Old one reached the bump limit.
Starting point of discussion: If your brain generates your thoughts, how can you, independently of your brain, choose to have different thoughts? The exact same concept applies to actions, feelings, and motivations.
>have thoughts for course of action
>abandon it
pretty easy senpai
>>24563968
The thought to abandon the course of action was itself generated by the brain that first conceived of the course of action.
Everything in the universe is connected. In this sense there is no such thing as absolute independence. No stand alone object exists.
Cause and effect is only in your mind. It is an abstraction.
When people say free will, they are talking about having a will that is free from baser impulses. This freedom is achieved through conscious reflection. That's why we say that animals do not posses free will, since animals aren't capable of conscious reflection.
>>24563968
You're an idiot who cannot into critical thinking. See >>24564013
>>24564020
They can, though.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/rats-experience-feelings-of-regret/
Are you presupposing it is even possible to separate "you" from your brain?
Isn't this going to just be the same arguments as last thread?
>>24564081
Maybe not. New posters, new arguments, new concepts.
Maybe.
>>24564075
To believe in libertarian free will, it seems like such a separation is necessary.
>>24564020
Reads like a new age article.
Try to sound less like a 420.
>>24563949
1. I don't see how me and my brain are two different things.
2. My brain leverages the true randomness of quantum phenomena to allow me to make choices that are completely original and without influence.
Get rekt scrub
>>24564020
>Everything in the universe is connected.
Most tightly, your brain and 'psychedelic mushrooms'.
>>24564365
>2. My brain leverages the true randomness of quantum phenomena to allow me to make choices that are completely original and without influence.
What do you mean it "leverages the true randomness of quantum phenomena"?
Like, what are you actually saying here?
>>24563949
>>24563949
We do have free will, if you've ever read you're bible than you will know this. I hope that one day you will read it and takes the words seriously.
>>24564460
The outcome of quantum mechanics cannot be predicted no matter what. It is truly random.
The brain is built to use these mechanics, not classical ones.
So even if you know the location and charge of every neuron in my skull you still have no idea what I'm gonna do cuz I'm a wild and crazy out of control motherfucker and I do whatever I want to.
>>24564495
*your
*then
*would
*take
Basically, science killed god and therefor you must be a) A mad fundamentalist or b) a bad troll. I will go with the obvious.
>>24564533
>you still have no idea what I'm gonna do
Ironically, neither me or you will know this.
>>24564495
Where in the Bible does it say we have free will?
>>24564560
You must be raised in a non religious family. The bible clearly states that we have free will. It implies this by saying that men can choice good over the bad in order to receive gods mercy and transcend to heaven. It places your fate in your hands to get into heaven by doing good in life.
The concept of heaven and hell is designed around the premise that we can choice freely between good and bad.I was raised catholic, but abandoned religion
>>24564551
No, your wrong.
If I unconsciously made the decision 7 seconds ago it's still my decision.
Lack of free will means the decision was already made at the moment of the Big Bang and that can not be the case because of muh quant mechanics
>>24564622
Show us the verses.
>>24564551
But what's stopping me from suddenly turning right?
Nothing in the world would have stopped you from rolling over this but your desire to prove that you have free will. It's only when you want to test whether you have free will that you actually get it. Otherwise, you're bound to determinism. Now get your dirty filthy paw away from this black space you disgusting, nosy oaf.
>>24563949
>you, independently of your brain
>implying the brain isn't you
>>24563949
Exactly, there is no free will, everything is determined by physics and the state of every atom in the universe. Like a line of dominoes, each event in your life was bound to happen and there's nothing you can do about it.
Why don't some people get this? Are they autistic?
>>24564619
Yes the brain leverages quantum phenomena the same way a car leverages gasoline.
>>24564533
>charge of every neuron
>charge
>neuron
lmao you're just spewing shit out onto a keyboard hoping to sound intelligent
To have free will implies that the will we humans naturally inhibit is withdrawn or the complete opposite from this.
And draw what exaggerated connotations you want from that, the mind being a prison, we'll never truly reach our full capacity etc, but the amount of socioeconomic connotations you could have with the word free allows for our minds, if strong enough, to wrap specific positions as in their situation, being truly free and therefore allow for closure and subsequent progress to be born out of this.
