Philosophy Now Forum

philosopher wrote: ↑Tue Aug 21, 2018 2:55 pm I can (maybe) influence the neurons in your brain to make a choice to believe me.

This would be problematic for your view, if true.

If you "can," then you are introducing yourself as an independent agent into the causal chain, and then introducing me as a volitional respondent.

Whether or not I would believe you was set prior to the Big Bang, remember? Nothing else can happen but what was fated by that pre-event, according to Determinism. So there is no possibility of anything "making a choice." Neurons are caused particles, not causative agents; they are dumb-terminals, in the Deterministic scheme.

But I appreciate the "maybe."

henry quirk wrote: ↑Tue Aug 21, 2018 2:33 pm And: if you're right, I have no choice in the matter.

Right. So how can he be offended by you calling him a "crazy person." You had no choice. The Big Bang made you do it.

And yet, he's offended.

I wonder when he'll start to take his own intuitions seriously....

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue Aug 21, 2018 3:04 pm

philosopher wrote: ↑Tue Aug 21, 2018 2:55 pm I can (maybe) influence the neurons in your brain to make a choice to believe me.

This would be problematic for your view, if true.

If you "can," then you are introducing yourself as an independent agent into the causal chain, and then introducing me as a volitional respondent.

Whether or not I would believe you was set prior to the Big Bang, remember? Nothing else can happen but what was fated by that pre-event, according to Determinism. So there is no possibility of anything "making a choice." Neurons are caused particles, not causative agents; they are dumb-terminals, in the Deterministic scheme.

But I appreciate the "maybe."

The world's most briliant minds like Richard Dawkins (he's my equivalant of a prophet, had it not been for the fact that prophets are entirely a religious thing) says free will is an illusion. Why don't you agree with him?

https://www.richarddawkins.net/2016/05/ ... free-will/

Professor Stephen Hawking also opposed free will:
https://www.quora.com/Is-Stephen-Hawkin ... -free-will

Were these people crazy?

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue Aug 21, 2018 3:06 pm

henry quirk wrote: ↑Tue Aug 21, 2018 2:33 pm And: if you're right, I have no choice in the matter.

Right. So how can he be offended by you calling him a "crazy person." You had no choice. The Big Bang made you do it.

And yet, he's offended.

I wonder when he'll start to take his own intuitions seriously....

So Stephen Hawking was crazy?

"Do people have free will? If we have free will, where in the evolutionary tree did it develop? Do blue-green algae or bacteria have free will, or is their behavior automatic and within the realm of scientific law? Is it only multicelled organisms that have free will, or only mammals? We might think that a chimpanzee is exercising free will when it chooses to chomp on a banana, or a cat when it rips up your sofa, but what about the roundworm called Caenorhabditis elegans—a simple creature made of only 959 cells? It probably never thinks, “That was damn tasty bacteria I got to dine on back there,” yet it too has a definite preference in food and will either settle for an unattractive meal or go foraging for something better, depending on recent experience. Is that the exercise of free will?
Though we feel that we can choose what we do, our understanding of the molecular basis of biology shows that biological processes are governed by the laws of physics and chemistry and therefore are as determined as the orbits of the planets. Recent experiments in neuroscience support the view that it is our physical brain, following the known laws of science, that determines our actions, and not some agency that exists outside those laws. For example, a study of patients undergoing awake brain surgery found that by electrically stimulating the appropriate regions of the brain, one could create in the patient the desire to move the hand, arm, or foot, or to move the lips and talk. It is hard to imagine how free will can operate if our behavior is determined by physical law, so it seems that we are no more than biological machines and that free will is just an illusion."

Source:
Stephen Hawking: http://threeillusions.com/stephen-hawking-on-free-will/

"I can (maybe) influence the neurons in your brain to make a choice to believe me."

No, you can't influence any-one or -thing. All 'you' can do is follow the program, the pre-determined sequence, like the rest of us.

If it appears that Mannie moderates his viewpoint as a result of sumthin' you present, really it's just the fall of dominos.

You have no choice but to present...Mannie has no choice but to moderate his view (or not)

Again: your actions are "decided" since the Big Bang

#

"You are entitled to your opinions,"

If you're right, then, no I'm not.

If you're right, my opinion is just sumthin' that 'is', sumthin' I have no hand in crafting and no responsibility for.

If I think you're a loon it's because -- according to you -- I must.

#

"but I am not crazy just because I don't agree with you!"

If I'm right about you and me being free wills, then you're crazier than a shithouse rat. You'd have to be to willingly deny your own self-experienced autonomy in favor of toaster-status.

Again...

If you're right, then none of us has a damn bit of choice, of say-so, in what we think, do, say. Me, thinkin' you're a nuthob, is just sumthin' that must be.

If I'm right, then I have good cause to consider you crazy.

henry quirk wrote: ↑Tue Aug 21, 2018 3:17 pm If I'm right about you and me being free wills, then you're crazier than a shithouse rat. You'd have to be to willingly deny your own self-experienced autonomy in favor of toaster-status.

Stephen Hawking and Richard Dawkins both oppose(d) free will. See above for quote by Stephen Hawking on free will,
AND TELL ME:

Was Stephen Hawking crazier than a shithouse rat?

