100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Does randomness allow free will? | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
Newtonian physics is not false, merely a true useful approximation. F=ma will still solve a lot of problems. Just not all of them.  F=ma Newton was right on with that equation. It has indeed proven to be the most useful equation ever. Plus those same letters can still hold in a quantum theory equation: Free will = microscopic acausality  Darn... wasn't going to post but. Free will is relativistic... apply E=MC^2... freewill = macrobservations * experiencedobservations (squared)   
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"In fact, we've even invented the word "willpower" to discribe this very human ability. We have recognized that we have a power of 'free will'. "
Dabra, (Abraca) willpower is not a proof of free will. Willpower is a mechanism that helps us resist a short-term gratification for a long-term gain. The psychological lure of long-term gain in these instances do make people seem to choose to reject the short-term gain, but it's actually a well-reasoned trade-off that has both pscyhological- and personal-gain merits. In fact, it has even social advantages, such as being looked up to by peers, for having a willpower. This is a well-motivated action, and therefore I say that willpower is a logical, forcing commitment, not at all an against-reason or against-emotion force that would be impossible to have without free will. |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
creativesoul
on
Mon 08/03/09 09:20 AM
|
|
Does that mean that because Christians exist... the 'God' of Abraham must as well?
 Unwavering persistent determination = free will??? |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Bushidobillyclub
on
Mon 08/03/09 09:54 AM
|
|
The difference between Quantum scales and Macro scales is AMAZING, and any bold assertions about where what behavior is determined needs to be specific. We must understand this before we try to pretend we know how decisions arise from this thing called a brain. And before we can put an ultimate label on something like, determined, or random, or indeterminate we need to know how these things happen. Anything less is a gross oversimplification. Well, this topic has indeed been addressed and continues to be refined all the time. The Teaching Company Course on Quantum Mechanics contains a very good description of the differences. The lecturer begins with a baseball and describes what all would need to be done to it before it could behave like a quantum object. That description is quite enlightening. The bottom line is that the baseball would ultimately need to be reduced to a situation where no information emanates from the ball or is reflected from it. In other words the ball must be completely isolated from any other parts of the universe in terms of information. Of course this would be impossible to do with something the size of a baseball, and this is precisely why a baseball always behaves as a macro object. However, when we get into the operation of the brain, we already know that many of the components that are associated with the functions within the brain are themselves already at the quantum scale. So it should be obvious that no firm line can be drawn between the macro and quantum scales of the brain. It's not like baseball. I mean, we could look at the overall tissues of the brain as a whole and say that this tissue framework is 'macro'. But that macro framework does not represent the 'quantum' activity that is affecting things that go on within the brain. I personally feel that we already have enough knowledge of how the cells called neurons work that it's perfectly clearly they can indeed be affected by quantum events. That's my personal conclusion based on what I know about neurobiology, chemistry, and physics. There's no question at all in my mind that the neurobiology of the brain can indeed be affected by quantum events. I've also heard other neurobiologists and M.D. confirm this view. Deepak Chopra M.D. is certianly one of them. So for me, it's already a known scientific fact. I don't think any prominent neurobiologist would question this. You're millage may vary. Another thing to consider is Bose-Einstein Condensates, which tend to bring the quantum behavior into the macro world. There are reasons that this doesn't violate the 'information rule'. It is also possible that some of the fluids within and surrounding cells within the brain could potentially take on similar quantum behvior in an orchestrated fashion that would also bring quantum behavior into a genuine macro area of the brain via electrolytic processes. So the potential is clearly there. It would seem to me that it would be far more difficult to deny it than to support it. To deny it you'd have to draw some sort of definite line and show how that line always holds. But where would such a line even be drawn? It makes far more sense to assume that there is no line, until one can be found. After all, the brain is ultimately made of electrons, atoms and free radicals. Those are all subatomic quantum entities. How would a definite line between the subtance of the brain and it's macro form be drawn? How could such a line be drawn? In a baseball it's easy to draw the line because the properties of the baseball that hold interest to us stem entirely from its macro form only. What's going on at the level of individual atoms within a baseball doesn't affect it's macro form. Just like in the brain. Our thought processes (which are clearly very near the quantum events) do not affect the large-scale macro structure of the brain tissue. As an organ our brains appear like baseballs, but within them the activity associated with thought goes right down to the quantum level. It's a non-brainer. Sorry, I couldn't resist the pun. Perhaps as different a scale of conclusion as the scale difference between macro and micro. If the Quantum effects do not move up the scale and effect the mind states, then there is no reason to believe that QM has anything to do with consciousness. Many scientists do believe that QM phenomena do effect mind states ect, they also have nothing right now to point to either. As far as being able to choose something, how do we know we really choose it? Whats the difference in behavior from a programed android, a zombie, and a conscious person will free will. The answer is the behavior cannot tell us the difference between these three. A person with free will can act the same as a zombie without ect ect. Behavior alone is not enough, asking questions and receiving responses is not enough, assuming that you have control over your mind states that precipitate choices is just that, an assumption. Can you know for a fact that this change in mind state was really a choice, or that you where going to change mind state anyway based on the various inputs and just felt like you had a choice? The discussion is far deeper then simple assumptions. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i do not think it is a very deep question.
for example, a decision to purchase a blue car instead of a red car it is solely up to discretion. there is no programming nor is it a mindless zombie like choice. it is a transient preference. choosing one color over another for purely personal, whimsical, or aesthetic reasons is an exercise of free will. happens everyday for every thinking being. over countless ever changing preferences. so what, big deal. randomness has nothing to do with it. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Bushidobillyclub
on
Mon 08/03/09 02:38 PM
|
|
i do not think it is a very deep question. for example, a decision to purchase a blue car instead of a red car it is solely up to discretion. there is no programming nor is it a mindless zombie like choice. it is a transient preference. choosing one color over another for purely personal, whimsical, or aesthetic reasons is an exercise of free will. happens everyday for every thinking being. over countless ever changing preferences. so what, big deal. randomness has nothing to do with it. What distinguishes these things from there opposites? THAT is the question that NO ONE can answer and what makes this a VERY deep question. Making the assertion that this is obvious adds nothing, its not obvious at all. When you ignore how one would go about telling a purely computational choice from a non computational choice then of course it appears easy . . . If a computer makes a choice based a series of if then statements and that ends in the computer picking a red car vs a blue car, and a human makes the same choice how can we tell free will from determined will, from programed responses? |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Jeanniebean
on
Mon 08/03/09 04:20 PM
|
|
"In fact, we've even invented the word "willpower" to discribe this very human ability. We have recognized that we have a power of 'free will'. " Dabra, (Abraca) willpower is not a proof of free will. Willpower is a mechanism that helps us resist a short-term gratification for a long-term gain. The psychological lure of long-term gain in these instances do make people seem to choose to reject the short-term gain, but it's actually a well-reasoned trade-off that has both pscyhological- and personal-gain merits. In fact, it has even social advantages, such as being looked up to by peers, for having a willpower. This is a well-motivated action, and therefore I say that willpower is a logical, forcing commitment, not at all an against-reason or against-emotion force that would be impossible to have without free will. "Willpower is a mechanism that helps us resist a short-term gratification for a long-term gain." That is a very limited understand of will power. How those two words got pushed together to form a word "willpower" and be mistakenly redefined to mean what you say is a shame. "Willpower" is not proof of 'free will.' I agree. The will is ALWAYS FREE. The term "free will" is redundant. THERE IS NO REASON TO TRY TO PROVE THAT THE WILL IS FREE. THE WILL IS ALWAYS AND NATURALLY FREE. To believe otherwise means that you don't understand what the will is. Will power is simply the power of the will. The power of the will is the power to direct ones own thoughts and attention. It is the thing that not only controls decision, but controls thoughts and attention consciously. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Is it possible that randomness and free will are different 'wavelengths' of the same condition. Or the crest and trough of the wavelength of another event? (I am having trouble translating this thought to english)  Yes, different wavelengths or "density levels" There are seven levels of "Densities" that exist for all.The highest level is 7 where the spirit or soul is in concert with the Creator.Humans on earth exist at this point in time at the 3rd level with lower entities such as rocks at level 1 and animals at level 2.The 5th, 6th and 7th levels or densities are only where spirits or souls exist without physical bodies or forms. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, different wavelengths or "density levels" There are seven levels of "Densities" that exist for all.The highest level is 7 where the spirit or soul is in concert with the Creator.Humans on earth exist at this point in time at the 3rd level with lower entities such as rocks at level 1 and animals at level 2.The 5th, 6th and 7th levels or densities are only where spirits or souls exist without physical bodies or forms. WTF HAPPENED TO THE 4TH LEVEL ? ? ? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, different wavelengths or "density levels" There are seven levels of "Densities" that exist for all.The highest level is 7 where the spirit or soul is in concert with the Creator.Humans on earth exist at this point in time at the 3rd level with lower entities such as rocks at level 1 and animals at level 2.The 5th, 6th and 7th levels or densities are only where spirits or souls exist without physical bodies or forms. WTF HAPPENED TO THE 4TH LEVEL ? ? ? The Human race is gradually moving up to the 4th level.The Reptoids exist on the 4th level which is still a physical level.However, since Humans are in the 3rd density, those beings in the 4th density cannot be seen.The Lizards occasionally appear in the 3rd density, but cannot remain for long
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Human race is gradually moving up to the 4th level.The Reptoids exist on the 4th level which is still a physical level.However, since Humans are in the 3rd density, those beings in the 4th density cannot be seen.The Lizards occasionally appear in the 3rd density, but cannot remain for long I fully accept this, if only for the reason that I subscribe to the belief that humans are getting more and more dense. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
s1ow...
Do you choose your innate preferences for foods? Does one consciously choose what their favorite color is? Could you use your free will to choose to be attracted to a person who you are not attracted to naturally? Can I will myself into liking the color red, when it is my least favorite hue? Preferences like these are not really of choice, or one could choose to change that! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
absence of social contracts. judgements, allows free will, not randomness.
