>mfw I realized free will is a fucking illusion
this idea fucks with me on a daily basis
guess it was always going to
How do you know the you that percieves isn't part of a system that make decisions for you... but since you are the outlet, you made the decision.
>>27671099
>guess it was always going to
nice
If free will didn;t exist neither would consciousness
It's not an illusion, you're just weak minded
It's an iffy topic, but you can at least be sure that your conscious mind can influence the way you subconscious interprets some of the stimuli you recieve.
This doesn't necessarily imply you have free will.
>>27671239
hello Noam Chomsky
>>27671122
>How do you know the you that percieves isn't part of a system that make decisions for you
it is
there is no "you"
>>27671140
i mean it's kinda obvious
just like no free will = no self, or at least that's how i see it
>>27671187
you're retarded
>>27671239
solid argument
It's an illusion, but there is literally no benefit to believing that you personally exert little influence over your life. It just leads to being an annoying fatalistic cunt.
Yu are just trying to escape responsibility.
OP, are you high?
>>27671021
No, it's not.
But your reality can shape how you perceive things.
Yes, most of the time you have almost no control, but there are plenty of things that you have full control over.
Only a destiny slave would utter such denial words.
What exactly does this mean? so what if it's an illusion?
Your personality influences the choices you will make, which is why it's easy to know what choice someone else will make if you know them. It is all action-reaction, different people have different reactions based on their personality.
But how is the personality formed? Not consciously, but by events that happen to which you have no control over. All those experiences supplement each other, and you've got a certain way of thinking.
Thus, you have no control over your personality, and have no control over the choices you make.
If free will existed, you wouldn't be able to predict what someone would do.
>>27671287
>you're retarded
solid argument
>>27671187
Why can't conciousness and deterministic behaviour coexist? As long as there are too many variables for me to understand, there's some magic going on. Even if it is perfectly scripted magic.
Please explain. I want a coke, I drink a coke. I want to fap, I fap. How is this not free will?
>>27671338
you're a slave, whether you like it or not
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LJtP0Ep1_ds
>>27671358
this guy's on the right track
>>27671365
i'm not arguing with you. as >>27671370 illustrated, you simply don't understand the concept.
>>27671372
why do you want those things? where do those urges come from?
>>27671370
>>27671391
Consciousness isn't a passive thing. You actively make most decisions.
>>27671352
This tbqfh. OP sounds like the kid who watches The Matrix for the first time.
>Dude, we could all be in The Matrix and we wouldn't even know it, man.
Sure, and I could be the estranged son of Putin who has had his memory washed to prevent me from saying anything.
I act on the probably, not the merely possible. Or, so long as it tastes, smells, and looks like chicken, it's chicken.
It doesn't matter. The question of free will literally does not matter.
>>27671391
>where do those urges come from?
I don't know. It's just out of habit I guess. But the first time I did them I must have explicitly decided.
>some people will go this far in justifying their failures and lack of drive
just go live your life you sad cunt, not believing in free will is agnostic tier
>I made the choice to do x action
>BUT HOW DO U KNOW IT WAS REALLY UR CHOICE???? CHECKMATE
and repeat ad infinitum
Well I guess you're free to believe that if you want.
even if we do or don't have free will the people at the top with the most power and money will still dictate how we and society lives
>>27671409
>You actively make most decisions
and just how do you know that?
you *think* you know that. those decisions are being made for you by your brain, even before you're consciously aware of them
choice is an illusion
>>27671416
protip: the urges come from changes in brain chemistry.
>>27671454
>choices are made for you
>even though you're consciously making the choice
ok
If free will doesn't exist, then rationality cannot exist. But if rationality doesn't exist, then your belief that free will doesn't exist cannot be rational. Therefore free will cannot possibly be denied rationally.
>>27671409
Do I really? I get exposed to a ton of Coke advertising, one day I'm thirsty and surrounded by blue shit. There's a disproportionate chance I reach for a coke on this table filled with sodas.
