I see redpill get casually thrown about here on various stupid shit, there's a circumcision up

I see redpill get casually thrown about here on various stupid shit, there's a circumcision up.

Let's have a serious discussion on free will.

The argument has been increasing in favor of there not being free will at all. From predetermined genes. To your circumstances. The decisions made generations ago have all shaped and molded your ancestors from how they think and what they do. And on a vast macro scientific level of continuous chain of effects long before us.

So give us your thoughts Sup Forums and have a non memenon shit thread.

Do these predetermined things add up to make the case we simply have no free will?
(No religion based responses are adequate)

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=WxBOBWLAn2Y
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

we have free will to act on our inhibitions and to get what we desire, but they are just what are programmed into us

Fuck off with your shitty interpretations of entropy, on this board we believe in predetermined reaction to stimuli and we damn well follow it

do you think its impossible to have an alternate reaction to the same stimuli?

True free will does not exist, yet nothing is absolutely pre-determined.

No, our reality is clearly a simulation, there is no such thing as free will, everything you do is predetermined, I assume no responsibility for failing that exam last month, it is a result of infinite compounding factors.

H O T
O
T

Deposited into wank bank, thanks m8

Free will is a stand alone term and there can't be a 'true free will' apart. Either it exists or it doesn't.

Free will does not exist, then. True was added for emphasis only.

Okay now I've actually types this shit out:
Basically all the arguements against free will follow the same basic two-step format ever since Cicero.
1) the forces on matter are constant and predictable
2) Forces and results are based on matter

Therefore, if the forces are known, then the result must be known

Hundreds of scientists came up with their own version of this to tie into their observations, but their arguements all agree that if all possible stimuli are known, then the resulting choice must also be known, and so there can be no free will, as you are merely a result of measurable external stimuli acting on your sensory organs to produce predictable internal stimuli, the results of which can be predictably modeled, the results of which will elicit a predicable response from you. So at its most pure, there is no free will.

Wouldn't a lack of free will imply predeterminism?
If you're at the grocery store and want ice cream. They have strawberry, chocolate, and vanilla. There are options but if you don't get to make the choice isn't whatever the person buys predetermined?

Your conscious mind had the illusion of options but no choice to actually make.

...

>implying there is a lack of free will without predeterminsm

" illusion "*

You guys might actually become a state one day if you learn to speak or at least type in english.

not related to free will, but i just watched the first two ghost in the shell movies. my god, that is the most pretentious shit ever, and this is coming from someone who's favorite shit is pretentious shit. especially the second movie, just kill me.

Ouch I can feel that burn from here

Our chances of becoming a state are near infinitely better than maintaining a white majority in the US.
?

>The argument has been increasing in favor of there not being free will at all.
There's a surplus of free will online, you just need a company or nation-state to mine and manipulate it.

>From predetermined genes.
OMG r u raciss?>

>To your circumstances. The decisions made generations ago have all shaped and molded your ancestors from how they think and what they do.
I'd say that this stuff merely narrows the expression of free will, but the will itself exists entirely in the mind and can be cultivated in response to these situations.

You could make the new Esperanto or you could do something useful. Or do nothing but that's losers.

>And on a vast macro scientific level of continuous chain of effects long before us.
That simply makes free will irrelevant in certain time frames, everything decays, duh

Your phrasing implied that you can get free will without predeterminsm. Predeterminsm doesn't imply complete absence of free will but absence of free will logically leads onto predeterminsm, especially if you are actually using logic and not just "muh prophet said"

only the meme has free will

At sub-atomic level, according to current understanding, world is probabilistic. Therefore nothing can be pre-determined.

Free will is more complicated and not entirely related on pre-determinism, as in lack of it would imply free will (as it at first peek would seem so).
But to be short, free will would imply total control over our brain and nervous system (at least) on a sub-atomic level, which is just absurd. The freeness of our will we experience, is and illusion.

*an

Why wouldn't predeterminism imply lack of free will? I'd like to hear about why you think we can have some free will.

It seems to me free will is an absolute. You have or you don't.

I've seen atrocious orthography, by Americans, and it's the only fucking language, you guys speak and write.

Are predeterminsm and probablism at odds?

Take the three doors experiment. Behind one door there is a bar of gold. In the other two goats.

Person A would have a 33.333-% chance at getting gold.
Person B however knows the gold is NOT in door 3. His odds are 50%.
Person C knows the gold is in door 2. He has 100% chance at getting gold.

The gold is always in the same door. 100%. All that changed was information. Wouldn't that mean with enough information, we would know the outcomes, meaning it goes side by side with predeterminsm.

(Thanks qt I'd give you a body massage as thanks if you were in my area.)

That analogue does not describe how it works at sub-atomic level. The location is of the bar of gold would not be determined until you opened one of the doors.

My spider sense is tingling and telling me you're just baiting me, or that you have hard time understanding basic science.

No, this is a major fuck up in logic.

They're talking about quantum probability. It's not a simple as choosing between doors. This whole argument goes back to weather, or not we're living in a simulation, or at least what would be required to simulate the universe. It's easier to go by a set of starting variables and basic rule, that punch out a universe formula that equates everything that's going to happen.

Hey kids! Get red pilled on free will.

youtube.com/watch?v=WxBOBWLAn2Y

Its a question of information. The person hosting the contest put the gold there. The outside observant may not know but its still there.

If we had more information and continued expanding our knowledge at the subatomic particle level why wouldn't the two terms go hand in hand?

This argument has little to do with the subject at hand, or at least from the standpoint your pushing. Even if you know which door the gold is behind, someone/something placed it there. You'd need to know that too, but also the reasoning for the placement... and so on and so forth. The presentation of more and more levels of complexity.

Your little example is quickly exposing the fact that determinism is a crock of shit. You'd have to know everything, and everything that has been know, or is to be known.

IT IS IMPOSSIBLE.

If I decide we do not have free will, that is an act of free will. If I decide we do have free will, that is an act of free will.

The more you know the more you can know.

Up to this point the it stands as a question of information. Its only probabilistic because we don't have enough information but enough information would make it predeterminsm.

>The more you know the more you can know.
The more you think, the more you can think. Sorry, no one is going to buy that shit logic.

>Its only probabilistic because we don't have enough information but enough information would make it predeterminsm.
Bullshit, if you watched the video I just linked - and gave a damn about actually being knowledgeable on the subject - the argument for determinism is void. Nature seeks the path of least resistance. It is advantageous for the universe to be probabilistic becasue a smaller number of variables is stabler and thus more likely.

Of course, this is for anyone that's actually interested. Fucking low quality bait.

>Its only probabilistic because we don't have enough information but enough information would make it predeterminsm

Logical fallacy.

under world is a simulation, if you program a simulation, you can have a player with alleged free will controlling a character, the character, as they have no idea of the higher level, will assume his actions are part of his free will, but they are truly the players'.

Could that be at play here? and none of your actions are actually yours, even though they originate from free will at some point? Would it even mater in the end?

Im just looking to have a different discussion than normal here. My BoS and the following graduate studies weren't in quantum.

What you know to be consciousness is a simulation of reality. Gas lighting doesn't matter, and neither does the tree that falls in the woods.
>Occam is here to shit on your ideas