Free Will vs. Determinism

Free Will vs. Determinism

Which one is right? Does it matter? Why or why not?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=aCxyVjUpaqk
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

I think it is both but that the actual question is when determinism stop to let the place to free will and vice-versa

Can you change the laws of physics?

Can you go back in time?

If you answered no to the above questions, you have no free will.

But we can't tell the future either, if it was %100 Determinism couldn't we manage the future based on neuro science and computers?

Free will =|= Having superpowers

Determinism itself is an anti-scientific statement. This is because it presupposes that everything has already been predetermined, including every single thought and every single idea any human being in history has ever had. In such a case there is no true formation of ideas, no real rationalism, only the predetermined results of a grand complex of physical and chemical processes whose outcomes were already more or less set in stone from the moment of the big bang. This means that there is no such thing as "reason", no such thing as reasonable observation, science and that therefore the means by which we establish determinism do not exist. In other words, we cannot trust our own minds to tell us that we cannot trust our own minds.

To actually do science we must presuppose, among others:
>Free will
>The existence of objective reason and logic
>The comprehensibility of the world to the human mind (what Einstein called "scientific faith")
>Mathematical objectivism
>The existence of an objective reality
What the most radical empiricists often forget is that to do science we must rely on a slew of a priori beliefs, without which the whole system collapses.

Neither is right. Determinism is more right but awesome point there had to be a non-deterministic event that triggered the deterministic universe, which is a paradox.

But there's no free will either way since the universe is either deterministic; i.e. no free will, or non deterministic; i.e. the "master plan" of something else, which you are a part of, i.e. you have no free will outside of the master plan.

Determinism

/thread

youtube.com/watch?v=aCxyVjUpaqk

I've read his book "Free Will" 4 times in the last 2 weeks, and I still feel as if there are more questions than answers

>To actually do science we must presuppose, among others:
>>Free will
No we mustn't. >it presupposes that everything has already been predetermined, including every single thought and every single idea any human being in history has ever had. In such a case there is no true formation of ideas, no real rationalism, only the predetermined results of a grand complex of physical and chemical processes whose outcomes were already more or less set in stone from the moment of the big bang
You were right up until here, everything after that was retarded. You can still observe things and record them, its just that you were always going to do that anyway since the universe is deterministic. It's not "predetermined" it's all determined already, there is no "pre". Every moment in time is now and always will be happening in the exact same moment in space time, and it's all already been determined.

This is a circular argument about free will.

There's no actual evidence here that free will is a presupposition required for science to work, other than you've asserted so.

Saying that there's no such thing as reason because events are determined isn't a coherent argument. Reasoning is simply a cognitive process that doesn't change or end just because that process is fixed.

I think i'd argue along the lines of Dan Dennett here, I think I'm right in saying that he's a compatibilist, and that he believes in a deterministic universe, but also believes there is a kind of free will, that more complex creatures such as humans can simulate reality to some very approximate degree in their head and chose to manipulate their surroundings to get a future that is best for them.

I think it means redefining what free will means exactly, I think the classic case of free will is simply a romantic notion, it's not something we can demonstrate is real. How could we possibly make an experiment to show that we could have done something otherwise, doesn't make any sense when you start thinking about it deeply.

>You can still observe things and record them, its just that you were always going to do that anyway since the universe is deterministic.
But the point is that you can't really draw conclusions for them, as our brains would already be predetermined to draw certain conclusions regardless of objective reality. In such a case our minds would be about as reliable as our eyes (which are very vulnerable to optical illussions). That's because it would be a world without objective reason. Of course we can still write down things, because that's what we're objectively doing right now (otherwise we would already be able to consign determinism to the garbage can by virtue of not conforming to what we observe), but it has more to do with whether or not we can rely on our own minds.

I also think it's interesting you attack "free will" in my list of a priori assumptions but not the existence of objective logic and reason (which itself would require free will) or the comprehensibility of the material world (ditto).

You asking wrong question.

Its about Determinism or Indeterminism.
After that you can ask questions about what you define as free will in that context.

I believe in free will in context of determinism for example.
Defining it as a freedom to express myself in social or cultural norms, not being inhabited by anything more than myself and my biological makeup.

>tfw no true "free will" tho, would love to fuck Stoya now.

No, you're brain doesn't become subjected to illusions, you still think for yourself and come to conclusions the way you normally would, it's just that you were always going to have those exact thoughts and come to those exact conclusions. Logic and reason still exist and everything you do is still you're choice, but you just never were going to make different choices then the ones you make. It's your choice, but your choice is the will of the universe.

Pretend that you have free will you will live a happier life

Don't know about you but I create my own reality

If determinism was right then absolutely nothing would matter.

Hard Determinism. Free will is an illusion and all events have been set in stone since the Big Bang. Everything is just a reaction to an action.

>other poster argues that rationalism requires freedom of will
>your reply is "your shits all retarted" with scare quotes around everything

There are far too many variables for us to know the future.

Alternatively, accept that lacking free will doesn't mean your will has no power over your actions, and live the same happy life

How so? You have desires and goals. Those things matter to you. It doesn't matter whether everything is determined or not, your desires and goals are a part of that machine.

This is a good way of looking at the issue

I have free will compared to some poor peasant in China. I get to determine lots of shit.

Maybe I don't have super awesome metaphysical powers that override the laws of physics, but who cares about that shit?

determinism has already been proven wrong

this.

We live in a causual universe. Everything happens for a reason. You can't change that any more than you can stop the sun from orbiting the center of the galaxy.