You have no free will dumbass

The entire universe probably has some underlying equations that describe it. At any rate, the parts of the universe that most affect humanity are basically calculations taking place across time.
One of the results of this is that humans are roughly predictable as both individuals and especially in broad group trends.
Discuss the moral, political, and practical implications of this, and why people deny it.

Other urls found in this thread:

sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/01/080129125354.htm
youtube.com/watch?v=H6HLjpj4Nt4
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

>probably

Is this where you get the justification to make retarded posts? You feel it is out of your control?

I understand you can't help being angry.

No.

It doesn't matter at all since in reality we don't know what the underlying rules are so still have to act as if other people and ourselves have free will because you can't tell yet what you or others are going to do in the future with 100% accuracy.

E.G. it's physically possible to predict the weather in a years time because it's all just different moving pockets of air pressure that follow the laws of physics, we just can't with current technology so I'm going to keep an umbrella in my car in case it rains.

t. non philosopher

Newtonian physics =/= quantum mechanics.

The giant pool table argument falls apart the deeper into matter you go.

Also doesn't answer the hard and soft questions of consciousness, see Chalmers.

But if people cannot help how they behave, doesn't that affect how we deal with them?
Hypothetically, suppose the data for a certain type of criminal shows 99% of them will reoffend. If have no delusions about "people can change" shouldn't we just look at the data and not let people out past a certain cutoff?
If you view this as just a larger level manifestation of probabilistic mechanics of the universe, surely it doesn't make much sense to. It's like rolling a loaded die.

I think I read something by Chalmers once. I've seen some related stuff. qualia, chinese room thought experiment, etc. yeah?
How does our ignorance about consciousness affect what I said though? We still have evidence about how the matter making up our bodies behaves.

>At any rate, the parts of the universe that most affect humanity are basically calculations taking place across time.
This is just another larper pretending not to a religiousfag

/thread

>The entire universe probably has some underlying equations that describe it. At any rate, the parts of the universe that most affect humanity are basically calculations taking place across time.
Massive pseuds like you need to leave

"No Free Will" assumes Someone Else is programming.

- if I have no free will, then what I say doesn't matter anyway, because it is not my opinion, it is just AI repeating this program string the Creator is perusing right now

--OR--

I just attained self awareness via a preprogrammed operation, and programmed my self to operate independently- but that was planned, so is it truly free will if I am programmed to attain self awareness?

Humans are predictable only in that we are finite, and that limitation eventually means that all the fractal possibilities could be generated with a large enough processing capability...

That is called omniscience.

you're entirely right OP. and the radiation from planets affects our brain chemistry; hence astrology is worth studying

inb4 muh astrology has no value and will never be understood or used properly!!!111 even tho i admit the moon affects people's minds and dats accepted but dats cuz its harvard !!!!11!!! kabalists didnt kno wat dey was talkin bout!!!

...

Causality itself is logically questionable.

The notion of claiming the cosmos is an endless series of unbroken cause-effect relationships is very suspect when the mere idea of 'causality' amounts to 'Noticing one thing happens after another thing with enough frequency to be statistically noteworthy'.

Suppose that a different model of causality is true other then 'One cause leads to one effect' as a domino-system and the whole thing comes crashing down.

dumbass assumes everything that is real is observable
dumbass assumes that being able to describe something with an equation means it is a deterministic machine

universe is described by math y/n?
humans exist in universe y/n?
if both y, humans are described by math
do you give a fuck and why?

>Universe is described by math

No. The entirety of modern science amounts to documenting patterns in nature and deducing laws and principles based on that observation. This pattern-recognition evolves into a "law of nature" only because it occurs with consistency in the areas we measure. Its entirely possible that these laws do not apply to all parts of the universe, or to all universes, or at the smallest levels of reality, or even with universal consistency at all.

>dumbass assumes everything that is real is observable
never assumed it. seems irrelevant.
>dumbass assumes that being able to describe something with an equation means it is a deterministic machine
never said it was deterministic
probabilistic is enough

this is a good quality thread.
bump

Wasn't saying current models are perfect. In principal, can we use math to describe whatever is out there, if we could observe it.
Second point, even if the laws are changing somewhere, I'm not going to have a blackhole spontaneously form in my intestine. Current models apply reliably to our circumstances.

if this is true and we are capable of decoding the the mach god equation wi could see how we lived in the past how many civilization across the galaxy has arisen and actually speak with them recreatin their value ,im in, we would ever get a computer powerful enought to decode the universe ??

>The entire universe probably has some underlying equations that describe it.

