Yet another post on "Free Will"
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
06-12-2015, 09:50 AM
RE: Yet another post on "Free Will"
(06-12-2015 09:35 AM)wallym Wrote:  
(06-12-2015 08:56 AM)true scotsman Wrote:  No. I have made the choice to commit myself to reason as my only means of knowledge. I could not abandon it because I would never choose to do that, knowing what I know. That's because I've made the choice to be honest. See how my inability to change my epistemology to believe in an invisible magic being is the result of a choice? It is caused by my volitional act.

When you chose to commit yourself to reason, was it a tough decision to pick between that and invisible magic? Were you right on the fence, could have gone either way at the time? Like we're "this" close to you talking about Jesus guiding your thoughts according to his will, or some nonsense?

We run it back 1000 times, out of 1000 times, how many do you think you pick invisible magic over reason for example?

Yes it was a very difficult choice. I vacillated for several years. That's because thinking is hard. Going with the flow and accepting what others believe is easy. It caused no small amount of fear and trepidation. It was damned scary, and I had to reach a point in my learning where I felt the confidence in my own ability to reason before I made the choice.

Do not lose your knowledge that man's proper estate is an upright posture, an intransigent mind and a step that travels unlimited roads. - Ayn Rand.

Don't sacrifice for me, live for yourself! - Me

The only alternative to Objectivism is some form of Subjectivism. - Dawson Bethrick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-12-2015, 09:53 AM
RE: Yet another post on "Free Will"
(05-12-2015 09:06 AM)666wannabe Wrote:  Set two glasses full of liquid in front of a person. One contains pure water and the other contains poison. Tell the person to choose which one to drink.

Obviously, the person is free to choose either one. He or she is not forced to choose one over the other. The choice that the person makes, however, will be determined by what they have been conditioned to want. If they have a wish to die, they will choose the poison.

There are only superficial differences between this scenario and a scenario where a person makes a choice between chocolate ice cream and vanilla ice cream. Perhaps the person has been conditioned to prefer chocolate over vanilla, in which case the person would choose the chocolate. Or maybe the same person has been conditioned to want to "try new things", in which case he or she would choose the vanilla.

If we knew all the factors which had conditioned the person (had determined what the person wants--in every situation), we could predict with 100% accuracy, how that person would behave in any given situation. However, it is impossible to know every single factor that goes into making a someone the person he or she is.

It is possible, however, to see that a person's choices are not based on free will.
So what are you presuming it would be based on?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-12-2015, 12:02 PM
RE: Yet another post on "Free Will"
(06-12-2015 08:37 AM)wallym Wrote:  
(05-12-2015 11:49 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  You would be wrong.

Seems like it'd be easy enough to prove that if you'd just listen to the cow.

Show me this sacred cow.

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-12-2015, 01:16 PM
RE: Yet another post on "Free Will"
(06-12-2015 12:02 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(06-12-2015 08:37 AM)wallym Wrote:  Seems like it'd be easy enough to prove that if you'd just listen to the cow.

Show me this sacred cow.

He can't. He's hypothesizing the arbitrary.

Do not lose your knowledge that man's proper estate is an upright posture, an intransigent mind and a step that travels unlimited roads. - Ayn Rand.

Don't sacrifice for me, live for yourself! - Me

The only alternative to Objectivism is some form of Subjectivism. - Dawson Bethrick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-12-2015, 01:33 PM
RE: Yet another post on "Free Will"
(05-12-2015 09:06 AM)666wannabe Wrote:  Set two glasses full of liquid in front of a person. One contains pure water and the other contains poison. Tell the person to choose which one to drink.

Obviously, the person is free to choose either one. He or she is not forced to choose one over the other. The choice that the person makes, however, will be determined by what they have been conditioned to want. If they have a wish to die, they will choose the poison.

There are only superficial differences between this scenario and a scenario where a person makes a choice between chocolate ice cream and vanilla ice cream. Perhaps the person has been conditioned to prefer chocolate over vanilla, in which case the person would choose the chocolate. Or maybe the same person has been conditioned to want to "try new things", in which case he or she would choose the vanilla.

If we knew all the factors which had conditioned the person (had determined what the person wants--in every situation), we could predict with 100% accuracy, how that person would behave in any given situation. However, it is impossible to know every single factor that goes into making a someone the person he or she is.

It is possible, however, to see that a person's choices are not based on free will.

Not really, the problem with the OP, is that it seems to operate on a strawman concept of free-will. I don't folks who subscribe to compatibilism, or some iteration of that would agree with your conception of it.

"Tell me, muse, of the storyteller who has been thrust to the edge of the world, both an infant and an ancient, and through him reveal everyman." ---Homer the aged poet.

"In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-12-2015, 05:41 PM
RE: Yet another post on "Free Will"
(06-12-2015 09:53 AM)DerFish Wrote:  
(05-12-2015 09:06 AM)666wannabe Wrote:  Set two glasses full of liquid in front of a person. One contains pure water and the other contains poison. Tell the person to choose which one to drink.

Obviously, the person is free to choose either one. He or she is not forced to choose one over the other. The choice that the person makes, however, will be determined by what they have been conditioned to want. If they have a wish to die, they will choose the poison.

There are only superficial differences between this scenario and a scenario where a person makes a choice between chocolate ice cream and vanilla ice cream. Perhaps the person has been conditioned to prefer chocolate over vanilla, in which case the person would choose the chocolate. Or maybe the same person has been conditioned to want to "try new things", in which case he or she would choose the vanilla.