"Beyond all the right doings and the wrong doings there is a field, I meet you there," Rumi |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
THERE IS NO REASON TO TRY TO PROVE THAT THE WILL IS FREE. THE WILL IS ALWAYS AND NATURALLY FREE. To believe otherwise means that you don't understand what the will is. Will power is simply the power of the will. The power of the will is the power to direct ones own thoughts and attention. It is the thing that not only controls decision, but controls thoughts and attention consciously. Truly. Philosophers who ponder whether or not their will is free have created their own prisons. There was never any doubt in my mind. We didn't need quantum mechanics to 'give' us free will. Quantum mechanics had to turn out to be the true nature of the universe because we already had free will. It couldn't be any other way. These people who are so 'determined' to imprison themselves in the old fashioned ideas of determinism have made their own free will choice to do such a silly thing. I suppose there isn't much sense in talking to such people. If they don't believe they have free will then it would be like talking to a zombie anyway. It actually feels like that when I converse with them. So I'm better off doing more productive and fruitful things. You can lead a horse to water, but the choice to drink it resides in the horse's own will. Just on a side note, I've been studying the Zodiac in very new and very fruitful ways. Non-personality type of ways that astrology web sites seldom cover. I've been reseaching this for quite some time and I finally found the information I've been seaching for. It's quite exciting. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
absence of social contracts. judgements, allows free will, not randomness. That is an interesting assertion. While I would completely agree that an absence of judgment would allow free will, I think that that notion is impossible to realize with humans. Language, understanding, belief, and knowledge require judgment to exist. I am not referring to moral/ethical judgment. Identification requires conscious perception of correlation between things. Correlations are what is believed to be the relationship between those objects of perception. That belief leads to understanding as more correlations are perceived and further accepted as true. Judged. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
in my opinion yes we choose our preferences. they are not imposed upon us although the reason we prefer one color over another or one food over another might require some thought to understand.
it is possible to prefer one color until something happens which produces a bad association with that color and we find that we develop an aversion to it. i do not believe that there is an innate preference for foods but that we develop our taste in foods based on our experiences and exposure to them. i did choose my favorite color. consciously. it's blue. i like it! but i like all the other colors too. can you talk yourself into liking red if it is your least favorite color? sure! why not? red is nice! people can modify their beliefs and behavior in general. ok - so you ate liver as a child and it made you throw up and to this day you can't stand the look or smell let alone the taste of liver. you can still decide whether you are going to try it again and give it another chance or not. in other words, the preference does not impede your freedom of choice. how do you discriminate between the computerized choice of blue which is pre-programmed and a person's choice of the blue car? offer the computer a $19,000 rebate if it chooses the red car. if it has been programmed to choose the blue car then the introduction of a new variable which is not programmed for into the decision making process will not produce a new response for the machine - but it can for the human. it is the ability to evaluate the introduction of an infinite number of new uncontrolled variables into he decision making process which differentiates the human response from the machine response. of course any physical or chemical process can be modeled...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Human race is gradually moving up to the 4th level.The Reptoids exist on the 4th level which is still a physical level.However, since Humans are in the 3rd density, those beings in the 4th density cannot be seen.The Lizards occasionally appear in the 3rd density, but cannot remain for long I fully accept this, if only for the reason that I subscribe to the belief that humans are getting more and more dense. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, different wavelengths or "density levels" There are seven levels of "Densities" that exist for all.The highest level is 7 where the spirit or soul is in concert with the Creator.Humans on earth exist at this point in time at the 3rd level with lower entities such as rocks at level 1 and animals at level 2.The 5th, 6th and 7th levels or densities are only where spirits or souls exist without physical bodies or forms. WTF HAPPENED TO THE 4TH LEVEL ? ? ? The Human race is gradually moving up to the 4th level.The Reptoids exist on the 4th level which is still a physical level.However, since Humans are in the 3rd density, those beings in the 4th density cannot be seen.The Lizards occasionally appear in the 3rd density, but cannot remain for long How is it that a 3rd level creature could do more the merely guess at the levels above... Or is that what this is... A guess? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
absence of social contracts. judgements, allows free will, not randomness. "Beyond all the right doings and the wrong doings there is a field, I meet you there," Rumi Rumi... A prime example of free(will)... sniff.. sniff.. Has anybody seen my tail... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, different wavelengths or "density levels" There are seven levels of "Densities" that exist for all.The highest level is 7 where the spirit or soul is in concert with the Creator.Humans on earth exist at this point in time at the 3rd level with lower entities such as rocks at level 1 and animals at level 2.The 5th, 6th and 7th levels or densities are only where spirits or souls exist without physical bodies or forms. WTF HAPPENED TO THE 4TH LEVEL ? ? ? The Human race is gradually moving up to the 4th level.The Reptoids exist on the 4th level which is still a physical level.However, since Humans are in the 3rd density, those beings in the 4th density cannot be seen.The Lizards occasionally appear in the 3rd density, but cannot remain for long How is it that a 3rd level creature could do more the merely guess at the levels above... Or is that what this is... A guess? Humans have been told by higher level density beings Also, some humans have experienced higher level existence for short durations
|
|
|
|
|
