Philosophy Now Forum

bahman wrote: ↑Fri Feb 15, 2019 9:25 pm Randomness is the only option available for a materialist when it comes to decision. That is true since decision is uncaused cause and material process is deterministic. The experience of wanting is after decision is made (following Libet's experiement) therefore they are different phenomena. We however observe fantastic correlation between what we consciously want and what we get. Therefore materialism is wrong (because you cannot expect a random change always correlates with conscious want).

bahman wrote: ↑Fri Feb 15, 2019 9:25 pm you cannot expect a random change always correlates with conscious want

Logik wrote: ↑Thu Feb 21, 2019 6:01 pm

bahman wrote: ↑Fri Feb 15, 2019 9:25 pm you cannot expect a random change always correlates with conscious want

Yes you can. Survivorship bias.

Suppose that "decision" (caused OR uncaused cause - doesn't matter) happens before want.

Decision: coffee
Want: yes please!
Result: correlates with "we get coffee"

Alternative

Decision: coffee
Want: No thanks!
Result: No coffee.

If the "want" vetoes an idea you can't expect it to correlate with what we get.

bahman wrote: ↑Thu Feb 21, 2019 10:14 pm

Logik wrote: ↑Thu Feb 21, 2019 6:01 pm

bahman wrote: ↑Fri Feb 15, 2019 9:25 pm you cannot expect a random change always correlates with conscious want

Yes you can. Survivorship bias.

Suppose that "decision" (caused OR uncaused cause - doesn't matter) happens before want.

Decision: coffee
Want: yes please!
Result: correlates with "we get coffee"

Alternative

Decision: coffee
Want: No thanks!
Result: No coffee.

If the "want" vetoes an idea you can't expect it to correlate with what we get.

The scenarios are like these when you are asked about coffee:

1)
Decision: Yes
Want: Yes
Result: You get the coffee (everything is fine)

2)
Decision: No
Want: No
Result: You don't get the coffee (everything is fine)

3)
Decision: Yes
Want: No
Result: You get the coffee but it is against what you want (conflict which we have never observed)

4)
Decision: No
Want: Yes
Result: You don't get the coffee but it is against what you want (conflict which we have never observed)

Logik wrote: ↑Thu Feb 21, 2019 10:19 pm

bahman wrote: ↑Thu Feb 21, 2019 10:14 pm

Logik wrote: ↑Thu Feb 21, 2019 6:01 pm
Yes you can. Survivorship bias.

Suppose that "decision" (caused OR uncaused cause - doesn't matter) happens before want.

Decision: coffee
Want: yes please!
Result: correlates with "we get coffee"

Alternative

Decision: coffee
Want: No thanks!
Result: No coffee.

If the "want" vetoes an idea you can't expect it to correlate with what we get.

The scenarios are like these when you are asked about coffee:

1)
Decision: Yes
Want: Yes
Result: You get the coffee (everything is fine)

2)
Decision: No
Want: No
Result: You don't get the coffee (everything is fine)

3)
Decision: Yes
Want: No
Result: You get the coffee but it is against what you want (conflict which we have never observed)

4)
Decision: No
Want: Yes
Result: You don't get the coffee but it is against what you want (conflict which we have never observed)

Not according to the Libet experiment.

The decision and want happen 7 seconds apart. They are in series, not in parallel.

So if No decision happens. No want needs to happen.

bahman wrote: ↑Thu Feb 21, 2019 10:22 pm

Logik wrote: ↑Thu Feb 21, 2019 10:19 pm

bahman wrote: ↑Thu Feb 21, 2019 10:14 pm
The scenarios are like these when you are asked about coffee:

1)
Decision: Yes
Want: Yes
Result: You get the coffee (everything is fine)

2)
Decision: No
Want: No
Result: You don't get the coffee (everything is fine)

3)
Decision: Yes
Want: No
Result: You get the coffee but it is against what you want (conflict which we have never observed)

4)
Decision: No
Want: Yes
Result: You don't get the coffee but it is against what you want (conflict which we have never observed)

Not according to the Libet experiment.

The decision and want happen 7 seconds apart. They are in series, not in parallel.

So if No decision happens. No want needs to happen.

Of course not. Your decision is always in agreement with your conscious want. My point is that if decision is a random variable then we are dealing with a conflict in half of the cases.