If we knew all the factors which had conditioned the person (had determined what the person wants--in every situation), we could predict with 100% accuracy, how that person would behave in any given situation. However, it is impossible to know every single factor that goes into making a someone the person he or she is.

It is possible, however, to see that a person's choices are not based on free will.
So what are you presuming it would be based on?

The choice the makes would be based upon "will", but will, the nature of which has been (and is) determined by the three factors I mentioned. If it is determined by factors beyond our control, it cannot be defined as "free".

If we believe absurdities, we shall commit atrocities.--Voltaire.

"To argue with a man who has renounced the use and authority of reason is like administering medicine to the dead." --Thomas Paine.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-12-2015, 07:31 AM
RE: Yet another post on "Free Will"
(06-12-2015 12:02 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(06-12-2015 08:37 AM)wallym Wrote:  Seems like it'd be easy enough to prove that if you'd just listen to the cow.

Show me this sacred cow.

I ate her.

Don't let those gnomes and their illusions get you down. They're just gnomes and illusions.

--Jake the Dog, Adventure Time

Alouette, je te plumerai.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-12-2015, 07:36 AM
RE: Yet another post on "Free Will"
(06-12-2015 09:50 AM)true scotsman Wrote:  
(06-12-2015 09:35 AM)wallym Wrote:  When you chose to commit yourself to reason, was it a tough decision to pick between that and invisible magic? Were you right on the fence, could have gone either way at the time? Like we're "this" close to you talking about Jesus guiding your thoughts according to his will, or some nonsense?

We run it back 1000 times, out of 1000 times, how many do you think you pick invisible magic over reason for example?

Yes it was a very difficult choice. I vacillated for several years. That's because thinking is hard. Going with the flow and accepting what others believe is easy. It caused no small amount of fear and trepidation. It was damned scary, and I had to reach a point in my learning where I felt the confidence in my own ability to reason before I made the choice.

What made you decide after all those years? The confidence in your reason to choose reason? That's an interesting path.

Blog: http://141min.tumblr.com/
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-12-2015, 11:24 AM
RE: Yet another post on "Free Will"
(07-12-2015 07:36 AM)wallym Wrote:  
(06-12-2015 09:50 AM)true scotsman Wrote:  Yes it was a very difficult choice. I vacillated for several years. That's because thinking is hard. Going with the flow and accepting what others believe is easy. It caused no small amount of fear and trepidation. It was damned scary, and I had to reach a point in my learning where I felt the confidence in my own ability to reason before I made the choice.

What made you decide after all those years? The confidence in your reason to choose reason? That's an interesting path.

I said my confidence in my ability to reason, not my reason to choose reason. Reason is a skill that must be learned and honed as I said. It is not automatic. It took me a long time for several reasons. I did not have the knowledge that I do now. I did not have a rational philosophy. I was philosophically unarmed so to speak and vulnerable to the fraud which is theism. I had no theory of concepts (where is one to be found in the Bible? Its concern is with faith, not reason). I also had been threatened throughout my childhood with going to Hell. That's a powerful motivator. I also was indoctrinated into a set of doctrines that was explicitly anti-reason. All of these factors stunted my growth as a person and kept me in fear and ignorance. I should say that when I integrated the concept of the primacy of existence, the decision was then easy, but it took years of study to get to that point, study that I was made to feel fearful for undertaking.

Theism can not stand for one second on a rational view of reality and theists know this which is why they promote faith and denigrate reason. Fortunately I escaped. I wish I had been taught the rational philosophy I now have when I was young lad instead of a pack of lies.

Do not lose your knowledge that man's proper estate is an upright posture, an intransigent mind and a step that travels unlimited roads. - Ayn Rand.

Don't sacrifice for me, live for yourself! - Me

The only alternative to Objectivism is some form of Subjectivism. - Dawson Bethrick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-12-2015, 12:37 PM
RE: Yet another post on "Free Will"
(07-12-2015 11:24 AM)true scotsman Wrote:  
(07-12-2015 07:36 AM)wallym Wrote:  What made you decide after all those years? The confidence in your reason to choose reason? That's an interesting path.

I said my confidence in my ability to reason, not my reason to choose reason. Reason is a skill that must be learned and honed as I said. It is not automatic. It took me a long time for several reasons. I did not have the knowledge that I do now. I did not have a rational philosophy. I was philosophically unarmed so to speak and vulnerable to the fraud which is theism. I had no theory of concepts (where is one to be found in the Bible? Its concern is with faith, not reason). I also had been threatened throughout my childhood with going to Hell. That's a powerful motivator. I also was indoctrinated into a set of doctrines that was explicitly anti-reason. All of these factors stunted my growth as a person and kept me in fear and ignorance. I should say that when I integrated the concept of the primacy of existence, the decision was then easy, but it took years of study to get to that point, study that I was made to feel fearful for undertaking.

Theism can not stand for one second on a rational view of reality and theists know this which is why they promote faith and denigrate reason. Fortunately I escaped. I wish I had been taught the rational philosophy I now have when I was young lad instead of a pack of lies.

Definitely interesting. I can see why free will being real would be so important to you. Out of curiosity, have you looked into it much in terms of the physics and neuroscience and all that jazz, or are you mostly just going on intuition. In that it 'seems' like I was free to choose A or B, so I must have freely chosen it.

My view is that we're artificial intelligence. Big Blue (famous chess computer) had all possible moves to choose from, but I don't think you'd consider Big Blue to have free will in choosing it's plays.

Blog: http://141min.tumblr.com/
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: