File: 8F7KeHU.gif (3 MB, 280x208) Image search: [Google]

3 MB, 280x208

Of course. If my friend asks me if I'd like to go out and drink today, I can. But I can also just stay at home if I'd like. If i feel for like staying at home 'cause I don't feel like I wanna drink today then I'm going to stay at home.

>>681783338
your neuronal responses happen faster than you produce thought. Basically, brain activity precedes your thought occurrence. So where is your free will?

>>681783642

this faggot has it right.

end of thread. go home.

>>681783642
>>681784039

>Kill somebody
>Get framed
>"It wasnt my fault I had no choice xD"

If our actions are determined then why can't we sense them before we execute them?

>>681784200
Wow, there's no coming back from this shit right here... This anon fucking nails a home run

>>681784200
Oh and that's

/thread.

Motherfuckers

of course you do, it can be influenced however,

>>681783642
How would your thoughts form before the neurons required to form them have been activated?

>>681784200
It doesn't mean that you are not self-aware of your actions. When you're killing someone you're conscious about the surroundings, or are you a dead-brain zombie?

>>681784200

> If our actions are determined then why can't we sense them before we execute them?

That's a non-sequitor.

>>681784304
>>681784343

And these guys are just retarded/ you're samefagging

>>681784456
This has nothing to do with that ... what the fuck are you talking about

>>681784499
Very good, you saw someone typing a certain way and it triggered your autism alarm!

Of course it's me, asshole. Go take your meds.

>>681783338

You are so clearly uneducated on the nuances of this discussion I feel like you should just leave the thread and stop wasting time.

>>681784623

I actually didn't analyze your writing style (Amazingly enough I would need more than about 3 sentences to work out someones distinct style of writing) I just thought the chances of 3 people being retarded enough to think that's a good argument are minuscule, so assumed it was just you samefagging.

Now fuck off with your uneducated opinions on the subject.

>>681782559
you shouldnt make these posts. the trump voting population will crucify you if you show them the truth.

> you are a combination of molecules and atoms
> molecules and atoms work in deterministic ways
> what makes you think you're special and you have free will?

Maybe free will is exactly how we perceive it, and nothing more.

>>681784499

If our brains can predict actions in the future then how is that possible when the future doesn't exist?

File: moon-man.jpg (25 KB, 517x800) Image search: [Google]

25 KB, 517x800

OP were you in a stoner thread yesterday or the day before?

>>681782559
No

Everything is controlled by chemistry and physics

Everything that has happened had to, and everything that will happen has to

comparing humans with AI suggests that we indeed have free will, because robots are programmed to act in one or another way. On the other hand, maybe humans are programmed to act in certain ways as well? We believe we think and act out of own free will, but it could be that we were biologically preprogrammed to think like that.

Free will does not exist.
But it holds no real world value. So just go about your day thinking you have free will.

>>681783642
It depends on the degree you are talking about. How for example would you explain conciousness?

>>681785713

You are a moron.

>>681786461

>He said a very good argument
>Cant say anything so I might as well call him a moron xD I sure showed him

>>681786063

>Has happened had to?

As to why? Is there a magical universal force that suddenly tunes our brains to do something?

Free will does not exist, because like everything else in this world that doesn't have free will, we are made of atoms, and it seems absurd that a certain combination of those atoms could create free will.

Also, it doesn't matter whether there there is a God or not and whether we are more than a mass of atoms. This is because in those religions (e.g. Christianity), the God is all-knowing and can therefore predict our actions, meaning that we do is already decided, and that we have no free will.

File: 1461871474554.jpg (59 KB, 640x640) Image search: [Google]

59 KB, 640x640

>>681786356
What I mean is that the latest theories about free will are interesting, no question, but they also don't explain conciousness as a whole. You can see that by the amount of new scientific books on that topic being published. It's a sign for how little we actually know. If we would actually get it, we would stop publishing books because we figured it out. There are for example no new releases about how mitosis works.

>>681784200
Of course, law enforcement and jail are designed to stop criminals from doing further damage, irrelevant of free will.

