>There is no such thing as free will
>"You" are not the author of the thoughts and decisions that arise in your conscience.
>The thoughts and decisions that arise in your conscience are likely due to previous and current events in the universe that "you' had no control over as well
>Future events in the universe will also effect which decisions and thoughts arise in your conscience
>The same is true for the other 6 billion or so people on earth
>This means that your life is essentially per-determined.
>>24590301
I was predestined to not give a shit
>>24590301
Well you rolled a shit life didn't you anon?
>Significantly complex randomness is indistinguishable from predetermination
all that means events are arbitrary/random not predetermined
>>24590431
"You" don't even really exist.
You are just a passenger.
>>24590508
No
"You" are the collective of all those things. The feeler and and feelings.
>>24590301
And why does that matter?
Even if someone came up to you and told you what you're future would be, it's not like you couldn't just do the opposite.
Isn't that the essence of free will? Being able to change your future?
>>24590556
>Isn't that the essence of free will? Being able to change your future
He's saying free will doesn't exist
Also, no. It's being able to choose for your present.
>>24590301
As Spinoza once said, the only way to break free from determinism is to understand what is actually determining your actions and then carrefully planning.
You are determined, but you also have to power (consciousness) to see through it.
>>24590556
>Even if someone came up to you and told you what you're future would be, it's not like you couldn't just do the opposite.
That person also does not have free will and he decided to come tell you that for was determined by events out of "his" control.
Give those events take place, your knowledge of your future life would influence your decisions past that point, but you still aren't the author of them.
>>24590508
Reminder that Buddhists' idea of egdy intellectualism is saying that 'things don't exist'.
>>24590599
>Also, no. It's being able to choose for your present.
I'm not sure what you mean by this.
You can't change the past that leads to the present, so naturally you can't really choose the present.
Your life is in fact pre-determined. Only normies ignore this to be happy. And they are thus living a delusion. Pretty funny.
It doesn't matter to me either way.
>>There is no such thing as free will
Another poor excuse for robots to place their blame on anything but themselves.
>>24590714
This.
/thread.This is now an original comment.
>>24590695
>That person also does not have free will and he decided to come tell you that for was determined by events out of "his" control.
Consider the following scenario.
An entity creates a universe. The universe is roughly deterministic, so the entity could predict at any moment the fate of a human in that universe.
Are you telling me that if that entity were to tell a human in the universe his fate, then the entity would cease to have free will?
>>24590674
Philosophers should stick to their world of make-believe instead of trying to talk about science. They just end up making themselves look silly.
>As Spinoza once said, the only way to break free from determinism is to understand what is actually determining your actions and then carrefully planning.
This is fucking hilarious.
>>24590791
But there isn't.
A 12 year old can realize this:
Name the first color that comes into your mind.
Now why did you pick that color?
Answer:You didn't. It appeared in your conscience. The same is true for thoughts and decisions. You experience them, but "you" didn't author them.
>>24590867
They can never understand this. Or to be more precise they don't want to. I had a "friend" whose argument against determinism was holding his phone in his hand and asking me if he's gonna drop it or not. Whatever I said he did the opposite and considered this to be definite argument against determinism. I don't talk to that fucking retard anymore. Saddest thing was that he had bachelors in CS so he wasn't burger-server tier retarded. He was just a normie who made himself believe bullshit to feel happy.
>>24590845
That depends on whether or not the entity has a human brain. If this entity is able to create a universe, I would imagine that it is not human and thus my statement becomes invalid.
>>24590695
>but you still aren't the author of them
You still get to choose though, don't you?
I mean sure, maybe some entity can perfectly predict the future, but simply knowing the prediction is enough to be able to change it.
I got the impression this whole "lack of free will" thing was meant to feel restrictive, but I don't see how it's any more restrictive than the case of having free will.
You don't really get to choose. Whatever feeling of choice you have doesn't matter. In the end the thing you do is the only thing you could have done.
>>24590556
Well no shit, time machines fuck up causality. Luckily, in the real world time machines aren't real.
its all written in the stars you morons
>>24591075
>You don't really get to choose. Whatever feeling of choice you have doesn't matter. In the end the thing you do is the only thing you could have done.
But to the individual, there's a choice.
