider the individual in question disturbed or broken and allow a degree of humanity into the judgment of the individual. The more recent science of Epigenetics should make the above strikingly obvious: what happens to you changes what genetic information is expressed, thus what behaviours are expressed. This new genetic expression not only affects the individual in the present but is passed on to the next generation. I believe most people's belief in free will springs from a lack of appreciation of the mind-blowing complexity of it all. Context defines, think about it, even if we never fully understand it. Accept the reality of this, and you will find your compassion will increase in general.
You don't know my thoughts in this matter. I say that both determinism and free will equally exist. Now you know.
Re: Do you believe in Free will? Determinism?
Posted: Sun Oct 26, 2025 7:25 am
by popeye1945
SpheresOfBalance wrote: ↑Sun Oct 26, 2025 4:16 am
popeye1945 wrote: ↑Sun Oct 26, 2025 4:12 am
SpheresOfBalance wrote: ↑Sun Oct 26, 2025 3:13 am
The people that believe in determinism exclusively, usually only do so for a "get out of jail free card" for all the immoral crap they do. They can just blame all their evil doings on determinism. So you know those are all on the political right, obviously.
It is totally egocentric to consider the complexity of the Earth, Cosmos, and biology as having as its goal your free will. You, like every other animal on the planet, are reactive creatures to the larger reality. It is silly to think that any individual is completely responsible for the present state of the being, their psyche. It is so strikingly absurd that I am surprised so many people entertain the thought. I understand that this realization greatly complicates both the sinning of individuals and the difficulties that arise within the legal system. That doesn't mean we allow an individual's damaging behaviours to continue; they, of course, must be dealt with and confined where necessary. The present moment is the summation of the past, and where context has a great deal to do with forming one's identity, we must assume the context has more to do with the individual's behaviour than their present life in the moment. Now you can consider the individual in question disturbed or broken and allow a degree of humanity into the judgment of the individual. The more recent science of Epigenetics should make the above strikingly obvious: what happens to you changes what genetic information is expressed, thus what behaviours are expressed. This new genetic expression not only affects the individual in the present but is passed on to the next generation. I believe most people's belief in free will springs from a lack of appreciation of the mind-blowing complexity of it all. Context defines, think about it, even if we never fully understand it. Accept the reality of this, and you will find your compassion will increase in general.
You don't know my thoughts in this matter. I say that both determinism and free will equally exist. Now you know.
So? Explain, this is a philosophy forum, I am all ears.
Re: Do you believe in Free will? Determinism?
Posted: Sun Oct 26, 2025 7:50 am
by SpheresOfBalance
popeye1945 wrote: ↑Sun Oct 26, 2025 7:25 am
SpheresOfBalance wrote: ↑Sun Oct 26, 2025 4:16 am
popeye1945 wrote: ↑Sun Oct 26, 2025 4:12 am
It is totally egocentric to consider the complexity of the Earth, Cosmos, and biology as having as its goal your free will. You, like every other animal on the planet, are reactive creatures to the larger reality. It is silly to think that any individual is completely responsible for the present state of the being, their psyche. It is so strikingly absurd that I am surprised so many people entertain the thought. I understand that this realization greatly complicates both the sinning of individuals and the difficulties that arise within the legal system. That doesn't mean we allow an individual's damaging behaviours to continue; they, of course, must be dealt with and confined where necessary. The present moment is the summation of the past, and where context has a great deal to do with forming one's identity, we must assume the context has more to do with the individual's behaviour than their present life in the moment. Now you can consider the individual in question disturbed or broken and allow a degree of humanity into the judgment of the individual. The more recent science of Epigenetics should make the above strikingly obvious: what happens to you changes what genetic information is expressed, thus what behaviours are expressed. This new genetic expression not only affects the individual in the present but is passed on to the next generation. I believe most people's belief in free will springs from a lack of appreciation of the mind-blowing complexity of it all. Context defines, think about it, even if we never fully understand it. Accept the reality of this, and you will find your compassion will increase in general.
You don't know my thoughts in this matter. I say that both determinism and free will equally exist. Now you know.
So? Explain, this is a philosophy forum, I am all ears.
I don't want to disturb anyone with a poped eye with my rhetoric, but I do feel sorry for cartoons with poped eyes. Did you know that back in the day, probably before you were born that, that was a derogatory thing to say to someone that had the defect. Good choice!
Re: Do you believe in Free will? Determinism?
Posted: Sun Oct 26, 2025 7:57 am
by LuckyR
Simple physical systems are determined by their physical states, extremely complex electrochemical systems have not been shown to be determined by their physical states. They may be in the future, which will prove Determinism (in the realm of decision making), until then, that is, currently, it is unknown but behaves as if Free Will exists, though it may (some day) be proven not to.
Re: Do you believe in Free will? Determinism?
Posted: Sun Oct 26, 2025 8:06 am
by popeye1945
SpheresOfBalance wrote: ↑Sun Oct 26, 2025 7:50 am
popeye1945 wrote: ↑Sun Oct 26, 2025 7:25 am
SpheresOfBalance wrote: ↑Sun Oct 26, 2025 4:16 am
You don't know my thoughts in this matter. I say that both determinism and free will equally exist. Now you know.
So? Explain, this is a philosophy forum, I am all ears.
I don't want to disturb anyone with a poped eye with my rhetoric, but I do feel sorry for cartoons with poped eyes. Did you know that back in the day, probably before you were born that, that was a derogatory thing to say to someone that had the defect. Good choice!
This is the place for disturbing people's rhetoric. What is your purpose here? Popeye to me just represented a cartoon character.