Yeah and those equations have solutions that are probability density functions, so your deterministic axiomatic nature argument is bullshit, retard.

There's no objective free will or equality in nature. They're virtues to strive for and frankly not believing in free will is the fastest route to extreme degeneracy and I don't like to use this term alot but frankly psychopathy. Read the link below.

sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/01/080129125354.htm

>Probabilistic behavior = free will is fo' realz
ok

>I and by extent, niggers, have no responsibility for our actions
It sounds like the ideology of a faggot, OP

>Probabilistic behavior = free will is fo' realz

You statement is the OP is misleading. You state that since nature follows law defined in terms of equations then there is a determined process that defines our thoughts and behaviors.

In reality quantum equations do not exactly determine quantum systems they can only describe events in terms of their probability of occurring and even then with uncertainty, so there is nothing deterministic in nature so there is underlying randomness even to ourselves.

You are wrong.

Watch this OP
You are missing something about the interaction of consciousness with the universe at large

youtube.com/watch?v=H6HLjpj4Nt4

I disagree cause infinity.

A single mother is one of the mods, believe it or not. Her name is BEAM and she was the one behind the neofag fiasco on Sup Forums.

Alright, I'll grant that I should have been explicit about this since this is the second time it's come up. "roughly predictable" in the OP is me waving this away. newton is wrong. I deliberately didn't say the universe was deterministic, though depending on how "calculation" is taken, it could be viewed as implied.
Still, if we could somehow examine every cell in your body, we'd be able to predict pretty well what you were about to do. That's the point.

That's now what free will means.

>Free will isn't a super-positional state.

Whew.

Lol that's pretty funny

Everyone thinks they have free will, until they need to take a shit. Good luck willing your urge to poop away

>That's now what free will means.
get that compatibilist shit outta here.
you fuckin daniel dennett or something?

So saying it was mathematically predetermined that I fucked your mom in the ass and then made her suck me clean? And that neither of us actually had a choice?

Kinda takes the fun out of it.

But I do. I could either shit in the toilet or shit on your pillow.

But on the other hand, with out free will, people with poor behaviors would potentially be viewed as faulty parts with high probability of failure.
Damned if you have free will damned if you don't.

>Still, if we could somehow examine every cell in your body, we'd be able to predict pretty well what you were about to do. That's the point.

But it's wrong. You could only determine what the probability of what will happen is.

It has no moral implications. Does a wasp choose to sting? No, it's in his nature. So you crush him.

>determine what the probability of what will happen is
I don't know what you mean by this.

It's either compatibilism or the cold vacuousness of nothing. You can go ahead and surrender to the void (oh wait you don't actually have a choice whoops) while we will try and adapt the concept to better serve humanity.

But what am I saying, just by entertaining the concept of free will and trying to disprove it, you've already revealed yourself as a compatibilist too.

CHECKMATE ATHEISTS
er... NON-COMPATIBILISTS

I can't help (har har) but view compatibilism as a bit of a word game or reframing. Doesn't change da fax.

I think free will is a big deal because people have strange ideas about the self as well. Kind of a package clusterfuck.

This is good bait; underrated, but substantial.

The moon doesn't have any effect on humans, directly. Are you a moron?

Yet the entire field of psychology is unable to predict even a single human's behavior to a certainty. Hence why it is considered a "soft science".

There, that is all the discussion your idea merits. Lemme know when you get to the conclusion where humans are simply a sequence of cascading reactions to whenever and trace that to the concept of a "prime mover" and you'll be somewhere around 350 BC.

He's an idiot, don't worry about him, he thinks there is no connection between probability and reality, when really, they are almost the same thing.

Fuck you're dumb cunt, I'm not even joking, you're just uneducated and wrong (in the sense that what your saying here sounds like mouth noises to an educated individual). Seriously, re-read what you've written here. After doing that a couple of times slowly and allowing youe mind to examine the content explicit, you will agree.

...

ill simply just say i agree 4 other reasons: because we can't choose when we want 2 die, & we also cant choose how we age/look

We have free will because God gave us free will.

>calculations taking place across time.
What is it with autists and their autistic conviction that since natural science seems to work, reality is probably built from numbers? If you were still doing the social-darwinist dance of mocking the concept of "soul" I'd understand, but even in your materialistic worldview there is no problem between free will and being a sack of chemicals. We do "calculations" in our head and are able to consider options, so the will is our name for this experience. If you could predict my choice by studying my synapses then you have simulated a part of reality 100%, which means you have literally reconstructed it. This also agrees with your "numbers rule the universe" autism.