Maybe to some cosmic entity with an ability to predict the future, sure, you don't have a choice.
If that's how you define free will, then sure, humans don't have it. But that does that really affect the individual's perception?
How would life be any different for someone that actually possessed free will?
You might say no entity could predict his future, but it's not like he'd know about such an entity even if he didn't have free will (if the entity made its predictions known, he could go against them).
so i am a puppet and a vessel? i'm not sure how to continue with this
>>24591283
>How would life be any different for someone that actually possessed free will?
They would live in a world where causality didn't exist, which would probably be absolutely fucking bonkers.
>>24591283
Well your perception is just a matter of social conditioning. If you try to leave it behind you will come to same conclusion as OP.
>>24590301
who cares? you fags here shill determinism all the time and you're miserable. meanwhile simpler folk are constantly concerned about the state of their immortal souls or their ancestors or whatever and they're efficient, friendly, nice, have strong ethics, are happier in general and live longer.
worrying about whether or not your will is free doesn't determine the course your will takes in finding happiness, it's all mental masturbation.
>>24590695
I still have thoughts in my head. There's an imaginary perception of the way things work that seem better than they currently are, and the only thing that matters is whether or not i can use that to make the world around me a better place, and whether or not people are grateful for it. i sure as hell don't give a damn if they aren't the authors of their own gratefulness, only that i'm not entirely alone in this world.
>>24591044
In the event of you knowing the prediction of your future, that would also have been predetermined, and so would all the things that follows.
Unless you manage to break free from causality in some way.
>>24591413
it feels tied up with the idea that we have to be sad about it and that you should give up on everything since it doesn't matter
>>24591413
You've just outed yourself out as a normie. Because only normie values thing on whether they bring him happiness or not. Real human being values things on whether they are true, whether given the knowledge he(she) has now it is the most likely option. That's what a rational real person does. A normie automaton judging things on whether they feel good? Not so much.
>>24590301
THE ENTIRETY OF "YOU" IS NOT YOUR MIND OR CONSCIOUSNESS
FREE YOURSELF AND ENTER THE PRESENT MOMENT FRIENDS
>>24591468
Not him but isn't understanding all this mean that you're aware of being an automaton yourself?
>>24590301
You need some Alan Watts anon, he's how the hippies got through this shit.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WGoTmNU_5A0
>>24590301
>It's not my fault I'm a lazy piece of shit: The Thread
>>24591526
Not necessarily. Maybe I'm a broken automaton. Who knows. I actually think there are more levels of "automation" you can choose to navigate in. I can only choose on one level.
Either be delusional but happy normie who is a productive part of society.
Or be a loser who belives in truth.
It's obvious to me what I'm chosing.
>>24590714
Funny how often while living that "delusion" they end up being happier, more successful and well adjusted than the Philosophy 101 students that think otherwise.
>>24591618
the whole point he's getting at is that it's a delusion, not true, doesn't matter the cost
>>24591618
They do. So? Should you choose things even if you know they are wrong that make you happy? If you do, can you even call yourself a human being? You're not even being honest to yourself. Your only option is to delude yourself(like a dirty normie).
>>24591323
If life as we know it hinges on causality and causality cannot coexist with free will, then indeed, life can never have free will.
>>24591343
>Well your perception is just a matter of social conditioning
Let's avoid society for a bit and imagine there were just a single human in the world.
>If you try to leave it behind you will come to same conclusion as OP.
But your life isn't predetermined from your perspective.
Or rather, you can never know what it's determined to be.
Some entity may be able to determine it, but you could never hear the entity's predictions without them becoming meaningless.
Moreover, you can never really know whether your life isn't predetermined. Can you think of a way to determine definitively whether an entity has free will?
ROBOTS HAVE SHOWN ME THE LIGHT
MY EYES HAVE SEEN THE GLORY OF THE COMING OF THE MEMES
>>24591468
>efficient
>friendly
>nice
>have strong ethics
>live longer
basically everything our community fails to achieve. happiness is a bullshit consequence of a life well lived and chasing it too much makes people complacent, but that doesn't mean you aren't going to crash and burn if you spend your entire life teetering from one borderline psychotic depressed episode to the next.
>>24591652
>Let's avoid society for a bit and imagine there were just a single human in the world.
