Do humans have free will or are we controlled by our biology?

Do humans have free will or are we controlled by our biology?

Discuss.

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compatibilism
bigthink.com/dollars-and-sex/taking-the-christianity-out-of-sex
youtu.be/t5ebjk319Wg
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

Do your own school work faggot

both

/thread

>bioLOGy

"free will" is just a concept humans made up and can't possibly exist i the idealized way humans imagine it. Just as how "perfection" as a concept cannot exist.

Everything has to follow the laws of physics. Humans are essentially just very advanced computers that do things based on the imputs we receive and "programming".

I'M LOGging IN CHIEF

You don't have a free will, choices have already made for you and you are merely picking them one by one at every single moment until you are dead.

Man by his nature is free to do as he wills but not will as he wills.

+1
/thread

you might want to look at the idea of "Compatibilism". The idea that we do have a certain amount of Free Will but it meets with the things that constrain us, the events and situations that determine the extent of our free will. Dont bother reading anything by Ayn Rand she is a dimwit and stole everyone elses ideas

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compatibilism

Same thing as saying "Life is what happens while youre busy making other plans"

Sure, humans have free will. We're not controlled by our biology, we ARE our biology.

Really though, it comes down to how you want to define free will. If you want it to be a completely useless concept with no meaning you can go ahead and make humans not have free will by definition.

That's interesting and all, but can you take tramadol into Egypt?

You are what you remember...

free will is illusion
eat shit

I guess the question is, if you restart the universe with the exact same starting parameters, will I make the same decisions as I did before?

Probably. It's hard to see my brain as anything but a regular old computer unless there were something that could be detected outside our physical/chemical make-up that influences my decisions.

So I'm inclined to think there is no free will.

is freedom a con we play unto ourselves in an effort to be convinced we can break free of the shackles of things we may or may not fully/partially understand?

That's like saying "If I watch the same video clip twice and the same thing happens there was no thought put into the making of the video"

rolling

Both and it is called nature verse nurture, it isn't a question of one or the other but what is dominant and what can override what (in a nut shell). Like being gay is biological for example.

You're just delaying the question. You're saying free will was employed to set those starting parameters before the universe began (even if the results are the same if you run the universe twice).

So then we have to imagine who set those initial parameters and how that entity's mind works, and then ask again if that entity has free will or were its decisions the inevitable consequences of some even earlier starting parameters.

I'm still leaning no free will.

Wrong - go read a book.

Babies that have no interaction become essentially retarded, babies were left in an orphanage with no real interaction and all they did was stare a a white wall and they were completely fucked.

Also you can teach children the wrong thing about basic shit like colors and they won't know the difference.

This is part of the reason woman are so funny, every horrible man was produced and formed in some way by a woman.

I didn't say anything about free will, actually. I was basically saying what you just said; your hypothetical scenario says nothing about free will.

You're assuming that free will by its definition would have to lie outside of the universe, which means free will, by any appropriate definition of 'the universe', inherently does not exist. Thus I would argue that whatever definition of free will you were using to begin with renders it a pointless concept.

The left wants us to abandon our biology and it's hurting our species, especially men.

meh, you can still have social interaction and receive education to its highest level then end up being retarded. your point is rather meaningless. also, you do realize by the time modern books are published the information has likely changed to one degree or another. (yes, i realize there are still fundamentals, however even then those can be slightly differently interpreted)

Well yes, as an absolute, the free will question is pointless (or at least it's outside any sort of scientific domain). This is why I've been saying "I lean" rather than "it is axiomatic".

What is less pointless would be the practical application of my leanings. That is the confidence I have that people will respond to environmental parameters in a predictable fashion because, even if they feel like they're exercising free will, their "computers" are simply processing internal and external parameters and spitting out a decision.

Both. Some aspects of our existence are controlled through our biology, while others are purely free will.

Use your fucking brains.

If we were controlled by biology, we would have observed the same behaviour across different culture.

As we can see here for example : bigthink.com/dollars-and-sex/taking-the-christianity-out-of-sex even when it comes to sex people act very differently depending of their culture.

Not op but I want to hear more on this

We are controlled by our biology's free will

I just thought of an interesting idea for an experiment. Sit the subject down in a chair at a table and place various items on the table. Notebook and magic markers. Rubix cube. Bowl of candy. A whistle. A roll of paper towels. Etc. Just make sure the setup is identical for every subject.

Tell them it is a timed test and that they must *immediately* follow the next instruction you are about to give them and they have 5 seconds to complete it.

The instruction will be: "Do something random"

I be willing to bet there will be a very narrow, normal list of what people do.

Well, in that case it just boils down to the complexity of the human brain: How accurately can the human brain contain a model of another human brain? I don't think free will really plays into that at all, as that would kind of imply that free will would rob a person of their personality or opinions (i.e. the things that would make you predictable).

Free will is nothing more than an illusion.

But don’t take my word for it.

youtu.be/t5ebjk319Wg

True. I gotta run. Thank you, user. That was an uncommonly stimulating conversation (for Sup Forums standards)

Free will in the classical sense does not exist. When we look at our universe and everything we observe acts according to causality we have to conclude that our minds are causal aswell.

That should be conclusive enough for most.

However, to satisy the rest; we know now that causality is an illusion aswell. Reversing time in our most recent equations does nothing. Therefor the future influences the present as much as the past does. It is possible some form of "free will" exists that dictates which particles from the past and the future pop up in the present. But this is far from what we usually talk about when discussing free will. This would be more like a universal consciousness or "brahman" or anything along those lines.

>Freshman philosophy with a "biology" twist to it

Some days I am reminded how young you are and how old I'm getting to still be here.

Biology would prevail without education and rational thinking. Free will depends on education (moral, religion)