"The world's most briliant minds like Richard Dawkins (he's my equivalant of a prophet, had it not been for the fact that prophets are entirely a religious thing) says free will is an illusion. Why don't you agree with him?"

If you and Rich are right: I don't agree cuz I HAVE NO CHOICE in the matter. If I disagree it's cuz that's the way it must be.

Asking me why I don't agree is like askin'' lightning why it struck one tree instead of another.

#

"Were these people crazy?"

If you're right: no (cuz they're nuthin' but events in a sequence of events).

If I'm right: yes (cuz they're agents who deny themselves).

Again...

If you're right: no (cuz he was nuthin' but an event in a sequence of events).

If I'm right: yes (cuz he was an agent who denied himself).

henry quirk wrote: ↑Tue Aug 21, 2018 3:28 pm "The world's most briliant minds like Richard Dawkins (he's my equivalant of a prophet, had it not been for the fact that prophets are entirely a religious thing) says free will is an illusion. Why don't you agree with him?"

If you and Rich are right: I don't agree cuz I HAVE NO CHOICE in the matter. If I disagree it's cuz that's the way it must be.

Asking me why I don't agree is like askin'' lightning why it struck one tree instead of another.

#

"Were these people crazy?"

If you're right: no (cuz they're nuthin' but events in a sequence of events).

If I'm right: yes (cuz they're agents who deny themselves).

It's better to deny yourself, than to deny the truth.

Whatever the truth might be, it has the highest status. It is the most glorious of all to adhere to and believe in.

The truth is ugly, it is unpleasant. But don't deny it. You must know the ugly and unpleasant.

If you're right, then that's meaningless..

If you're right: your view, my view, are what they are cuz they can be no other way.

If I'm right: then I'm embracin' truth and you're the one in denial.

philosopher wrote: ↑Sun Aug 19, 2018 11:24 am Free Will is an illusion. So says all science.

It won't be logical either, if we did have free will.
What is free will? What constitutes "Free"? If you make a decision, you made some thoughts behind it. But thoughts are generated from something else. Like environment. And chemical and electrical signals in the brain.

So why do people keep saying we have free will, when we don't?

OK, when you come to a fork in the road which do you take?

Some people loose some of their teeth, and of those people some get dentures, some get implants, some don't and try and chew with their remaining teeth and some puree all their food.

Some people become Christians, some Buddhists, some Hindus, and some atheists.

Those are just a few examples of free will at work, the ability to choose between various options.

"free will
noun
1) free and independent choice; voluntary decision: You took on the responsibility of your own free will.
2) Philosophy. the doctrine that the conduct of human beings expresses personal choice and is not simply determined by physical or divine forces." --courtesy, dictionary.com--

SpheresOfBalance wrote: ↑Tue Aug 21, 2018 3:49 pm

philosopher wrote: ↑Sun Aug 19, 2018 11:24 am Free Will is an illusion. So says all science.

It won't be logical either, if we did have free will.
What is free will? What constitutes "Free"? If you make a decision, you made some thoughts behind it. But thoughts are generated from something else. Like environment. And chemical and electrical signals in the brain.

So why do people keep saying we have free will, when we don't?

OK, when you come to a fork in the road which do you take?

Some people loose some of their teeth, and of those people some get dentures, some get implants, some don't and try and chew with their remaining teeth and some puree all their food.

Some people become Christians, some Buddhists, some Hindus, and some atheists.

Those are just a few examples of free will at work, the ability to choose between various options.

The path I choose would be the one that the neurons processing information summed in total in favor of.

philosopher wrote: ↑Tue Aug 21, 2018 3:54 pm

SpheresOfBalance wrote: ↑Tue Aug 21, 2018 3:49 pm

philosopher wrote: ↑Sun Aug 19, 2018 11:24 am Free Will is an illusion. So says all science.

It won't be logical either, if we did have free will.
What is free will? What constitutes "Free"? If you make a decision, you made some thoughts behind it. But thoughts are generated from something else. Like environment. And chemical and electrical signals in the brain.

So why do people keep saying we have free will, when we don't?

OK, when you come to a fork in the road which do you take?

Some people loose some of their teeth, and of those people some get dentures, some get implants, some don't and try and chew with their remaining teeth and some puree all their food.

Some people become Christians, some Buddhists, some Hindus, and some atheists.

Those are just a few examples of free will at work, the ability to choose between various options.

The path I choose would be the one that the neurons processing information summed in total in favor of.

Incorrect, while your brain commands some of your body as autonomic functions, which is determined. You are your brain, and the totality of you, can choose between various options. In other words, "you, your brain, controls you, your brain."

You see the problem with this question is that it's bound by ones ignorance of the brain. In some cases it's you that determines which neurons fire.

"The path I choose would be the one that the neurons processing information summed in total in favor of."

In other words: you wouldn't choose jack. Your path would be determined by neuro-processes (electro-chemistry).

henry quirk wrote: ↑Tue Aug 21, 2018 4:01 pm "The path I choose would be the one that the neurons processing information summed in total in favor of."

In other words: you wouldn't choose jack. Your path would be determined by neuro-processes (electro-chemistry).

Yes?