That's retarded. It's not the case it and likely never will be.
>Moreover, you can never really know whether your life isn't predetermined. Can you think of a way to determine definitively whether an entity has free will?
I can't. So? I will still choose the option that seems more logical. Just because I can't prove something definitely doesn't mean I can't choose the more likely option and go along with it. That's the rational position.
>>24590867
It came to your mind due to your subconscious. You develop patterns in life based on your decisions and your interaction and therefor will inadvertently favor one color over others based on your experiences.
Where freewill comes in is where you have the ability to choose which experiences you may have based on previous experiences.
>>24590301
you have to be 18 to post here
blox
>>24591686
It doesn't matter if I'm going to crash and burn. I just can't choose. If you showed me some theory that explained some really complicated problem and I had no counterarguments against it. I would accept it.
And if that theory additionally meant that I have to hate myself, and eventually kill myself? I would still accept it. Because if I don't. If I refuse something on the basis that it's not good for me even though I can't with my own intelectual powers disprove it. If I did that, then what's the point of anything? If I can't be honest to MYSELF? I don't mean anyone else. Not even honest with my own mind. How can one live like that? I know I can't because I know I've tried. Reality comes crashing on you and shows you what you really should believe and what you should not.
>>24590431
the metaphysical implications of superdeterminism would cause a pretty severe upheaval
I think this is why people avoid it at all costs
Actualism is another one of those things that would have pretty severe implications if it were testable
Not having control shouldn't necessarily mean your life is any less meaningful though, just that you are essentially off the hook
No one is forcing you to play the game anyway especially with all the gimmedats being thrown around
>>24590301
This may be way out of your league anon, but if you think there is no free will (like I used to until I got my sorry ass educated) then you should read
>"Godel, Escher, Bach"
>"I am a Strange Loop"
>"The Mind's I"
all by Douglas Hofstadter. They will forever destroy your childish notion of determinism.
>>24591725
And here we see another normie that's being threatened by my intelligence, and is still willing to delude himself with the concept of "free" will, so he insults me in the process. His brain can't take the fact that a smarter individual, a greater authority than him, is shattering every belief that he held about this world.
It's absolutely pitiful.
>>24591816
That man is a lunatic...
So I can only assume that you are one as well
>>24590301
Actually try cracking open a philosophy book every once and a while
i'd rather have femanon threads than this shit.
>>24591827
Who's the truly stupid one: the guy who made the obvious shit post or you for responding to it?It's you, obviously
>>24591694
>It's not the case it and likely never will be.
No, I'm not talking about myself here.
I think there's been a misunderstanding somewhere along the line.
>I can't. So? I will still choose the option that seems more logical. Just because I can't prove something definitely doesn't mean I can't choose the more likely option and go along with it. That's the rational position.
I'm not arguing that humans have free will (at least if we define it like in >>24591283)
Based on what we know, humans don't really have free will by that definition.
But I don't think a lack of free will is all that restrictive.
>>24591864
Care to explain how he's a lunatic?
>boo hoo my will is an emergent property of physical interactions and therefore isn't free or good
>if only i could do things other than the things i am inclined to do
hurr
>>24591864
>That man is a lunatic
Wow, that's convincing.
>>24591707
>you have the ability to choose
That is pre-determined also.
>>24590928
>guys this one guy I know who believed in determinism was a complete autist so obviously its wrong wake up sheeple
you do know most of the stoics believed in compatibilism right?
really any fucking ontologist worth his salt would at the VERY LEAST believe in that
>>24591864
>"Show me a sane man, and I'll cure him for you."
- Carl Jung
>>24590301
What are you majoring in, may I ask?
>>24591946
>It's been decided that you can choose freely
>Therefore any action you take has been decided for you because it's been allowed to happen
Fuck man, step it up.
>>24591917
>>24591908
JUST LOOK AT HIM GUYS LOOK AT THAT HAIRCUT HOW COULD A SANE MAN THINK THAT LOOKS ALRIGHT
>>24590503
True, but even pre-determined events have probability.
>>24591971
He's getting his Ph.D in Convincing Mom to Let Me Stay Sere Another Month.
>>24591413
>you don't believe in free will
>that's why you're a miserable robot who doesn't wanna change!