But it's not like any of us, myself included, could probably achieve that from being here and the situations that led me and many of you here contributing to aspects of why that'll probably never be achieved.
>>24564533
>implying the researchers that "found out" that quantum mechanics are not determinable are in the right and not just too early in their research to find the pattern / law behind quantums.
I'm very confused by free will.. It's not like I can suddenly decide that I prefer sucking men's dicks whenever I want.
>>24564756
Well, you're free to do so.
These threads are biggest fedora tipping contests
read Heidegger or Kant or something man, the world is simply a membrane between us and a higher order of reality
as we squirm and move, so does the membrane but only as much as the reality behind it allows
>>24564759
This then:
>>24564657
>>24564781
talking random carp and trying to sound intelligent by using abstract concepts of reality that have no relation to the real world whatsoever.
>strawman
>>24564781
empirical proof where?
>>24564820
Empirical proof is not the only kind of proof. There's also logical deduction.
They're two peas in a pod.
>>24564697
Atoms don't behave like dominos.
>>24564745
> muh hidden variables
This is the exact same thing as saying "God controls it"
>>24564283
>>24564403
I don't read any new age articles.
I read philosophy, including natural philosophy.
You suckers probably believe is such new age babble as big bang, black holes, discrete particles and other surrealistic nonsense invented in the 20th century by "anti-intuative" mathmaticians.
You can believe what you want, but there is no way for you to offer any kind of rational explanation for phenomena such as the force of pull(gravity), or magnetism, using the irrational hypothesis of discrete particles.
>>24563949
>The brain isn't you
0/10 we can move onto the next thread.
>>24564910
I believe in dualism bruh.
I was criticizing your way of phrasing your sentences.
>>24564933
So you "believe" in some vague religious abstracion.
That's neat, it just doesn't make any sense to call me new age, when your line of thinking is far more new age.
>>24564929
Even if "you" were your brain and not simply the product of brain activity spawning a unique consciousness you still would not inhibit the ability to think freely. Your brain produces outcomes according to internal and external causes, not because the brain decides to move a electron from A to B. There is no magical entity sitting inside your brain saying : "Now we will create thought A and B and also commence action C". It all happens due to cause and effect.
>>24564815
>talking random carp
>>24564929
For real. I identify as the spark of electricity inside the brain (or 'point of consciousness') first, then the brain (or the thoughts), then as the body (which I activate through extending my conscious will into different parts of me).
One more step, putting your will through tools and machines, effectively 'becoming' or 'feeling' those objects (or worlds as is the case with video games movies and books).
>>24565049
You are wrong faggot, l2science
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Involuntary_action
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voluntary_action
>>24564966
Pretty sure dualism is a perfectly scientific concept that is the most precise to date.
>>24563949
>independently of your brain
you are the brain, dumbass.
>m-muh lack of free will
No amount of philosophical bullshit will erase the fact that you choose to be a loser every day.
>>24565110
I'm pretty sure you couldn't define the purpose of science to save your life.
>>24565152
Science: Simply a concept/model to its maximum while keeping the explanation true.
>>24565196
How about you learn to speak english before you even attempt to have discussions with people in english.
>>24565094
Look here robot.
>>24565210
True, English is not my first language, but I am confident you can grasp the gist of my post.
I will gladly accept your ad hominem, in order to improve my grammar further.
>>24564879
A line of dominoes is like a simplified version of the universe, each event causes the next
>>24565319
There is no gist of your post.
You are a complete moron. English is not my first language either, but I make an actual effort to make sense instead of blurting out random words.
>>24565375
I think my problems lies withing not proof-reading my test before clicking the submit button.
I took your ad hominen to motivate further grammar improvements. There is no need to add more to it.
You are assuming that the concept of mind is reducible to the physical level. By making this assumption, you are making a category mistake.
>>24564013
You are begging the question by asserting your point is true without providing any evidence to back it up.
>>24565404
Your problem lies in the fact that you don't understand the words you use. Not even in your native language.
You quite simply do not understand the concepts.
>>24565414
Please elaborate senpai.
>>24564365
Just because you don't understand the mechanism behind a concept does not make that concept's function random.