I chose the soda. Well not really, experience conditioned my shit into making the choice. But I don't understand it, I wanted the coke. I chose Coke, the taste of blue.
Now I want milk, fuck.
>>27671461
i just said you're NOT consciously making the choice.
your brain receives stimuli from your senses in the form of electrical impulses and your network of neurons processes them like a computer would, because that's what you are. And, just like a computer, given the same inputs, you will always get the same outputs. Subjectively, the choice seems to appear out of nowhere, and you're not sure why you decided one way or another.
Sometimes things happen so effortlessly that you can call that fate. However there are hard choices in life, where your gut feeling is paralized because all options have different pros and different cons. That's when you use free will.
>>27671482
You can recognise that and choose not to drink Coke senpai
>>27671486
that doesn't explain consciousness or rational thought though anon
it only explains at best the things we desire without thinking about it
if i want to fap but i decide not to rationally then all my senses were telling me to fap but my will decided that it wouldn't happen
>>27671521
I'm not trying to be a dick or anything, but it's very clear that you're missing the point of this whole conversation. Recognizing an urge to drink a certain thing and then deciding to drink something else instead is not necessarily an example of free will. Your urges, and your impulses to resist those urges, are out of your control.
How do consciousness and/or rational thought contradict determinism? You are able to perceive things and process information, but the way in which you do those things is also out of your control.
>>27671569
But that person said that it was. Not everything is urges and impulses, we have rational thought and consciousness. They contradict determinism because if for all intents and purposes possible we choose what we do and are responsible for our own action then there's no determinism in any meaningful way.
It is not an illusion, humans are simply scared of the consequences. Humans live like literal robots, study, work, get married, ensure kids future, die of old age.
This is not how l'm going to live, l'll show the normies how hard l can hit, and hit them so hard that they will regret giving birth to me
>>27671591
You're mistaking "urges and impulses" to mean "I MUST FUCK THIS" or "I MUST EAT THIS"
I don't care what he says; he is not the author of his thoughts/actions. See, we are not thinkers of thoughts; we are merely the collections of thoughts themselves. There is no subjective "I" to speak of.
As for your second point, determinism by definition dictates that your choices are preordained by causes outside of your control and awareness.
To make this more concrete for you, ask yourself a question:
You know the little voice in your head that just pops in at random times throughout your day? Where do the things it says come from? In the words of Sam Harris, you can't choose your thoughts before you think them, because that would require you to think them before you thought them.
>>27671287
>there is no "you"
Yes there is.
>>27671521
And then it just becomes a part of the process to try and avoid regularity. Like the Artists that used the I Ching and random processes to subvert their own biases.
My point was it doesn't matter how long I deliberate on the soda, the process is going to seem free even if scripted by hidden variables.
Free choice isn't, it's created by your constant reactions to an unending stream of events that determine future behaviours. How you are now is how your life was. Recursive defs and a torrent of data.
Expose yourself to what you believe is benificial, and then the opposite. I believe humans are beautiful no rational machines, the autism here reminds me of its value.
Cold logicing fucks, be free don't think!
>>27671663
I don't have a little voice in my head that says things I can't control because I'm not fucking schnitzelphrenic.
>>27671665
You believe this based on what?
>>27671700
I said so.
>>27671686
The little voice is every thought you've ever had. Are you telling me you don't think? It's starting to look that way.
>>27671681
So all rational thought is just a pointless way of resisting desires? Free will exists but it's bad?
>>27671710
Anon you can't be rude to me and be consistent in your beliefs that I'm not responsible for anything.
>mfw realising I am powerless to temptation, and that only God can give me strength to follow him
>>27671721
I can, and I will, because that's what I was always going to do.
I'm just rewording "little voice" so you'll stop being pedantic.
>>27671021
Free will doesn't exist, but you do make choices.
You just need to change your definitions.
>>27671741
So I can go publicly masturbate and when they arrest me I can just say it was inevitable?
>>27671752
It would be inevitable if you did it, but our justice system is structured around free will.