Except I'm a well functioning happy member of society, I just don't delude myself for the sake of happiness like most normies
>>24591963
Compatibilism doesn't mean you have free will, it's just an explanation of how to reconcile determinism with the regular will of humans. In that sense most of the people who are "hard-determinists" are also compatibalists when they say free will doesn't exist.
>>24592007
*Here Another Month
>>24591977
You are standing on a dock, you see a man collapsed on the subway tracks. Do you jump in and save him, call for help, or do nothing?
>>24591977
You think and feel that you are making the decision but all it is is your brain running it's optimization algorithm which is based on previous information which you had no control over. You can't "decide" to do what your brain calculates as your best option because the only way for that to happen would be if the past stimuli that it received was different.
>>24591808
I want to kill you
>>24591971
>wasting money on a piece of paper in this economy
>wanting to be around hard-headed morons just foolishly looking to make money (because someone told them you had to go to college to make money) and don't have any interest in furthering the world
>letting yourself be indoctrinated
>convincing yourself that you're superior to anyone, even with that fancy STEM degree, while you're actually dumber than the average self-studied academic
My answer: I'm not majoring in anything.
>>24591977
Illusion of choice exists, the actual freedom of choice does not.
>>24591998
So you would say that there is a chaos factor, which creates an element of "true randomness"?
>>24592067
But you can go against what your brain determines as the "best" choice, which is free will.
>>24592064
I jump in and let myself get killed, because I want to die.
>>24591963
That guy wasn't a fucking autist though. He is 6'5" that's why he is confident because he received positive feedback all his life and now he is in fact more succesful than me. Just proves that if you got dealt a good hand you always win.
I'M ABOUT TO BLOW YOUR MINDS, you ready? this is some original shit.
Free will doesn't exist.. in the present. Will is a projection of yourself in the future. You don't control yourself right now, your past self steered yourself to this point, you only have will to your days ahead, today can't be taken off the path you predetermined yesterday.
That's how people get stuck in ruts and routines, this is how you get manipulated etc.
People incorrectly attach these important concepts to the exact seconds of time that pass as they process them mentally.
>>24592132
should I have just said retard?
you don't have to be smart to be successful right?
>>24591790
I'd really like an answer from one of you oh-so-enlightened normies.
>>24592070
ehehehe :D
>>24592162
Academically he is also doing better than me. He's getting masters in CS(so am I). So, well I don't want to put my major on a pedestal, but I don't think many retarded people study CS.
>>24592093
>My answer: I want rationalize my shitty decision to do nothing
ftfy
The real reason you won't go to college is because you'll have to be evaluated by someone else against your peers and you know you'll be found lacking. That "piece of paper" proves that:
>you know more than the basics about your field of study/job
>you can work with others
>you have follow through
All of which you will never have/do.
>>24592100
No you can't, you're just describing a situation in which an individual works in a way which goes against conventional logic or "common sense"
It all depends on what the goal of the action is and what the expected outcome is, but the action which ends up being executed is always what the brain determines as the preferred course of action for that particular time.
For example the objective "best" choice for the long term survivability of a drug addict would be something like going to an addiction center and trying to get help from other people.
Instead of doing that the person goes out to get more drugs to get high again.
Did that person make a choice "against" what their brain determined to be the best choice?
No he didn't because their brain isn't doing a calculation for "how do I achieve long term survivability", their brain is probably fucked up on all sorts of chemicals which aren't usually present and their neural networks have been altered. Instead their brain does a calculation for "how do I get high again?" which executes the action of going out to get more drugs.
At no point did the person act "against" their best choice because.
>>24590301
>Causality drives the universe
Sounds logical to me.
This doesn't mean we shouldn't assume responsibility for our lives, or not even try to make the most of whatever circumstances are available to us. Fatalism is just self-pity.
>>24592234
my god have they really butchered language this much?
listen, you don't have to be a genius to do most things
you don't have to understand philosophy to be good at math and vice versa
what makes someone intelligent?
what makes someone wise?
how smart do you have to be to realize the nature of life is a spinning wheel?
>>24592119
>because
This is why "free will" does not exist. Your actions are "caused" by something. Free will implies no causation.
>>24592097
Order and chaos balance each other out, there cannot be pure randomness forever.