>>681786686

It's only a good argument if you're fucking retarded.

You are so far below the level of knowledge needed to have this conversation that I'd literally have to teach you about the whole thing before we can have a discussion.

Right now it's literally not worth hearing your opinion on the subject because it's like an infants, except you're not cute.

File: 1341362242787.jpg (93 KB, 500x446) Image search: [Google]

93 KB, 500x446

1. Big Bang, forces of the Universe introduced
2. Chain reaction, particles keep colliding/bonding/seperating
3. Ever more complex things come out these collisions.
4. Complexity of particles into unique structures and placements with the electromagnetic force running through it reaches a high level, we call it "life"


Thinking is nothing more than the ever ongoing complexity of collisions/bonding/serperation of particles a super-local level on a specific place within the Universe abiding by the 4 forces. You might think you can think, but even thinking that you think is nothing more than a part of the chain reaction set off by the Big Bang.

Just sit still and let everything happen. Breathe deep into your stomach and out. You can feel your thoughts are nothing but seemingly random waves of energy. Everything just happens.

Hope it made sense.

>>681786995
I think consciousness can exist without free will. Free will is logically incoherent, has no evidence for it, and much evidence against it. Consciousness, on the other hand, even though we have yet to explain everything about it, has sufficient evidence for, at the very least, it’s existence. And the lack of free will does not imply that our conscious thoughts and actions aren’t a part of causality

>>681787309

Nah you're just mad because you obviously have nothing to bring to the table because you know Im right and you're wrong.

Now kindly fuck off

>>681787588
*tips fedora

In how far does this preclude the possibility of certain systems of atoms (humans) in the system itself (universe) not being able to develope a very complex instrument to interact with its sourrounding world. You stopped thinking it through at the level "life".

yes mothafucka but it depends on your decision space

>>681787218

Explain lighter sentences then, criminals who still keep killing in jail and criminals who are released and then change for the better

Explain the reason for parole in prison

>>681787893

> If apples fall from tress then how come vanilla walrus taco?

Just because you said words doesn't mean you made a good argument. Fact is the words you said tell me you don't know what you're talking about.

You didn't just make a bad argument, you made an argument so bad it grinds the discussion to a halt.

>>681788424
what if both of you would just shut the fuck up and start commenting on the topic?

>>681788424
how is this helping discussion?

check my quints

>>681788424

>Blah blah blah you're wrong this is how you're doing sentences blah blah blah
>I still have nothing to contribute

Seriously kill yourself, wannabe smart ass nerd

File: 1461786135201.png (456 KB, 800x600) Image search: [Google]

456 KB, 800x600

>>681782559
Does it really matter?

>>681787842
thing is, that's what you think

>>681788765
well, all our opinions here are subjective as there is no definite answer to the question..

quints!

>>681787842

Hmm interesting

>>681788848
fair enough

File: composition_of_the_Universe_0109d_02.jpg (53 KB, 420x274) Image search: [Google]

53 KB, 420x274

BEST ANSWER:

>>681782559

the existence of free will is entirely dependent on the question: is the universe deterministic? For the most part it is BUT there is phenomena that defies determinism such as the double slit experiment, quantum entanglement, the accelerating expansion on the universe

I should be studying for my forensic exam tomorrow, but here I am, on b arguing about free will.

>>681782559
>Alright you faggots, does free will exist or is it an illusion?
Your question give you the answer, if you can ask this then you have free will. System fuck as so that we think we don't have what we do have.

>>681789112
but he just can be conscious about it. Why the fuck would he need free will to ask a question about on /b/ ?

>>681788754

Okay, let's go through this then.

I assume you were

>>681784200

Again, it's a non-sequitur, something you still haven't responded to.

As for

>>681785713

Lets start with all the many retarded things

1:

> If our brains can predict actions in the future

Nobody ever once said that in this thread. Nobody has said our brains can predict the future, instead another anon pointed out that neurons react before we have a conscious thought.

In other words: A happens before B

The point of this thread is essentially asking if having "B" constitutes free will, some anon made the case that since A causes B and we can't control A, no, we don't.