>>27671765
and it has to be structured around free will so there's no point in caring?
>>27671775
There's no point in anything, but you'll care if it's what you were meant to do.
>>27671794
What if I'm meant to publicly masturbate or run a court? There's no way around suffering at all?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u31PeUi7Xig
Compatibilism: The TV Show
>>27671824
>There's no way around suffering at all?
No, not if it's what you're meant to do.
>>27671879
how can you believe this and not kill yourself?
>>27671879
there is no "meant" or "do" only the dance
memes and genes
>>27671712
No, you can still reason and mangle abstract concepts around. But it's how you go about mangling those abstract concepts that operates in cycles.
I also believe a person in conflict with themselves makes life more exciting. I take a postmodern approach to religion. God as psychological phenomenon mixed with Buddhist thought and subconscious sigil magick. It's a giant ball of cognitive dissonance that cannot be resolved. When does a CompEng become a painter?
Here there is no grand narrative, no logic, no truth past what we create. And that creation force, holds meaning.
Fuck science, fuck religion, fuck order, fuck chaos. Let the blender of your monkey brain relate them. Be holistic
>>27671885
Whether I kill myself or not isn't up to me.
>>27671890
I mean "meant" in the sense that the atoms that make up his brain are arranged in such a way that he perceives suffering. If prior interactions among those atoms leads to such a state, then he was meant to suffer.
>>27671913
then he was also destine for pleasure, this does not disprove freewill, only proves suffering is fundamental and thats obvious
>>27671985
Yes, it does. How can he be free to choose something if he's destined for it either way? Are you hearing yourself?
>>27671997
but you realize what he is dont you, at his core he is all that is and isnt.
he freely chose this before he even was and continues to play the flow as it goes, as there never was a before and never will be a after
>>27671997
Not the guy you're talking to.
Imagine we run an experiment.
A woman, 'Jane' sits in a chair. Besides her, a man 'John', sits in a chair, he's given two alternatives. He can eat a lemon or an apple, but not both.
At the point the experiment commences, nobody can predict with any great degree of certainty what he's going to choose. He likely doesn't even know himself what he's going to choose. He choses an apple.
You've recorded this. You can now replay the video over and over. No matter how many times you replay, he will ALWAYS choose the apple.
So you say "John in this instance chose the apple, and he was always going to choose the apple" The terms "John" and "he" refers to the decision-maker.
Now, in a deterministic universe what he chose was always going to be the case because of all sorts of factors that make up John and his situation. His 'choice' is a matter of signals firing in his brain, signals which exist within a structure which obeys rules, and on and on. It's entirely possible that Jane's presence influenced him somehow, she may have verbally suggested the apple! Her presence is no doubt also just as determined as his choice is.
But it would be innacurate to state that "Jane" made the choice. Language is about convenience, generalisation, etc. What is the Thames River? The water flowing through it in this instant is radically difference to what was flowing through it two minutes ago. We still call it the "Thames River", most of us are aware of these subtelties.
So John MADE THE CHOICE, but he was ALSO always destined to do so.
>>27672077
We are the universe collapsing in self to create possibility.
This is some really stupid shit that doesn't make sense. Worse than arguing about God's existence with a religious cuck since you can just backpedal and say that I was meant to not believe this :^)
>>27672112
no collapsing required only play
fun fun fun
pain pain pain
and all in between
>>27672132
And when pain is fun and the all understood we shall become God.
But when a butterfly flaps its wings, does it love another to flap so?
>time is an illusion
>consciousness is an illusion
>money is an illusion
>happiness is an illusion
>civilization is an illusion
>determinism is an illusion
>life is an illusion
>illusions are an illusion
>normal is an illusion
>free will is an illusion
>death is an illusion
>love is an illusion
>democracy is an illusion
>reality is an illusion
>control is an illusion
Maybe all these things are real and you just don't want to face them or the fact you suffer because of your lack of willpower and your own decisions so you create the illusion that they are not real. Maybe the only illusion is the idea you are a special snowflake.