>>24592341
No, I'm asking if there is a thing as "true randomness" in the first place.
>>24592341
>>24592367
Pure randomness doesn't really exist since it is based on the size of the sample space you're looking at. If you zoom in close enough to something "random" you will begin to see some loose order
>>24592341
Where the fuck did you get the notion that free will excludes causation?
There's a reason (cause) why you had to make a decision but your actions are your own. Yes, all your decisions are based on previous encounters and yes, there are only a finite amount of actions one can take in any given situation, but it's that choice of which decision to make that makes free will.
>>24592322
Well sorry I'm not native english speaker and since I'm in /r9k/ I am also inferior.
Someone who got lucky, got the right amount of confidence thanks to being lucky and growing up healthily(without bullying). That's someone who is considered smart.
>>24592384
Maybe, but I'm talking on a metaphysical scale here, like chaos theorems and quantum mechanics.
>tfw I didnt't choose my parents
>tfw I didn't choose my 3/10 face
>tfw I didn't choose to be alive
>>24592415
If your will is based on previous causes it's not "free" since it's directly dependent on something else.
>>24592463
It's the same thing with quantum mechanics just on a much smaller scale, not to mention that even there everything can be loosely predicted based on known probability.
>>24590714
Pretty sure living a happy life through understanding reality is a good possibility.
>>24592539
Living good life through ignoring reality and living in delusion is not.
>>24592515
Everything is a reaction to something else, but the ability to choose reaction is free will.
>>24590928
>bachelor in CS
What that is possible? I begin programming as a hobby when I turned 14. I am pretty sure that is was programming that got me into thinking about free will (as my hobby made me realize more and more how predetermined reality is, compared to the algorithms I wrote in my free time).
I was convinced that others from CS might think similar to this.
>>24592515
If the compatibility between determinism and quantum mechanics were to be that clear and cut, it wouldn't be that big of an issue for real scientists.
>>24590508
You idiot... "just" a passenger?
JUST a passenger?
Where does this imply nonexistence?
>>24592563
>Living a good life isn't living a good life.
Holy fuck, bro. Your argumentation skills need some serious work.
Why do you post this thread every day?
>>24592659
If you have to ignore reality to live "good life" you aren't really living a good life at all.
>>24592672
Well, he's not majoring in anything so he has exactly nothing better to do.Well, actually it was predetermined that he would at the moment of creation. He's as much a victim of his shit posting as we are.
>>24592708
Define reality then, chucklefuck.
>>24592647
I'm not even talking about the compatibility though, the question was about "pure randomness", I just pointed out that quantum elements aren't "purely random" since they follow a specific distribution.
>>24592616
You don't choose a reaction, your brain automatically does it for you by subconsciously connecting past information with current inputs.
If you can choose your reactions why would you always react positively to everything? Why would you ever get sad or depressed if you could just choose to react in a more productive way?
>>24592708
Perception IS reality.
>>24592744
Seriously, >>24591816 had it right. You need to read at least The Mind's I to talk about this better.
If you have any neetbux left over from your allowance, pick up a copy and really read it. You're making half sense right now and it will go a long way in helping you understand the concept of free will better.
>>24592730
Doesn't matter. If you ignore ANY fact that you perceive to feel happier then you're a dirty normie who is ignoring reality.
>>24592855
But what if the fact I'm ignoring will only cause me to live a shittier life if I acknowledge it? What then, Boethius?
It's like you want to be miserable.
>>24592443
ad populum my friend
I didn't mean to offend I just get riled up easily
as long as you listen to your gut you will find what you are looking for
>>24592833
I might do that eventually although I dunno why you assume I'm a NEET
Could you at least explain which part didn't make sense to you
>>24592899
And you think that living a life when you are not even being honest to yourself is not shitty?
>>24592367
Randomness does not exist, except whatever randomness is thought to exist in quantum physics, which we can possibly just chalk up to our vast lack of understanding of the subject.
Even "randomness" in computers is deterministic. A random number generator generates a number that only appears random, and it does this through a series of calculations based on existing environmental variables, such as the contents of RAM. Since these variables are constantly subject to change, the number generator can output results that appear diverse and are difficult to predict.