You didn't understand this and instead said

> Hurr how does we predict da future

Nobody said we predict the future. Some Anon just said our neurons fire before our conscious thought kicks in. Not our neurons predicting the future, just our neurons acting before B starts. You were too stupid to understand this.

> when the future doesn't exist?

Someone hasn't heard time is relative. Don't worry about it tho, it was only proposed by one of the worlds greatest minds decades ago and taught in schools worldwide since then, easy to miss.

Your grammar sucked as well.

Now, if you want we can have a conversation about determinism and whether or not the chemical reactions and neurons running in our brain invalidate free will or cause it, but I feel like it would just involve a lot of googling on your part to keep up, so maybe you should just leave the thread.

>>681789344
he need proof or confirmation that what he know is true one or other way

>>681789344

Because relying on my brain is boring

>>681782559
It obviously exists.

>>681789551
>REKT

File: clap.gif (2 MB, 610x350) Image search: [Google]

2 MB, 610x350

>>681789551

>>681782559
The universe is fundamentally based on chance not cause and effect. With that uncertainty built into the fundamental building blocks it can't be ruled out a free will exists to navigate an uncertain world.

>>681789721
Elaborate on your answer or gtfo.

>>681786063
You're a moron.

>>681786858
Then what's the point of commanding us to worship?

>>681789551
What if consciousness guides the body from the past, like a stick guiding a rolling hoop. So how we deal with the incoming data in our conscious mind sets a pattern for the future.

>>681782559
Whether you choose to suck dick or whether its in your mouth before you know it, you're still a faggot

tl;dr it doesn't matter

>>681790266
It's pretty damn simple.

Anarchy doesn't work.

If there were no free will, anarchy would be fine, because the tribal mindset would not allow things to progress to the point of violence. The fact that we need rules, regulations, ethics, morals, and other behavioral strictures proves that anarchy is unacceptable and deleterious to the organism of society and human life. So we choice to avoid anarchy by mkind social constructs called morals, rules, laws, and reasons to codify behavior.

If there was no free will, there would be no need for codified behavior.

File: Screenshot from 2016-04-28 19-06-18.png (53 KB, 272x190) Image search: [Google]

53 KB, 272x190

become aware

>>681790670
Why didnt you just say that the first time?

Also

You're a retard

>>681790670
I tend to agree. I think to myself 'what would the behaviour of a being with free will look like?' And ourbbehaviours seem to fit the bill. Seems like this debate could be semantics as much as anything.

>>681790959
What have the Jews to do with it.

>>681791151
It's a conspiracy is what it is.

>>681790670
I agree with you to some extent. How do you know that free will is responsible for aberrant behaviour that needs regulations? Maybe we're just programmed to act out those actions when certain contextual parameters are met? Think as of an automatic response to stimuli with different outcomes.

Randomness is not free will. The physics debate about determinism has no bearing on it unless someone stumbles upon a Free Will particle that explains quantum physics. I dunno, is that what people are hoping for?

for my own i can say not.
ex. i would like to be treated better, yet i get confronted with bullshit.
if people dont fear you, they will strike your will, and bullshit your opinions merciless

>>681789551

Yet again, a conscious thought is only a thought that doesn't exist and is only processed through the mind. If our neurons controlled our actions then explain the sequence between gluons which only come in and out of existence without explanation? If really that's prediction coming out then why the fuck aren't we just learning our mistakes and not making the same mistakes over and over again? Ever heard of history repeating itself?

Of course, if we don't have free will then what is the point of being conscious about our thoughts? What is the point of suddenly feeling guilt over bad actions or getting consequences for our actions if we aren't truly in control? If we aren't truly in control then why is it why are we still responsible for our own actions? If our paths are determined by neurons way before we even think or have the ability to choose then what is the point per say let's say having a debate if our brains already predict our actions?

>Time is relative

Time doesn't exist, it's only a concept

>>681791747

Does that explain instincts?

>>681793419
I'm fine with what you said except time does exists.

