Free Will or Determinisn

[Momsurroundedbyboys]

(02-12-2012 04:31 AM)DLJ Wrote:  

(02-12-2012 03:21 AM)morondog Wrote:  Incorrect afaik. Quantum Mech cannot predict state of an atom in the future from it's current state, even a single hydrogen atom. There's speculation that it's kinda written into the laws of the universe that it's not possible. Best we can do is probabilistic calculation.

But free will still an illusion, because if our brains are subject to laws of the universe then whenever we change our mind or decide to do something, it's eventually down to the universe interacting with itself in complex ways. That's why I had no choice really about typing this post

Y'r Honour, m'Lud, the Universe told me to rape her... I had no choice.

Seems like a reasonable defense.

For a huge myriad of reasons the whole idea of free will never made sense -- at least to me. But this whole idea of "determinism" seems to make less.

[Free]

Determinism completely relies on an origin of all that exists. Some believe that the Big Bang is the origin of existence but that leaves a glaring question of "Where did the singularity of the Big Bang come from in the first place?"

Some have tried to answer that question by proposing that the singularity came from "nothing." Others counter that assertion by saying, "How can something come from nothing?"

The argument is a vicious circular reasoning fallacy, and the end result is that nothing is known. Now, since nothing is truly known conclusively, the default position is that no origin of existence has yet been determined. What that means is, so far, there is no known origin of existence, therefore determinism can not yet be proven.

On the other side of the coin, we have what many call "Free Will," which scientifically translates to "Randomness."

Some believe that since determinism cannot be proven, then all that exists has always existed in an eternal state, and everything is therefore random. This argument has also not been proven and may never be proven, but since we have yet to conclusively prove an origin to existence, then Randomness becomes the default position.

It's a simple matter of mathematics. If one cannot prove that something exists- such as the origin of existence- then it does not exist. The burden of proof is upon he/she who makes the positive claim, in this case.

The only other option is Randomness. No burden of proof is required here because if Randomness has no origin- and as of yet none has been conclusively identified- then Randomness can only be disproven as opposed to proven.

Therefore, the current state of our knowledge indicates that Randomness tops Determinism, but Determinism is indeed approaching actuality.

[Momsurroundedbyboys]

(02-12-2012 12:03 PM)Free Wrote:  Determinism completely relies on an origin of all that exists. Some believe that the Big Bang is the origin of existence but that leaves a glaring question of "Where did the singularity of the Big Bang come from in the first place?"

Some have tried to answer that question by proposing that the singularity came from "nothing." Others counter that assertion by saying, "How can something come from nothing?"

The argument is a vicious circular reasoning fallacy, and the end result is that nothing is known. Now, since nothing is truly known conclusively, the default position is that no origin of existence has yet been determined. What that means is, so far, there is no known origin of existence, therefore determinism can not yet be proven.

On the other side of the coin, we have what many call "Free Will," which scientifically translates to "Randomness."

Some believe that since determinism cannot be proven, then all that exists has always existed in an eternal state, and everything is therefore random. This argument has also not been proven and may never be proven, but since we have yet to conclusively prove an origin to existence, then Randomness becomes the default position.

It's a simple matter of mathematics. If one cannot prove that something exists- such as the origin of existence- then it does not exist. The burden of proof is upon he/she who makes the positive claim, in this case.

The only other option is Randomness. No burden of proof is required here because if Randomness has no origin- and as of yet none has been conclusively identified- then Randomness can only be disproven as opposed to proven.

Therefore, the current state of our knowledge indicates that Randomness tops Determinism, but Determinism is indeed approaching actuality.

Ok, however if Determinism is approaching actuality, wouldn't there still be some randomness? Especially, when applied to humans? If Determinism is that given a set of conditions, there's only one outcome, what determines the conditions? I fail to see how everything could be predicted.

Yes, I'm probably looking at this way too simplistically...

[GirlyMan]

(02-12-2012 12:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  If Determinism is that given a set of conditions, there's only one outcome, what determines the conditions? I fail to see how everything could be predicted.

A system can be predictable without being "perfectly predictable". Perfect predictability does imply strict determinism. But perfect predictability is both practically and theoretically impossible which, while not disproving strict determinism, renders it moot at best.

[morondog]

(02-12-2012 04:31 AM)DLJ Wrote:  

(02-12-2012 03:21 AM)morondog Wrote:  Incorrect afaik. Quantum Mech cannot predict state of an atom in the future from it's current state, even a single hydrogen atom. There's speculation that it's kinda written into the laws of the universe that it's not possible. Best we can do is probabilistic calculation.