>>24592980
Answering a question with a question isn't really an answer at all.
Nice try though, homie.
>>24593045
I don't have to answer your question. If you have to lie to yourself to "live better life" you aren't really living better life.
Maybe free will exists, you just conclude it doesn't after choosing to believe in all the foundational principles of science and especially inductive reasoning, which has its problems.
Maybe determinism is only an approximation of what really goes on.
Whatever is the case, it feels as if free will exists, so you might as well not give up on it.
Don't cu.ck yourself too much with humans perceived understanding of things.
I mean, you can appreciate where we've got into reducing humans as materialistic machines in a seemingly deterministic universe, but all of this ultimately only matters on how deeply you take this understanding seriously.
All these words to say, "My position in life is not my fault. I got dealt a bad hand and there's nothing I can do about it."
>>24593143
you know it kid and its ALL true, its like the universe is making excuses for me
>>24592708
I am>>24592539
I was referring that understanding reality will lead to a better life eventually, as it will give you realistic options on how to improve it.
I was not arguing that ignoring reality was the way to go.
Cheers.
>>24590705
What the hell, it's not intellectual or edgy. It's just saying concepts don't validly capture anything, not that nothing exists. If anything it's just rejecting intellectualism as anything more than practical.
>>24593436
Well if you are inferior only realistic option is suicide. Or well hard work all your life to get a fraction of what someone who got luckier gets.
Neither of these are desirable.
>>24590301
Look up Alan Watts m8. Goes for everyone in the thread really.
>>24590556
You will die a virgin
BTFO
T
F
O
>>24593552
>Neither of these are desirable.
Well, suicide is probably desirable. But being such a huge pussy I fear the act of killing myself and I don't think I will ever get it done. I'd rather would never be born than to off myself.
I wish my parents would choice prenatal diagnosis, so I would not have to exist.
>implying there is no such thing as free will
My phenomenal self actively identifies with the principle of laughing at your face and experiences itself as the first link of a causal chain of laughing at your face just as my noumenal self spontaneously laughs at your face.
My delusion is that everything is part of a dream I'm having. Everything that has ever existed and happened is because I've imagined it in my head. None of you are real. You're all just figments of my imagination.
What is this
>>24593708
And how did you decide to decide to do that?
>>24590301
It doesn't follow that you are not the author of your thoughts from there not being free will.
My states of mind being predetermined does not imply that those are not the states of mind that correspond to the co-conscious experiences that are named "I".
>being a filthy incompatibilist
>not being a glorious compatibilist master race
>>24593737
By entering the self-reflective point of view and judging the weight of a number of principles of action in a process of reasonable justification.
>>24593777
>process of reasonable justification
Which was performed by you or chemicals in your body?
>>24593807
It was presumably performed by my noumenal self, so the chemicals in my brain corresponding to myself as a personification of pure reason.
>>24593743
trying way too hard here
douche
>>24593807
whats the difference? I consider my mind to be inherent in all atoms, they are two sides of the same coin.
>>24593838
No problem, you can call the molecular setup of your body "you", but do you agree that these are not controlled by "you" but by laws of nature?
>>24593878
I don't consider myself to be separate from the laws of nature, you and nature are the same, thats what everything will always boil down to.
>>24593929
Now your are just mixing everything with anything else. I am pretty sure no scientist would equate humans to natural laws. These are categorically different things.
>>24592443
>got lucky
>thread about determinism
keks
>>24593978
humans are made of atoms, the center of our minds are made of atoms, atoms are made of more fundamental particles and eventually it is just energy.
We are literally of nature and can't speak of anything we do without it being bound by the laws of nature.
So I am in fact controlled by the laws of nature but in the end it is still me controlling myself
We don't live in a deterministic universe, we exist within a substance on which we impose the category of causality. We must understand constant conjunction as necessary connection, because theoretical reason is geared towards the explanation of phenomenal events as contingent effects. Thereby the determinist nature of the universe is intersubjective. Substance may or may not be deterministic.