>>27672177
statistically speaking I am actually pretty special though
ITT: a bunch of fedora tipping pseudoscientists
>>27672177
mebbe we all special snowlfake
>>27672177
Claiming that a vaguely-defined concept is an "illusion" is basically a way of sounding profound while still saying nothing at all.
>>27672209
>"pseudoscientist"
pseudointellectual detected
>>27672209
*slaps this anon across face with cock for lack of understanding*
wake the fuck up
>>27672177
your a fool
if u read anything ud understand real and not real are useless terms
faggot
>>27672177
But the illusion exists to in reference to itself, separate nonexistent, together a whole. But there are holes!
None of it exists, all of it does not exist, together a context is created. A knot of wholes!
>>27672286
wholly molly
that sounds holy
or is it merely folly
no but thats a nice post good to see some quality
>>27672332
We play war with the schoolboys, we nuke Japan and kill millions! Real and imagined are only fuzzy lines.
Love is just fuzz on top of a desire, but it pangs sweet! The no logic of loins and saliva no rational grounds, but existent.
We should take ourselves as actors on a stage, serious in role but simply at play! For the brief light closes with the curtains. But my mate needs a giggle.
Goodnight, it's time to continue this discussion behind eyelids!
>>27672077
>So John MADE THE CHOICE
You were right until that. John's brain processed the information given to it and arrived at a specific outcome. John did not choose anything.
>>27672416
John is the brain.
>>27671472
Free will doesn't have to be denied rationally for it not to exist.
If Free Will exists, there has to be some part of the human being, some faculty that exercises Free Will. But Free Will can only be exercised by something which is completely removed from and unaffected by any external stimulus, otherwise it would not be truly free and independent.
However, in order to make informed and free decisions, this faculty would also have to receive information about the outside world through the senses.
We are looking for a part of the human being which receives and processes information about the outside world and is simultaneously isolated from all external stimuli.
Unless you can prove that such a faculty exists, you have no case for Free Will.
>>27672429
Precisely.
blox
>>27671472
>>27671472
>But if rationality doesn't exist, then your belief that free will doesn't exist cannot be rational
Yes, in that case rationality ceases being a valid concept altogether, and you are no longer able to dismiss an argument as irrational either.
>>27672416
use your head,
comon thinking that there is a john separate from the brain
and thinking the brain is separate from "john"
not saying john exists as in him being a identity or separate source of action, but he made the choice, in relation with everything else of course but because he is inseperable from everything else he most certainly made the choice
>>27672416
Did you read what I said?
'John' is the term we use to refer to the 'decision maker', the 'computer' that processed that information, which involves pretty much everything you'd consider a "soul".
It may not have been a cold calculation of choosing between alternatives, it may have in part have been 'biological' (perhaps under certain conditions our bodies react in a way that predisposes us to desire one fruit over the other), it could have in part been emotional (a series of childhood experiences that led to a favourable position on apples), in part social (a hint or suggestion from Jane, perhaps she was eyeing the apple and he wanted Jane to suffer defeat, perhaps she was eyeing the lemon and he wanted to do her well), etc.
All of these possible contributing aspects of his choice relate outwards to wider reality. If the emotional thing was a big player, then if he'd been raised in a country without apples he may have made another choice. We still say that "he", "John" is the one who ultimately made the choice in this instance.
He made the choice, but he was always going to.
>you want a job
>someone else has to give it you
so much for free will.
it's more like "linear" will.
free will would be me leaving my house right now with nothing but a tent, going out to the California ridges and trying to strike rich by finding gold, squatting on any land i wanted.
good luck squatting, good luck keeping gold you find, good luck gaining entry to property.
it's not "free" will anymore, it's just "will".
>>27672532
I think we're pretty much in agreement. The biological computer known as "John" was given two alternatives, and it processed the information to arrive at an outcome. I just don't like the word "choice" because it implies that he could have done something differently, which is false.
