Free will doesn't exist

Prove me wrong faggots. Protip: you can't.

Other urls found in this thread:

lesswrong.com/lw/nqv/zombies_redacted/
youtu.be/mkuRqZ-SssI
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

Free will certainly does exist, but so do consequences.

I chose to sage and red pill.

Actually, it does. It is but reserved for the Chosen Few of The Man.

Somewhat relevant: lesswrong.com/lw/nqv/zombies_redacted/

We have no choice but to have free will.
Figure that one out, brainlet.

You're attempting to make me CHOSE to believe that free will doesn't exist. You are literally using free will to try to convince us to not believe in free will.

>brainlet.jpg

we are free but the cost of freedom is becoming degenerate

Is that the infamous aids-pool i heard about ?

It absolutely exists, just the fact that most people are weak and desire to follow others blindly.

You've already lost everything. Each thought you have is not your own. Everyone you meet is a clone of a clone. When you catch onto their scheme you somehow get lost in a maze of confusion. The game is already over. But the question remains, why are you fighting shadows?

>we are made of atoms simply reacting to the laws of physics
>somehow 'free will' is magically inserted into this picture
Absolute superstition-tier belief

>Free will certainly does exist,
>Actually, it does.
Proof?

What's the point of determining this? What happens next once we agree there isn't? Will it be a better world if we act as if there is or isn't?

just decided to post that I saw your male thread and chose to avoid it but then chose to come and show you how deluded you are... I made TWO different choices in the blink of an eye and changed the course of human history.. prove ME wrong.

>What happens next once we agree there isn't?
First let's conclusively agree that there's no free will.

>just decided to post that I saw your male thread
Male thread?
>and chose to avoid it but then chose to come and show you how deluded you are
What's the origin of your choice? Can you see how you choose? If not, fuck yourself you faggot.
>I made TWO different choices
How did you "MAKE" these choices if you don't fucking know where your choices originate?
>prove ME wrong.
No need to prove you wrong. You're a faggot who doesn't know shit.

OP you're the one making the claim here.
What's your argument against free will existing? I want to be convinced.

fact

youtu.be/mkuRqZ-SssI

John 8:36,If the Son therefore shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed.

Free wills existence or non existence changes nothing about your or any of our lives. Prove me wrong.

Free will does exist and I'll prove it by not posting in this topic

>What's your argument against free will existing?
We don't know the origin of our choices - we don't know where thoughts originate from. We only observe them after they are formed. If we don't know the decision rules that generate our choices, free will really doesn't exist.

>Free wills existence or non existence changes nothing about your or any of our lives.
Can't argue with that.

>Prove me wrong faggots
what forced you to create this topic

>Free will does exist and I'll prove it by not posting in this topic
How did you make the choice? Can you observe it's origin? Or did the choice "come" to you?

>Can't argue with that.
is that due to your lack of free will?

>what forced you to create this topic
If all our thoughts are formed in our brain and are purely the result of neurons firing, then there is no free will since the brain consists of particles that follows the laws of the universe - thus we also follow the laws of the universe.

If our thoughts don't originate in this universe, then there's no way to prove conclusively there's free will. In addition, we can't observe/inspect the origin of our thoughts. All of my thoughts come to me after they're formed. After doing some research, it seems science can't prove that thoughts originate in our universe.

Thus, there's no way to prove the existence of free will. It's a construct designed to delegate the consequences of people's actions to them.

>is that due to your lack of free will?
Due to the fact that none of us can observe the origin of our thoughts.

>time doesn't exist
>all possibilities/events already exist
>your current perspective is just a new linear path through established events chosen with free will, while you pretend you haven't seen this movie before

And that is why I myself stopped caring about this question. I don't see any realistic way it could be answered and if it
>proves we have free will
then all the choices we made before then were our own. people might suddenly think "oh now i can make my own choices to spite my previous ones!" But your previous ones were also made under free will thus nothing really changes.
>proves we don't have free will
then nothing we do after that will change that fact
So I just don't worry about it. Its the same as the "How do we know that what we experience is real and not a simulation" questions. My answer, feels real enough to me so ima go on with my day.

Lack of knowledge isn't enough to use as evidence.

Doesn't that also mean there's no way to disprove the existence of free will?
The materialist model on the other hand can be scrutinized.
How do the firings of neurons alone create thought?

There's a question about punishment vs prevention that free will is important to.
If nobody's in control of their own actions, legal systems should be exclusively centered around prevention of crimes.

(space)+time definitely exists, just not in the linear way we think.

>All of my thoughts come to me after they're formed
so what starts this process? The brain rules you? Air rules you? Earth rules you?

>then all the choices we made before then were our own.
This implies that "choice" doesn't exist. Just laws that we're all following. Like a great game that's being played out and we're the players and spectators. We're just watching the events unfold, but they're all predetermined.