Once we understand that the phenomenal world can not be known but as a deterministic world because we simply can not understand it otherwise, we understand that essentially we make the phenomenal world deterministic when we structure it by imposing the category of causality on noumena, not characterised by it. Hence the feeling of active choice, incommensurable as such with a passive description of predetermined conclusion, couples with the fact that our self-reflective thought is the only knowledge we have of a noumenal substance, results uncontroversially to the conclusion that our experience of free will is proof of a vital sponaneity outside the phenomenal world. Our inability to commensurate this experience with the phenomenal world is just an outcome of the dual function of reason as theoretical and practical.
tl;dr: incompatibilists are right, free will exists because the universe isn't a cause-and-effect nexus.
>>24594081
So you identify as your molecular composition and therefor come to the conclusion that its "you" controlling your body? OK, but do you see how far you went to change the semantics so you could come up with a sentence that spells "I am in control of myself".
In the end you agree that " I am in fact controlled by the laws of nature", which means you understand the consequences of natural laws.
http://breakingthefreewillillusion.com/
Free will is not only a myth; it's a dangerous myth and the cause of a tremendous amount of suffering.
If we break the illusion, we can have a whole new, better, more rational world.
>>24594244
yeaaaa I guess
i dont remember
>>24594376
>If we break the illusion, we can have a whole new, better, more rational world.
There is no empirical data on the general population that hints at this. We can only suggest it leads to a better world.
>>24594427
Check out the web site. Slattery explains it better than I could right now.
>>24594839
Alright will do.
>>24590854
>im not adding anything to the debate im just stating that i am smart and you are in fact dumb
you're fucking hilarious
>>24595195
Well but he is right in criticizing that cite. If you agree with determinism in one line and then assume you can break free from it by understanding it in the next line people will start to laugh at you. Those two statements are contradictory to each other and sound too silly to be taking serious.
>>24592093
Are you OP?
I'm seeing a big example of free will in that post. I see ideas that YOU authored. I am seeing nothing pre-determined in your response other than the arguments you make based on the opinion you have acquired with your free will.
>>24594177
>Hence the feeling of active choice, incommensurable as such with a passive description of predetermined conclusion, couples with the fact that our self-reflective thought is the only knowledge we have of a noumenal substance, results uncontroversially to the conclusion that our experience of free will is proof of a vital sponaneity outside the phenomenal world.
Objection: How do you know that I "experience free will"?
>>24595500
>I
Or you, for that matter. Or anyone.
>>24595500
Get up. Compare this to your reflexively scratching your ear when a fly does a drive by it. In the former case you must consider the reasons you have to stand up or not stand up etc and identify with the principle of standing up. You must choose to stand in order to stand up, and choice is pure activity. It's the difference between something happening and doing something. When we choose to do something we experience ourselves as acting, not as moved around by some force or other. So even if we acknwoledge that social or genetic forces inform our choices (say we have the biological need to eat, yet the very feeling of hunger and the urge to eat do not translate to action unless we reflect on it and decide to eat), we must by necessity experience them as underdetermining what we do.
>>24596778
"Free will" is more than just "reasoning".
>>24597268
Free will is nothing more than acting according to a law that reason imposes on itself. If someone can argue that urges and social forces underdetermine choice, then they argue the most radical version of libertarian free will. At the core of the discussion is the question, whether activity can ultimately be self-reflective or must be purely instinctual. Biological determinists must commit to the latter since they view reason as reducible to biological functions.
>>24597400
>Free will is nothing more than acting according to a law that reason imposes on itself
I usually think of free will as the ability to make decisions free of prior causes or divine intervention.
>>24597618
Freely willing something essentially just is acting according to a deliberately chosen principle. Free will as pure spontaneity would be self-contradictory, since freedom in that sense would mean acting not according to any principle that can be individuated. But then you have no will formation at all. The only thing that differentiates acting according to reason and acting according to urges, is that insofar as reason is a priori, it is necessary and not contingent like empirical inclinations. Therefore, by acting according to reason, I act according to a law that I find within me and I can be said to be the first link of a causal chain (there are no prior causes, so to speak)
>>24597749
>Freely willing something essentially just is acting according to a deliberately chosen principle.
If someone secretly put a drug in your coffee that made you choose different principles, would the actions you made in accordance with that principle be free-will actions?
>>24597783
How does the drug work? Am I conscious of acting and capable of reflecting on alternatives? Then yes, all such actions would be freely willed actions.
>>24597825
>How does the drug work?