>>681792488
I think the bearing quantum physics has is about super positions, sister particles and all that. It's not randomness, it's particles transcending physical limitations and the ideas about what sort of systems could come out of that strange behaviour we can't understand.

>>681782559
We can never know.

Basically all our actions come down to our previous experiences in life, experiences which make us who we are, how we think, how we see the world and thus control our thoughts and actions. In this sense, yes it is an illusion.

>>681794380
But it's us in the present organising that information with a feedback loop. We do something and feel what it's like to do it at that loop writes the code of actions to take. Is this our consciousness pre-programming our mind like any computer requires, but every computer requires a free will to write it's codes. That might be important because there's always more than one course of action to choose from.

>>681793808

Is free will and the ego some what related? I feel like it is

>>681794800
That's how it may seem, and is easy to believe/is something we'd want to believe, but in reality the action we take is already decided by our previous life experiences and any choices you may weigh in your mind does not actually contribute to the decision making.

But hey, I could be wrong. We could all be wrong. It might be something so complex that none of us can even imagine.

>>681794905
Well, it's like you said, seems like a waste of energy to produce this experience if it's useless. I think the existence of self awarness could be, what you might call, a functional requirement.

>>681795164
So if you touch something 100 times and on the 101 time it burns you, that doesn't matter?

>>681795351
How'd you get there? The 101th time you touch it is also an experience which will dictate your future actions, in this case, not touching it again because it could burn you.

>>681795618
So you never touch it again? It seems like that experience would create a new dynamic of ideas competing to take control and free will could give an efficient means of choosing the right action. When we do something lots it disappears into our subconscious suggesting an automatic element to our behaviours, but that fact that right here and now exists in the conscious mind suggests there is more going on here.

>>681782559
That depends on point of view off course but if we define it as "Am I free to do anything I want within the boundaries that the laws of nature have set?" then I'd say, yes.
>>681783642
The fact that brain activity precedes conscious awareness does not change the fact that it is your brain that's doing the decision making. You are your brain. That unique network of neurons is you. If it does something then it is you doing it/wanting it done.

>>681796051
>So you never touch it again?
This depends on the individual and the kind of life experience they've had. Some people are more prone to taking risks/putting themselves in dangerous situations, for whatever reason, be it a positive feedback from doing so, like an adrenaline rush or trusting their "luck" by not experiencing a lot of failure, or something similar.

File: image.gif (19 KB, 333x441) Image search: [Google]

19 KB, 333x441

>>681782559

>>681786063

What if free will is chemistry and physics?

>>681796327
OK. But the point is we're perfectly capable of turning our experiences into automatic responses and they disappear as thoughts. Sorry to repeat myself but that suggests our consciousness is not part of our automatic behaviours and requires attention from a none automatic response.

>>681782559

Free will is an illusion, just like space, time, solidity and EVERYTHING ELSE BESIDES CONSCIOUSNESS. When you watch a DVD movie, the entire movie is on that disc and the part of the movie you watch depends on what you do with your remote. Reality is kind of like that in the sense that the 'past', the 'present' and the 'future' are ALL happening at the same time and the part of it you experience (i.e. the 'past', the 'present' and the 'future') and the speed you experience it at (i.e. slow-motion and fast-forward) depends on how your mind (i.e. the remote) decodes it.

>>681782559
you cannot change the past ergo free will does not exist. you are a call and response to your environment.

>>681782559
it exists much less than we sometimes might think due to the cultural and societal brainwashing

>>681796770
The way I see it, that only backs up what I've been arguing for. They are "automatic responses" only in the sense that we do them sub-conciously, in other words, in a way that we have previously accepted as the best course of action to take in such a situation.

I believe that all of this is a simulation and that our lifes are just illusions and that we live our lifes pre-programmed from the game. To us it looks like we are conscioussly taking actions while we are hooked up to conputers in the reality.

File: 1461873142102.jpg (147 KB, 800x800) Image search: [Google]

147 KB, 800x800

>>681782559
I think its an illusion, because I also believe that this world is a simulation so everything in this life is hardcoded. Now free will in the reality outside this one? Idk about that.