>>24565414
You associate your post with tarot cards and by doing so you remove all credibility from yourself.
Go peddle your snake oil on /x/.
>>24565427
Please elaborate, if you are confident that my words was wrong.
>>24565439
He is applying qualities to something they don't inherently apply to.
>>24565456
I just like the picture, man. Noice logical fallcy though you seem very smart.
I've thought about this many times. My conclusion: In the here and now I have free will, but on a grander scale (if you were a deity looking over everything), no you don't have free will. Because my perception of reality is merely limited to my own thoughts, from my perspective I have free will, but I know it isn't actually free will. If you were to rewind the universe to the big bang and watched what happened up to the point of me typing this, it wouldn't be anything different from the first big bang. Everything that happens is always bound to happen, and free will is limited your own conciseness.
>>24565504
Sure you just like the picture, you weren't trying to appear like the mystical sage you consider yourself.
Also there was no logical fallacy in my post. It's a matter of fact that you lose your credibility when you associate yourself with something like tarot cards.
>>24565219
Good thing psychology is a pseudoscience then.
>>24565518
>I've thought about this many times. My conclusion: In the here and now I have free will, but on a grander scale (if you were a deity looking over everything), no you don't have free will
I have free will, but from a third perspective I do not. Wat.
>from my perspective I have free will, but I know it isn't actually free will
>I experience free will, but I don't have it.
Agree.
>Everything that happens is always bound to happen, and free will is limited your own conciseness.
So you accept that determinism is a reality, but still come to the conclusion that you possess the ability to think freely? I can't follow your reasoning behind this.
>>24565539
You are trying to use ad hominem to make me look silly. Do you know anything about philosophy or ethics at all?
Also, is this an attempt to make you think I'm a pretty girl?
>>24565556
>>24565555
Off by one Senpai.
>>24565610
Ad hominen to make you look silly? Not everything is a logical fallacy.
My conclusion, that you lose your credibility by associating with tarot, is entirely seperate from you.
There is no ad hominem. Most people understand that tarot cards are bullshit, so by associating yourself with tarot cards, people will think that believe in bullshit and so you do infact lose credibility.
>>24565579
I feel there for I am sort of thing. I feel like I have free will, so in my mind I do. But like I brought up before, if the universe was reminded and played back up until this point in time, nothing would change. Free will is a fabrication of the human mind, that's why within my own thoughts I have free will, but form an omniscient perspective everything is bound to happen.
>>24565640
"Your argument is invalid because of [something you associate with]. You could not possibly be a rational person, please excuse yourself from this discussion as you have nothing of value to offer."
>ad hominem ergo decedo
>>24565652
>Free will is a fabrication of the human mind, that's why within my own thoughts I have free will, but form an omniscient perspective everything is bound to happen.
Argh. I don't agree with your phrasing, but I am glad we agree on the core of of the argument, that free will is a fabrication of the brain.
>>24563949
Not only does free will not exist, nor does friendship and trust. It's all fake.
We all pretend to like each other in this 3D world, but it's all fake. It's just illusions, a game if you will. People are judgmental, unable to exchange ideas without shaming someone for being different and not pretend that they're part of the hivemind.
Life isn't even real. Just a long video game that will end someday, and you'll have to play another
I just want to exist in the 4th dimension
>>24565725
Mind sharing how you would phrase it?
>>24565703
I don't think you even have an argument tbf.
I just stated the FACT that you lose your credibility and my OPINION that you need to fuck off to /x/.
both remain the same.
>>24565742
I dunno, but you don't need to unzoom into a omniscient point of view to state that you don't have free will.
>>24565744
>I just stated the FACT that you lose your credibility
Not the anon you are responding to but you can safely ignore that anon is avatarfagging or whatever and concentrate on the text only.
A picture cannot take any credibility of his message, if his reasoning is sound.
You guys are talking in circles.
>>24565865
Credibility has nothing to do with what is being said, but who is saying it.
>>24565741
Eww anon, you are giving me bad vibes tho.
>>24564073
On a side note - rats are the best small pets
Still waiting on those Bible verses that say we have free will.