It overstimulates your peripheral nervous system, causing you to feel an overwhelming urge to make violent, repetitive motions with your hands. While in such a stimulated state, your thoughts race and the sensation of fine touch, pain, and deep pressure in your extremities is severely reduced, due to vasoconstriction.
As you feel the urge to move, your racing thoughts will attempt to zero in on some sort of reason to move your hands in a violent way (such as, perhaps clawing off your skin, or smashing things).
>Am I conscious of acting and capable of reflecting on alternatives?
Your thoughts are racing, so any reflection you may experience is very brief as a new thought displaces the old one very quickly.
Your ability to think clearly is further hindered by the urge to do something with your hands. The thoughts that come to you are almost entirely in some way related to reasons why you should perform violent, repetitive hand motions.
>tfw this thread will make you give up, as a cause and effect
>tfw if you didn't read this thread you could have had a chance
>tfw determinism is a harsh mistress and it only takes one tiny flick to make the ball go astray
Free will is intrinsically tied to self-reflection, so your drug, by inhibiting me from entering the point of view of self-reflection and thus making it impossible for me to reflect on alternatives makes my acting instinctual and reflexive.
>>24598013
That was meant for
>>24597955
>>24598013
Does it do so even if, at the time, you feel that you are self-reflecting?
Take the case of a surgeon who has been slipped such a drug. He is performing a mastectomy.
As the urge to move his hands becomes unbearable, the thoughts come to him "I just need to cut a little more. I know what I'm doing. I'm a trained surgeon--I feel a little weird, but I'm okay. Must have been a little too much caffeine in the coffee I NEED TO MOVE MY HANDS I NEED TO MOVE THEM--what? Why did I think that?
Steady, steady, steady... cut I needtocutmoremoremoreineedtocutisthatright?
yes,it'srightIjustneedtokeepcuttingI'vegotthis
I've done
this100timesbefore,I'mfine I need to cut more moremoremoremore
I
NEED
TO
CUT
MORE
He ends up killing his patient by repeatedly stabbing her, though his initial intention was only to treat her breast cancer, which melded with the desire to repetitively move his hands due to the drug he was given without his consent.
He was reflecting during the surgery. At several points during the surgery, he questioned why he felt strange. He even noticed the overwhelming urge to move his hands. He doubted his ability, and then reassured himself.
What say you? Did he botch the surgery out of his own free will?
He did reflect, remember that.
>>24598012
Why would the thought of not having free will make you want to give up?
Maybe you're wrong.
Everybody could have free will.
Maybe you're right, we could be controlled by something far greater.
Even if you were right, I wonder what it would be that controls us?
So, read downwards.
>>24590714
>they are thus living a delusion. Pretty funny.
happiness > truth
just admit it you faggot
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z7BuQFUhsRM
>tfw you could not have of your own accord done otherwise
OP is right.
Normies ITT shilling their crappy books only prove his point. You are pre-determined to live in denial and try to pass your delusion as the truth.
You can see this very well in physics. You can't "fight" enthropy and the things in motion in the universe. Now, use your tiny brains and think it this way: human interactions are part of the universe. Your actions, your thoughts, these things release energy. Energy that cannot go back to its original state. All your actions, all your thoughts have already been enstablished.
Thinking determinism is childish and bullshit because it's simple is like saying the 2nd law of thermodynamics is childish and bullshit because it's simple.
Please pseudo-normies from /lit/, please understand that philosophy is only a way to tell things and OPINIONS. Determinism is strictly related to science, which is FACTS.
>>24593999
>replies got lucky
>gets lucky
>thread about determinism
IT NEVER ENDSnice trips.
>>24600755
top kek senpai used
Can any of you give an example of a free will decision you made recently?
>>24593567
My Nigger, Nigger Jones.
Youre right OP, but that should be a good thing. No self is the way to live
>>24590503
Sort of. Its not necessarily pre-determined, but the things you and everyone else will do in life are influenced by other existing things, so your "fate" is predetermined in the sense that you can't deviate from it, but its not in the sense that it already happened
>>24590508
"You" are more like an intersection. Cars pass through you, you see the sun rise and set, you see the things around you, etc, but "You" dont really exist
Why would anyone choose to make a bad decision, if we have free will?