>>681797095
Right now, you're having to engage with me. I don't believe in zombies.

>>681796327

I certainly agree that thought process is the dominant decision making process of the brain, but I think it is pretty evident that humans are able to make illogical and emotional decisions. When that stuff enters the loop, I get confused on how exactly you can justify determinism. You know the conclusion your brain gave you is the logical choice, but you reject it because you hope for a lower probability outcome which you desire. That seems like free will to me.

>>681797276
Same here
Im >>681797242

>>681797290
Wut?

>>681797386
>but I think it is pretty evident that humans are able to make illogical and emotional decisions
Surely, illogical and emotional to an outside observer. They're not illogical or emotional to you though, the one making the decision. They're only the sum of your previous experiences in life.

>You know the conclusion your brain gave you is the logical choice, but you reject it because you hope for a lower probability outcome which you desire
Exactly. And this is also because you have experienced "luck" previously in your life or have seen others experience luck and see the illogical choice (illogically) as the most logical choise.

You all must understand that not only does free will exist in essence y'all are faggots. Ima go cum to traps l8 fgtsz

>>681798049
You don't get the zombie reference? Do you know what the hard problem is?

The illusion of the freedom of choice is there to exclude self aware entities from the deterministic nature of being ( or life if you prefer).
To be able to enjoy life it's better not to know at the start where and when it will end.

The perception of freedom of choice protects us against insanity.

File: 1461754608244.jpg (89 KB, 500x375) Image search: [Google]

89 KB, 500x375

>>681797868
If you think about it, it's inevitable that we would come up with the technology to achieve a sim like this. We already have 4K video, which you cant distinguish from reality, and VR is on its way to the mainstream. I think we have evolved to the point where we are basically AI, so we have to go back into simulations in order to learn how to be humans through emotions, since AI most likely cannot understand something like that. Its an idea anyway.

>>681783338
except your decision was made already based on your previous experiences, it was predictable that you would take your action based on all the previous events you've experienced.

>>681798366
>The perception of freedom of choice protects us against insanity.
For some maybe, for me believing free will as an illusion is comforting. It means that everything that happens is supposed to happen, so I dont sweat things too much.

>>681798222
If you're saying you don't want to argue about this with me anymore juse because you insist on sticking to the beliefs of past philosophers, that's like covering your ears and screaming out loud not to hear differing ideas.

May I add, a belief that is very controversial. Just like any when it comes to questions such as the one we are discussing..

>>681798049

How would they not be emotional decisions to the person? Have you ever seen someone make a decision that they regret instantly (before any consequences), just because it was heat of the moment and emotions were high? I don't think emotional decisions are not emotional to the person. I don't really know though, I have a hard time speaking with any sort of personal knowledge on emotional decisions.

Also, how do you explain making a decision in the heat of the moment versus thinking it through. Say you are under pressure and you choose one path, when you would have chose another if you had more time to think. If neurons and chemicals preempt action, how does time affect the decision process?

My personal theory is that human brains are experience imprints, but not all experiences point in one direction. Thinking is essentially tracing out possible actions with likely outcomes. Free choice comes in when you choose which outcome you want balanced against its likelihood.

You can choose how you view things and you can choose your experiences in life to some extent, essentially giving you free reign to design that circuit for future thinking. You aren't trapped into thinking a certain way any more than you make yourself. Or is that just, like, my opinion man?

File: IND-01.png (15 KB, 615x500) Image search: [Google]

15 KB, 615x500

If you guys talk about quantum entanglement and free will you first of all have to understand this:

>Independent: Φ■ ψ■ + Φ■ ψ● + Φ● ψ■ + Φ● ψ●

File: ENT-01.png (14 KB, 615x500) Image search: [Google]

14 KB, 615x500

>>681798872
>Entangled: Φ■ ψ■ + Φ● ψ●

File: CircleCircleSquareSquare-01.png (11 KB, 550x450) Image search: [Google]

11 KB, 550x450

>>681798872
>>681798901
and this

>>681782559
It's an illusion. Your future in a second is your past in two seconds. There is only one thing that will end up happening in this continuity.