>>27672567
fuck off
your not even trying
>>27672696
What's the problem with the word choice? You could replace it with "decision" or "calculation" perhaps, and the sentence means roughly the same thing.
>he may have made another choice
>he may have made another decision
>he may have made another calculation
The word "choice" refers to a situation with an unknown outcome. The word is relevant to human beings because we don't necessarily known beforehand what the outcome of our (or other people's) "processing" will be. The word\idea is valuable to us because recognising situations where there are alternatives is a part of this decision-making process. It's like telling a computer "if this situation occurs, run this set of equations", if the computer doesn't recognise the situation it won't be able to respond to it effectively.
>>27672721
my point is that you make your own choices, sure, but you don't decide your own fate.
your life isn't 100% in your hands, it's in the hands of others in a sense.
>>27672761
>>he may have made another choice
>>he may have made another decision
>>he may have made another calculation
But he can't have made any other choice/decision/calculation. He was always going to choose what he did, because he did. That's why I don't like the word "choice." As stated previously, it implies that the event could have gone differently, when it could only have happened as it did.
>>27672777
>you make your own choices
This is false.
>>27671021
>free will is an illusion
>but cant be fully aware of the process for determined behavior in yourself or others so might as well go on as if it wasn't an illusion as there are so many variables unknown to you
like how its technically possible to predict the weather indefinitely as it's simply a system of the enviroment but we dont have the technology to do so yet so you should still keep an umbrella in your car as it might rain when you're on holiday
>>27672782
Think of it another way.
If I said "if we place the air conditioner in Lucy's room, we won't get cool air in the living-room", I don't think you'd have a problem with that statement. This is just a matter of considering possible alternative configurations of things. At the point this discussion takes place, the air conditioner may not even have been bought. The conversation is involving hypothetics, not realities.
In the same way, when I said "he may have made another choice", I was specifically talking about a hypothetical alternate configuration, but moments later I specifically said he couldn't ever have chosen differently - but we can only say "he would only ever choose the apple" once we as human beings with limited knowledge know what's happened.
So 'choice\decision\calculation' are all valuable terms for human beings as decision-makers, as thinkers with limited knowledge. The objective reality is different.
>>27672807
That's more or less the conclusion I arrived at. Still, it's scary as fuck to think about the idea that the subjective "I" doesn't really exist, and that I have no control over anything in my life.
It also has other implications. For example, it no longer makes sense to ever be mad at anyone or seek revenge for something they do or say, since you would have done the exact same thing if you were them.
FOR ANYONE TRYING TO UNDERSTAND HOW FREE WILL IS AN ILLUSION
Think about this, you just read that sentence, and a little voice in your head read it out loud. Same with this sentence. Did you decide for it to do that? Well no of course not you say. But think about this, your answer to that question was instantaneous, an appeared out of nowhere. Every thought you have every day of your life simply "appears" in your mind. You don't pull it out of your subconscious, it just arrived there.
Think about you're deciding whether to get Doritos or Mountain Dew. You look at Doritos and go "Oh man I could kinda go a cheesy sodium hit" but then you look at the mountain dew and think "Ahh but I am thirsty". BOTH OF THESE THOUGHTS, have simply appeared from subconscious processes, your brain evaluated the packaging of the Doritos, associated it with the flavour you're familiar with, and sent the recollection and thought to your head for you to simply experience, not think about yourself. And then after deliberating these two, all of sudden you've made up your mind. How did you make up your mind? You don't really know it just suddenly clicked, or you told yourself you wanted on more. How did you tell yourself that? How did you bring the thought into consciouses?
Free will isn't an illusion, once you inspect it you realise there's no illusion it's simply not there at all. You're essentially just watching a movie of your life play out with no control over it, just pure experience.