>>24566506
Nobody is going to spoon feed you what google could do in 2 seconds.
>>24563949
Do you have free will? both yes and no.
Yes, you are given options and choices throughout your life. If you are given to a frenzy of sporadic choice-making, it really is possible to alter your reality.
But there's a limit to how many choices you can make. That means the spectrum of actions you can choose to make are controlled in a certain manner.
So, yes, it's controlled, but you still have the free will to choose between your controlled options.
>>24566708
Are you calling choices, which arrive through the effects of chemicals reacting in your brain, yours?
>>24563949
Why am I defined as an entity independent of my brain?
>>24566873
Because the brain likes to defines itself in third person view.
>>24566680
Not my burden of proof to bear.
I don't understand how anyone could believe in free will. Its so fantastically absurd you'd have to be an absolute madman to believe it.
>>24567040
D-Did you mention m-madman?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCofmZlC72g
Thank you, Sam.
I've think about this and my conclusion is, we don't have free will at all.
The brain is a physic object and thus, bound to physic and chemistry laws. Imagine you are on cocaine or any other drug your desicions, your consciousness won't be the same. Now think that your genetics determine the amount of dopamine, serotonine, and all the other neuro transmisors, conditioning your personality the way you think, etc. Of course you can't choose your genetics, I think you can't choose anything really.
>le no free will i'm not responsible for my actions meme
you neetkeks are getting desperate. when will you realize that you yourself are the problem and not 'laws of physics and stuff'?
>>24568609
We are the products of our genetics and environments, anon.
>>24568703
This. Having no willpower/motivation is also part of my genetics.
>>24568997
It could also be environmental.
Most likely it's a combination of both.
>>24569209
>It could also be environmental.
Well yeah being raised by a psychotic single mom didnt help
>>24569378
Have you tried talking to a professional about it?
Of course, the pills they might put you on can end up frying your brain. They're barely even regulated and they can switch your brand at any time. And the brands aren't "equivalent"--that's just a lie.
>>24563949
People will invariably pick the path of greatest perceived pleasure. Not matter how much thought you put into a decision, it's still just you figuring out which path is more pleasurable and you will never be able to choose otherwise.
>>24569467
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=joanVUoXY0s
>>24569416
>Have you tried talking to a professional about it?
Well yeah but it only helped a little. I didn't want any pills for the reasons u mentioned.
It was a female therapist though, so perhaps that's why...
You are your brain, you can't exist separately from it
Anything that is generated by the chemical reactions in your brain is therefor generated by you. When your consciousness becomes aware of the action it is about to commit, you have the option to continue, or stop.
For me, it's having the ability to either go forward or stop that defines free will. Your brain has already made the decision, it's up to your conscious brain to go through with it. That's free will.
Yes, the consciousness is also chemical reactions in your brain, but at what point do you stop upping the ante?
>>24569519
Maybe try getting a male therapist, if you think he'd be better. It's worth a shot.
>>24569600
But evidence suggests that by the time our conscious mind becomes aware of something happening, it's actually already happened.
http://www.salk.edu/news-release/we-live-in-the-past-salk-scientists-discover/
Reminder that the very nature of this discussion is flawed and all the conclusions you try to draw about it are non-truths
Things will happen the only way they can happen.
>implying I'm going to read a thread full of idiots before I post
It's simple anons, your active thought process is only a fraction of your brain's computing power. This includes homeostatic functions, differentiating temperatures, spatial awareness etc. When you think, you actually recall an instantaneous process where by you string together pieces of information.
You can't have your brain think different thoughts independent of itself because it's the container for all possible action consciously or subconsciously exercised by the body. Your brain interprets information on an entirely different level then you consciously recall information, which means that the act of thinking is intrinsically separate from the act of gaining knowledge through experience.
The experiential process will generate consistent results based upon the actions experienced. If everyone in a red shirt punched you, then you upon recollection there will be the thought that people in red shirts are jerks and will punch you. Free will is the ability to intentionally ignore correlations in actions with the hope of expecting different results due to conscious or subconscious doubt about the experience. This is why firefighters run into burning buildings. The chain of causation looks like fire: when touched is hot > things that are hot hurt > therefore fire hurts. With free will applied to the scenario, it looks like: fire when touched is hot > things that are hot hurt > therefore fire hurts > BUT saving someone from the fire despite it hurting will earn acclaim > therefore you freely choose to accept the risk or avoid it.
