Is there free will?
I come to doubt it more and more every day.
>>67892174
Even if there is fundamentally no free will, the processes behind how our choices are determined are so complicated that we won't ever be able to predict them.
So, in practice there is free will.
Yes there is, no one can get into your mind and order what to think. You can be influenced but thats just weak will, ultimately you always have the choice of what to think.
>>67892315
Very nice.
I hate threads like these btw.
Good on you Funland.
>>67892174
Yes.
>>67892505
don't mind me, just jogging in a heavily political polluted safe space.
There is nothing metaphysical or non-corporeal about the mind. Our brain and all it's processes are physical and therefore limited.
I just don't see true free-will without that separation.
>>67892174
I tried to sit down and wait till I did something without willing myself to.
Nothing happened.
See this shit right?
This is why science is the devil. Fedora scientists will not be satisfied until they have dismantled every justification for morality and human exceptionalism.
>We're all just chemical reactions brah!
>OK so why is snuffing out the chemical reaction known as human life any more morally troubling than halting any other chemical reactionary?
>.... MUH TEAPOT
Free will is a meaningless concept.
So is consciousness.
Free will is for homos
I am a machine for the greatness of America
>>67892174
There's none. If there was, even the laws of nature (eg: Gravity) would obey your commands. I'd keep going to open your eyes about the depths of "free will", but it's long, boring and most of all demoralizing.
>>67893013
Even the ultimate fedora could still think that entropy is bad, and that complex system are good.
Thus even an unwaveringly mechanistic view of the universe can have morality
>>67893171
Spoopy
>>67892925
You were freely choosing to sit still and "do nothing"
You were breathing
You'd piss yourself eventually if you wait long enough
>>67892174
You have a series of choices pre-selected by jews pretty much, unless you dont want a normal life and feel like being alienated and rejected.
>>67893289
Except the ultimate logic bound fedroa would have no falsifiable reason for believing complex systems are good beyond his own personal preferences, aka. "muh feels".
So once again we find ourselves at a nihilistic impasse.
>>67892315
Basically this. The universe is deterministic, but that doesn't mean we can predict everything. We have free will, it just isn't magic or anything.
>>67892174
man its so spooky that after Trump went down the escalator, they did a scene in the Simpsons in which Trump goes down an escalator. CONNECTION?!?! OR DID THEY SEE TRUMP GO DOWN AN ESCALATOR AND PUT IT IN SIMPSONS BECAUSE OF THAT?
>>67892820
If particles can decay randomly then that means determinism is wrong. If determinism is wrong that means our brains have the capacity for free will, which most people agree we can exercise.
>>67892174
No. Unless every aspect of human logic up until now has been wrong, then no. Nobody can even define it, it's like some kind of magic.
>>67893614
kek
I don't believe that there is. The fact however does not change anything in my life. Just like >>67892315 said the processes behind our choice making are so complicated that there is no way to predict them and that basically makes the determinism of the human mind meaningless.
>>67893632
>>67893013
This argument doesn't make sense at all. First off, you could turn it around just as logically and go "If Christ forgives all my sins, and a turbo child murderer and the purest, kindest unforgiven person ever are equally bad and deserving of hellfire, what difference does it make? Everyone alive is just playing the shitty demo to life anyway."
There are any number of moral theories which do not depend on magic to work. Science etc. only disproves one sort of morality, Divine Command Theory... oh no, wait, it doesn't, true believers can just append "because God liked the idea" on top of that.
>>67892174
Why are you asking us?
>>67893853
When you get down to that small quantum level but I don't see how that affects things on a larger scale.
Then again I don't fully understand radioactive decay or quantum mechanics.
Read Free Will - Sam Harris. It's a small book, can be ordered through bol.com, it's not an easy read but it's very interesting (especially with his neuroscience background). Sam Harris takes the no-Free Will camp btw
If you take a complex system, like a human being or a nation, and you damage or destroy it, you are destroying more data than you are creating.
The ultimate fedora only has to assume 'things that exist are better than things that don't exist'. He will eventually realise he has a moral code that will broadly speaking, forbid murder, advocate the furthering of human civilisation, the protection of vulnerable ecologies, the creation of works of art, and so on and on and on
>>67893632
>>67894540
forgot the reply thingy
>>67894540
Doesn't mean there is anything objective about that moral code, only that it was created by the circumstances.
>>67895016
I think that 'more data and complexity are the better option' is about as objective as a moral imperative can be. That's what I was aiming for at least.
>>67894539
Sam Harris is a fucking idiot.
>"ought statements are theological in nature"
My philosophy professors all hate him.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OnxkfLe4G74
>>67892385
they had mk ultra controling rats in the 60s
i think they have the tech today honestly and I'm scared that they're using it.
>>67895451
He's really not an idiot, he's just not really a philosopher.
>>67892174
>i doubt
how?
You have the exact same amount of free will as a cow or a dog. That is theoretically you are able to do anything you like for example a cow could rebel against it's owner and gore it or a dog could learn to use weapons but they won't. Both animals for the most part simply have predictable reactions to outside stimuli. Prode a cow in the ass and it will move forward and if you throw a ball a dog will chase it. The same techniques are used against you. If you see a picture of a dead child refugee you will probably have a sympathetic reaction to it's plight and by the same token if you see a video of refugees raping and robbing you will probably be against the same cause. In both cases you are being provoked to perform a specific action.
>>67895564
Well, obviously I don't mean "idiot" literally. He's probably a fine neurologist, it's just philosophy isn't reducible to neurology.
You can't come up with a comprehensive moral theory based on electrical signals. That kind of talk leads to utility monsters and people sitting around smoking weed all day.
>>67896241
But what if I want to be a hedonist?
>>67896241
No but I think the type of philosophy he does serves its purpose in so far as his audience is concerned. His brand of morality is very new atheism-y and he represents it well for his followers.
Out of curiosity what sort of philosophy do you mostly read/write?
>>67892174
Free will exists, but it is not as free as free will proponents claim nor as strict as determinists claim.
>>>/his/
RAUS
>>67892315
>i don't like the truth, so i'm just going to lie to myself in order to feel better
grow a pair you mongolian faggot
Believing in free will is the fedora meme of philosophy
yes, God gave you that, praise Him and His son, Jesus Christ
>>67892174
Of course there is free will.