>>27672864
this nigga gets it
blox
>>27672864
>no control over it
I'm not fucking retarded like the person (you) that was described, I don't find it difficult at all to try something new, or just get up and walk somewhere with no particular goal and visit places I never thought about in my mind before
You sound preprogrammed as fuck, perhaps its an intelligence thing
>>27672864
I forgot to add
ALL EXPERIENCE IS THE SAME
You don't choose what you see, you don't choose what you hear, you don't choose what you feel and you don't choose what you think, these are all determined by external stimulus, the "self" in all this is simply background noise of all these senses communicating with each other
>>27672864
and what the fuck is bad about your brain sending you signals that you should eat etc.? You can always decide what to eat, and you can choose to believe that free will is an illusion or real
>>27672864
>You don't pull it out of your subconscious, it just arrived there...
This is wrong. My sub and unconscious are a part of what makes up "me", and your sub and unconscious are a part of what makes up "you".
One thing we know about the unconscious for example is that if you repeat behaviours over and over again, they can become more 'natural'. So a behaviour that may seem radically strange and new and has to be focused on and learnt, with enough repetition, becomes 'natural'. Learning the violin for example. I can make the choice to take up lessons, I can make choices to practice regularly, I can make choices to work more to pay for the lessons. All of these things involve decisions that I (or you) make, but they involve many many unconscious and subconscious "threads".
What you're describing is a subjective state of turning your attention on yourself and trying to comprehend how these decisions come about, the vast vast majority are unconscious or subconscious. But those things are still a part of YOU (as we use the term).
>>27672864
the only thing your missing is understanding who you are
>>27672791
oh okay, it's false then, whatever.
>>27672901
But when you CHOOSE to try something new, or walk somewhere with no particular goal, or visit a place you never have been, it's not "you" choosing at all. Your subconscious decides, and you just roll with the decision, blind to the difference.
How exactly do you choose to try something new? Let's say, a new meal at your favourite restaurant.
The process would probably go, in your mind
"I might get something different tonight, just for variety" - this thought has simply arises instantaneously. Why do you feel like getting something different? Perhaps you'd say
"Well because I'm sick of the same thing"
And again, this response you didn't dwell over each word in the sentence, the sentence just strung itself and was immediately said without much or any thought at all. And even if you had deliberated, your careful consideration of each word would've been beyond your control as well, you're simply being fed from your subconscious how to phrase it.
The real reason you feel like something different could always be biologically explained, I'm no biologist but it would probably be in this example that you're body is looking for different nutrients or something along the lines of. Or if you went for a walk it desired exercise or fresh air, and you only sometimes realise the reason. The example is arbitrary though. Next time you make a decision or a thought arises, like you all of a sudden think "This guy is a faggot", HOW did you bring that thought into your state of mind? You didn't, and you never have for any thought of yours ever.
nope.
I have free will. I'm a neet faggot who hasn't been pressured to do anything. I decide for myself what I want to do and how I think about things.
>>27672920
Well that's just semantics, because you have no control over your subconscious, your are nothing but a slave to it. You need to expand your mind. Seriously go to the fridge right now pick something to eat. You'll look at a couple of things, and then just "decide" and reach for something. And what you think is yourself "deciding", is really you just telling yourself the reasons you think you chose it, but actually the decision happened automatically, just like opening the door to the fridge. You didn't have to think about doing that, it just happened. The same thing is the basis of every single decision you've ever made, despite how convincingly if feels like you yourself made that decision. Your decision to respond to me right now is automatic and without autonomy, you'll just do it on almost autopilot and as you type the words will just be fed to you without have to think much. And when you pause to think of a word, notice how really you're actually just going brain dead kinda for a second and then suddenly the word just appears in your mind. It's all very very obvious once you truly realise it.
>>27673012
Who is "I"? Who are "you"?
Not your name
Not your job
Not your physical descriptions
Not what you think, feel or do
Who are YOU
Seriously try and answer, the point is that there is no "self" it's simply a feeling of experiencing that there's a "you" behind your eyes in your head experiencing this, and the feeling of having a body, which is all also, simply part of consciousness.
>>27672980
But I do choose. I can choose to do things that are completely against my personality or wants/needs. That is free will my friend. And I don't order the same thing at restaurants because I'm not a dipshit autist who can't handle change.