But free will still an illusion, because if our brains are subject to laws of the universe then whenever we change our mind or decide to do something, it's eventually down to the universe interacting with itself in complex ways. That's why I had no choice really about typing this post

Y'r Honour, m'Lud, the Universe told me to rape her... I had no choice.

Seems like a reasonable defense.

The Universe told me to sentence you to 20 years. Cuts both ways. Point is, the complexity of interaction is such that to all intents and purposes we *do* have free will. But in reality, unless you're willing to posit something external to the universe which magically gives us free will you have to accept that any decision you make eventually boils down to a reaction somewhere between your ears. I don't understand why this bother people ?

[Momsurroundedbyboys]

(02-12-2012 01:32 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  

(02-12-2012 12:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  If Determinism is that given a set of conditions, there's only one outcome, what determines the conditions? I fail to see how everything could be predicted.

A system can be predictable without being "perfectly predictable". Perfect predictability does imply strict determinism. But perfect predictability is both practically and theoretically impossible which, while not disproving strict determinism, renders it moot at best.

Thank you!

[Momsurroundedbyboys]

(02-12-2012 02:15 PM)morondog Wrote:  

(02-12-2012 04:31 AM)DLJ Wrote:  Y'r Honour, m'Lud, the Universe told me to rape her... I had no choice.

Seems like a reasonable defense.

The Universe told me to sentence you to 20 years. Cuts both ways. Point is, the complexity of interaction is such that to all intents and purposes we *do* have free will. But in reality, unless you're willing to posit something external to the universe which magically gives us free will you have to accept that any decision you make eventually boils down to a reaction somewhere between your ears. I don't understand why this bother people ?

For some people (not me) they believe that free will was given to us by god. Or cause and effect when eve snd Adam ate the apple. To me that argument just never made sense. If god did give Adam and Eve free will to do whatever they wanted, except for eating fruit from one tree, then already they didn't have free will at all. If god gave them free will as a result of the apple exchange, then why he punish anyone for utilizing the "gift" he gave? Unless he never intended it to be used, except for what he commanded....then there isn't any "free will."

When I take god out of the equation completely, free will just falls apart because of how I was raised, my genetics, my gender, my preferences (which are personal to me, however others might share them), my fears, and how critical my thought processes are all play a role in my choices.

But now I'm wandering off my own intent on my original query so I'll stop. :-)

[Free]

Quote:Ok, however if Determinism is approaching actuality, wouldn't there still be some randomness? Especially, when applied to humans? If Determinism is that given a set of conditions, there's only one outcome, what determines the conditions? I fail to see how everything could be predicted.

Yes, I'm probably looking at this way too simplistically...

Some people, including myself, like to call it "Order from Chaos."


I am no scientist by any means, but it is my theory that order gets established through the process of gravitational and repulisve fields of energy.

Small pockets of these fields get established through the universe and coagulate to enable a form of a cosmic "natural selection." From that point, to the victor go the spoils, and a hierarchy becomes developed with the strongest resting atop the cosmic food chain.

After that, stars and planets get formed, and life begins.

It's really like a paradox where Determinism and Randomness cohabitate, with Randomness still sitting at the top of the cosmic food chain.

It's just a theory. I could be crazy, and likely am.

[GirlyMan]

(02-12-2012 03:32 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  

(02-12-2012 02:15 PM)morondog Wrote:  The Universe told me to sentence you to 20 years. Cuts both ways. Point is, the complexity of interaction is such that to all intents and purposes we *do* have free will. But in reality, unless you're willing to posit something external to the universe which magically gives us free will you have to accept that any decision you make eventually boils down to a reaction somewhere between your ears. I don't understand why this bother people ?

For some people (not me) they believe that free will was given to us by god. Or cause and effect when eve snd Adam ate the apple. To me that argument just never made sense. If god did give Adam and Eve free will to do whatever they wanted, except for eating fruit from one tree, then already they didn't have free will at all. If god gave them free will as a result of the apple exchange, then why he punish anyone for utilizing the "gift" he gave? Unless he never intended it to be used, except for what he commanded....then there isn't any "free will."

When I take god out of the equation completely, free will just falls apart because of how I was raised, my genetics, my gender, my preferences (which are personal to me, however others might share them), my fears, and how critical my thought processes are all play a role in my choices.

But now I'm wandering off my own intent on my original query so I'll stop. :-)

And yet Girly somehow just remains as his own personal Jesus. ... Shit's crazy ain't it.





Reach out and touch faith, bitches. ... My own personal Jesus, reach out and touch faith!