>>24570567
lmao
I love the 'hurr durr humans do complex stuff so its free will' argument
>>24570730
Better than the "hurr durr biological determinism because we lack the scientific grasp for definite proof" argument.
>>24563949
how are you independent of your brain you fucking retard? The definition of free will doesn't float around in space, it's what happens in your head and how you process decisions.
Let me ask a question. What does it feel like to know something is absolutely right? what does it feel like having this knowledge in your possession?
>>24570768
Everything you observe is deterministic
B-but the mind is different, especially human mind!
Its super special and stuff and can do things nothing else can!
Please, why would I believe such insanity?
>>24570887
>feel
>knowledge
You can experience knowledge, and you can feel things because of what you know, but the feel of absolute truth is like the feel of a vagina. No one will ever know, and those who do are blinded by the magnificence of its truth.
Let me reword it a bit. How sure are you that you're a being that exists in a universe who posses objective facts about said universe?
>>24570980
are you really arguing that there's no difference between the behavior of humans and the behavior of a bucket of water?
>>24570887
Are you insinuating that everything you think and believe can't be traced back to something that isn't you?
You're the sole contributor to all of your thoughts and actions? Your preferences, the way you process and rationalize new information?
Everything about you has ties to some external presence or simple human biology. You can reasonably predict the actions of anyone if given enough information about them. People develop personalities because we're creatures of instinct and habit. With free will, the term "personality" wouldn't mean much because people wouldn't be very predictable at all.
>>24570980
>everything you observe is deterministic
Nope. Incorrect anon. Everything in the universe is causal, meaning action is the direct result of previous actions.
Let me The Matrix it for you. Everything is made up of atoms. Atoms are made up mostly of space. That means when you bounce a ball off a wall, it's reasonable to predict its return. You can even use math to express how it will return. Since both the wall and the ball are made up of atoms, and atoms are made up of space, if you bounced a ball an infinite number of times, in theory the spaces in the ball and the spaces in the wall will line up and the ball will pass through the wall unharmed. The causation for the wall to bounce is impact with the wall, but there is no way to certainly determine a ball's indefinite future from a single bounce.
>>24571026
Are you really arguing that the human mind escapes the laws of physics because muh feels?
>>24571141
Yes, I took physics 101 as well anon. But were not talking about atoms, were talking about intricate interconnected biological systems
>>24571190
>But were not talking about atoms, were talking about intricate interconnected biological systems
SPOOKY ACTION ANON.
>>24571111
No. I was reading through this thread and saw allot of people speaking about the nature reality and was just wondering what it felt like to know they were correct in their descriptions and the people arguing against them were wrong
>>24571259
>quantum entanglement shows that free will is valid
wew lad
>>24563949
that pile of meat in your head is you, you are your brain.
you dumb sack of shit
>Consciousness is a product of the brain
Good luck proving that.
But regardless, free will cannot exist for if your actions weren't a product of the past they would be purely random. And in that case, what would it even mean if they were random? Random is just a word for things we don't know the exact causalities for, it doesn't actually exist.
q.e.d, e.g, - suck my dick fags
>>24571748
Oh, you mere simpleton, so sure of your knowledge despite knowing so little.
Free will is a self invalidating concept, it cannot exist physically nor metaphysically.
In short, it's just silly.
There is no free will. The actions you take are determined by physics and only afterwards are they described as free will.
It's like Brownian motion. It appears random but is the product of specific particles affecting an object.
Normies hate this idea because they derive self esteem from their actions. If they believed things were not their choices, it would lower their self esteem. This is advanced robotics, so if you're a failed normie then you'll disagree. But, if something as complex as a human being is determined entirely by physics, human thought is not an exception.
>>24570567
>BUT saving someone from the fire despite it hurting will earn acclaim > therefore you freely choose to accept the risk or avoid it.
Well there's your logical leap. Who says that "choice" is determined by free will and not just your neurons automatically weighing fear of death against potential acclaim. There's no way to prove it's free will.