And of course I don't dwell on my sentences, considering every word you fucking mongoloid. That's not a lack of free will, that's the result of years of socialising and experiences reducing the need to carefully consider every word that comes out of my mouth. I've already learned what effect my tone of voice, or my chosen vocabulary has on many sentences so it doesn't need much thought at all
I thought "this guy is a faggot" when reading your post, because the words chosen and the tone and the ignorance combined into something which made me realise you're a fucking douchebag with low intelligence. The kind of person who puts comments like "this music links the conciousness of the universe" on youtube
>>27673040
I agree that everything you're saying is true, and a valid observation.
My issue is definitional, it's not "just semantics". Whatever "I" am may be very small, but "I" do have the ability to make choices, that seems to be a very intimate part of who I am. I CAN sit down and consciously consider things in deep ways, not everything is one of these spontaneous decisions emerging out of the unconscious. The issue is that even when I'm making a conscious decision using reason, I'm still determined in everything I do - but this is still "me".
So nothing in the observable universe - about 10^80 atoms of normal matter - has this magic ability called free will where the past does not determine the present. Except of course for this tiny group of hydrogen, carbon, etc. atoms arranged in the shape of the human brain. Isn't that something?
Well, it's nice to know that two neutron stars in close proximity cannot "choose" whether to collide, or that a red giant cannot "choose" whether to go supernova, but I CAN "choose" to get out of bed this morning!
So if I am so unique and powerful, why don't I have a gf yet?
don't even trip senpai
most people (likely including you) are too stupid to comprehend the limitations and parameters of their existence, so they operate in the world as if by free will anyway
>>27673091
I am my subconcious + concious parts of my brain; memories, emotions and some logic.
If someone says it's not me making decicions, just my subconcious mind, they're wrong. My subconcious is part of what makes me me.
>>27673122
r9k. the post.Why did I even bother? Of course this was unoriginal.
>>27673093
You're stupid and therefore hard to argue with, but I can't blame you because it's not actually your fault but your unintelligent subconscious. I mean I could just link the scientific papers showing neuroscientist knowing the decision someone makes because they themselves know that decision. But it would be easier if you simply follow the steps in this post
>>27673040
And point out SPECIFICALLY where I was wrong. Please go ahead.
To address your point though. Say you hit yourself right now to prove to yourself that you do have free will, because why would your brain choose to do that? But the idea to do that was fed to you unconsciously. Seriously why decide to hit yourself? Why not jump up and down or something? You would start stammering for a reason and your brain would automatically make one up like "it was easier", but you didn't think that before, you subconscious was just forced to come up with a reason. It was even your subconscious entirely that decided for you to hit yourself because it itself is confused by the fact you have no free will. (Despite feelings and thoughts are separate, they simply communicate with each other just like sights and thoughts). Okay, so where is all this database of socialising stored? Did you decide to access it and consider all the things you've learned socialising because constructing your sentence? NO it happens AUTOMATICALLY, just like THE THOUGHT ITSELF. Honestly it's not possible for you to be right, it's so absolutely known there's no free will now it's simply a question of whether you understand it or not.
>>27673205
>you're stupid and there are a bunch of articles i wont post but they exist do my work for me eh
Stopped reading there, you're a dumbfuck
>>27673122
>ignorant science worshipper believes the universe is totally understood based on theoretical experiments
Fuck people like you
>>27673147
You don't become a thought. If you feel sad, you are not sadness now, you are simply experience sadness. Or if you see a bus, you don't choose to see the bus, the bus is simply there and you are being fed the information. The same way you are experience thoughts, you are being fed them by external stimulus and simply experiencing them. Thoughts disappear and reappear beyond your control just like emotions. So sure you can say you are your subconscious, but even with that the case it still doesn't change the fact you have no control over what you do, just like you have no control over what you hear. Your body is on autopilot, and the feeling of being a conscious being is just watching it all unfold. It's like watching a movie, where you get fully immersed in it. Realising free will doesn't exist is like that moment you look away from the screen, and remember you're just sitting in a room, and it's unfolding without you actually being a part. That is what being alive is.