I think you could be onto something..

Cogito ergo sum

This

Those who dismiss their will power simply are too unaware to separate consciousness from programming. It's the difference between the man who's self disciplined and the man who lives impulsively

When you learn to asses your impulses before acting, you learn to exercise will

agree

>Lack of knowledge isn't enough to use as evidence.
Jackass, that works the other way too. Do you have knowledge of where your thoughts and will originates? How the fuck can you claim you have free will faggot?

>Doesn't that also mean there's no way to disprove the existence of free will?
Yes you faggot, and that is why I said you can't prove me wrong.
>The materialist model on the other hand can be scrutinized.
I don't know why materialists believe in free will. Materialists who bypass the laws of the universe by assuming the consciousness as an axiom are the biggest retards on this planet.

you making this thread of your own free will you proved it yourself faggot

the origin of your thoughts is less relevant than the fact of your will emanating from your mind when you choose to act on the thought.. you can choose to ignore a thought or to act on it or to modify it and act in a way the initial form of the thought may not have appeared by virtue of experience. The question was about WILL .. your claim will lack self directed autonomy due to some vague undefined non-locality of thought origins is going to require substantial development .

>>All of my thoughts come to me after they're formed
>so what starts this process?
I say I can't observe it, and then you ask me to define it. Good job.

>Those who dismiss their will power simply are too unaware to separate consciousness from programming.
Take your hippie shit to /x/.

go on youtube and type in "global transient amnesia"

>free will fags btfo in one video

Check out E Micheal Jones and his book libido dominandi.

It only exists for people who believe in it.

You brought this here, you mindless drone

What is freely asserted is freely dismissed.

No shit. So enlightening. You can go be a faggot sonewhere else.

boat analogy

>you making this thread of your own free will you proved it yourself faggot
>Being such a faggot that you cite actions as a proof of free will.
Go fuck yourself you faggotphobic faggot.

>Use cognitive and sensory organs to perceive and process information
>These organs are a result of natural selection
>Contrary to the bad logic most people assume, reproductive success is less based on objective accuracy of reality, as it is shortcuts to optimize reproduction(hence why you can pop a boner to cartoon pictures, your brain uses que shortcuts)
>Faggot tries to assert freewill doesn't exist based on a faulty value and assesment system in which his own predetermined chemical arrangement is the only factor of his own assessment, rather then any objective value, truth or "correctness" behind it

>the origin of your thoughts is less relevant than the fact of your will emanating from your mind when you choose to act on the thought.
Define choosing to act. What are the options from which you're choosing?

>that works the other way too
The difference is that without the knowledge, we still by default perceive ourselves subjectively, making our own decisions.

>Yes you faggot, and that is why I said you can't prove me wrong.
But we already know that baseless statements can't be proven wrong, you're not saying anything new. Why are you getting triggered?

>Materialists who bypass the laws of the universe by assuming the consciousness as an axiom are the biggest retards on this planet.
This is true.
Close behind them are the determinist materialists. They just move the question back a layer, still bypassing the laws of the universe, and say our entire consciousness is just an illusion.
An illusion being experienced by what?

Free will exists exactly once.
As soon as you make your first conscious decision, the rest of your life is completely deterministic.

Free will exists only for those who seek it.

>You brought this here, you mindless drone
I'm not here to discuss some consciousness and some other astral shit. Argue on logic and observations. Otherwise, fuck off to /x/.

No fucking astral hypotheses on how we're all part of some entity and shit. I can't observe that entity, nor can I observe the astral plane or the consciousness you speak of.

You sheep who fucking believe in all this telemarketing shit disgust me.

You're nothing but a miserable coward destined to repeat your mistakes

>not here to entertain alternatives to what I've been fed as fact

And that's why you're a mindless golem

>Close behind them are the determinist materialists. They just move the question back a layer, still bypassing the laws of the universe, and say our entire consciousness is just an illusion.

I don't think you know what "determinist" and "materialism" mean. A determinist says our entire consciousness is deterministic, not that it's just an illusion. Materialism says our entire consciousness is material, not that it's just an illusion.

You will not find what you're looking for. You will believe this means you are correct... but then in a few months or years, you will realize free will exists; and it will be obvious from then on that it does.

Kys retard

Free will exists

it only exists if you follow gnosticism and you descover your innermind.
The trials that you have to do is for you only

So while you're doing your "trials", your free will doens't yet exist?

>The difference is that without the knowledge, we still by default perceive ourselves subjectively, making our own decisions.
Making a decision implies that you're choosing from between alternatives. Is there a standard decision rule which can be used to make choices? Or is this decision rule flexible?

If there's a standard decision rule - such as all choices are made in self-interest in the small picture or big picture, or all choices are made to try and fit the environment - then there's no free will. All of us follow the same decision rule or law for making choices.

If, however, you claim that the decision rule you use is flexible and you're aware of it, and can change it at will, then you can claim the existence of free will. However, to have the ability to alter the aforementioned decision rule, you need to have the ability to either rewire your neurons (assuming thoughts originate in this universe) or have the ability to observe and manipulate the origin of your thoughts (if thoughts have an extra-universal origin).

That's my issue with free will.

>Why are you getting triggered?
Oh, no, just having fun calling others faggots. Perfectly ready to have a civil conversation. Apologies if I offended you.

>This is true.
>Close behind them are the determinist materialists.
Kek.

Prove it to yourself. Study manifestation. I cannot give you what I know. You must seek it on your own. I care not what you choose other than to say lack of evidence that is acceptable to you does not mean something doesnt exist. Perhaps you should set your will towards something specific with an open heart and a vision and see what happens.

I choose to call you a faggot.

there.

>As soon as you make your first conscious decision, the rest of your life is completely deterministic.
What's this first conscious decision you speak of?

>Prove it to yourself. Study manifestation. I cannot give you what I know. You must seek it on your own. I care not what you choose other than to say lack of evidence that is acceptable to you does not mean something doesnt exist. Perhaps you should set your will towards something specific with an open heart and a vision and see what happens.

Trigger max.

It does because the trials themselves are only dedicated to you and what you experienced through your life.
So you have to endure your worst downfalls inside your inner self.
The more you discover the inner the more free will you have.

The physical world is too restricted where the inner world is nothing but abundance.
Things can get creepy and spooky there though the path is not for everyone

When scientists study animals, should they assume that these animals were "created with free will", or should they replace it with "some unsupportable mechanistic determinism"?

>I care not

Why talk like an oracle?

These people are disgusting and deserve a mass shooting at their degenerate party

What are you talking about?

It does and I am living proof.

I was about to get into bed and fap but then I thought, nope, I don't want to engage in such degeneracy.

Then I considered fapping again. Then I reaffirmed by position and said nope again.

tfw free will + free willy

>user is a materialist

on what basis do you group animals with Humans?

This is why Nikolas Jesus Cruz murdered 17 children today.

I dont need my human brain as much any way lately...

>I care not
>I do not care

Different meanings

I thought you said it only exists once you've done these trials ("follow gnosticism", "descover your innermind"). That means it doesn't exist for anyone else, or for you when you're first getting started, right?

Really? What are the different meanings?

Perhaps that is what I am.

It's different for each of us.
Most people were probably too young when they made it to remember making it now.

I'm talking about the claim that "determinist materialism" has anything to say about the existence or nonexistence of consciousness. It's a dumb claim. Determinism is about cause/effect and laws of nature. Materialism is about everything being material in nature. Neither thesis says anything about whether consciousness is an illusion. You'd need a lot of additional argumentation to get to that conclusion.

>I chose to reply to this post.
What's the origin of your choice? Can you observe it? Can you manipulate it? Or do the choices "come" to you? If you can't manipulate the origin of your choices, then you have no free will faggot.

>be me
>decide which underwear to wear today
OP btfo

>Perhaps that is what I am.

>20 posts by this ID

You know your fate.

>on what basis do you group animals with Humans?

Humans are animals. This is not a controversial fact. Hell, humans gradually evolved from non-human animals, a fact that's only controversial among retards.

>I choose to call you a faggot.
>there.

FAAAAGGOTTTTT.

I didn't choose to call you a faggot. My hands moved themselves.

There.

These trials will be different for every single individual because everyone has experienced different things.
Different mental diseases=different things that people will need to overcome.
A person with ocd would need to let things just be. ETC ETC ETC.
The more and more you do your trials and suffering and overcoming the more and more you have control of your own physical society and eventually you go beyond the physical world to the point where it does not effect you.
Then you have a new world that opens up that humans barely have talked about or instructed about. It is kind of like your the first person in space and you get to choose where to go.
One of our last frontiers that humans need to go through to evolve IMO.
This path is world breaking because it gives a new way to experience life, a new way to look at life, and a explanation for the after life and a bunch of things that humans would struggle with.

This kind of knowledge could save humanity from all issues mentally.

>Is there a standard decision rule
Can you find one?

>you need to have the ability to either rewire your neurons (assuming thoughts originate in this universe) or have the ability to observe and manipulate the origin of your thoughts (if thoughts have an extra-universal origin)
Based on what?
Who's saying the decision rule needs to consist of all neurons? You're talking about instinct. Nobody thinks that free will is a function that's separate from the brain entirely, just some kind of root that gets channeled by the brain.

>Kek.
The illusion problem's pretty funny, right?

...

>I care not to rape
>I do not care to rape

One is caring to not do and the other is not caring to do. Subtle but entirely different

Blessings user

Go to bed Sam.