>>27673235
Okay here you go but they're usually complex
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16876476
>>27673292
Did you even read what you posted or was this just googled and served up to me in the hopes I wouldn't bother looking at it?
>>27673329
Not even that guy, but it's the relevant article you asked for, fuckass
>>27673329
Clearly you didn't
"Time of conscious intention to act in relation to onset of cerebral activity (readiness-potential). The unconscious initiation of a freely voluntary act. Brain 1983;106:623-642] that the awareness of intention to move occurred much later than the onset of BP, the early BP might reflect, physiologically, slowly increasing cortical excitability and, behaviorally, subconscious readiness for the forthcoming movement. Whether the late BP reflects conscious preparation for intended movement or not remains to be clarified."
Right there in the Abstract
If you want this explained in layman, refer to this article
http://io9.gizmodo.com/5975778/scientific-evidence-that-you-probably-dont-have-free-will
>>27673372
>relevant article
>less than 20 lines talking about how they understand physiological diseases
>barely explains the article title
>ends without surety of the concept
Same fag detected and you obviously just googled this
>>27671021
you literally made the decision using your free will not to believe in free will, saying "everything is determined XD" is not an explanation to everything
>>27673405
>He doesn't know what an abstract is
Hahahah dude that's just a summary of the paper, and they always have to end without surety of concept, like legitimately every paper ever.
I know it's a hard pill to swallow, but it's quite liberating I assure you.
>>27673405
What's it like to be as dumb as you are? Genuinely curious.
>>27673431
those decisions are based off opinions which are forged by experience and education. Both of which are subject to basically being in the right time and at the right place.
>>27673449
If you're going to post something, post the actual paper. For one, that has absolutely no data of the results, it doesn't explain the concept or even summarise it well, and thirdly its totally unproven - simply theoretical
>and they always have to end without surety of concept
No shit, because the majority of science is a 'best guess' using a slice of data
Hilariously, science cultists like yourselves worship this data as absolute truth. While hilariously shitting all over religion
>>27673454
Think yourself, then think 10x smarter
>>27673557
Don't stop posting, dude. I'm gonna make some coffee and use you as my morning entertainment.
>>27673534
I forgot to include genetics, which can mean you get treated differently by others, thus changing your experiences and education. Example being US apartheid.
>>27673587
you are literally this image
>>27673640
lol
To the guy who posted the article, I apologize for ruining your debate. But you were arguing with a shill so it doesn't matter anyway.
>>27671122
>part of a system that make decisions for you.
we call that your brain
>>27673682
>a shill
Calling people stupid while being unable to use terms properly
Haha dude like I'm so superior haha I'm just making my coffee this is taking no effort woah did I make it clear how cool and collected I am haha dude seriously what!
>>27672199
>>27672216
Who decides what is valuable in the universe? Nothing? God? If anything it is roughly based on what sapient beings value. When you look at a huge crowd of people, do you care about their individual childhood memories and other bullshit? You don't and likewise they don't care about your precious memes.
The only thing that would make you care is if one of them accomplished something spectacular or if they were otherwise virtuous.
>>27672222
I know right.
>>27672270
sry
>>27672286
>>27672414
which illusions are separate nonexistent but together a whole
>>27673739
>Who decides what is valuable in the universe? Nothing? God? If anything it is roughly based on what sapient beings value.
Those values are opinions therefore
>>27673534
>>27672177
>Maybe the only illusion is the idea you are a special snowflake.
If free will is an illusion then it actually shows that we aren't special.
Free will is the main thing that supposedly separates us from machines, it's what makes us "special".
From my point of view it is the Jedi who are evil
>>27671472
Lmfao, what a circular line of bullshit
its not that free will is an illusion but that it was a flawed concept from the beginning. philosophers have a hard time agreeing on what "free will" even means, because when you really think about it, the notion of free will in almost any way you try to define it doesn't make any sense at all within the confines of a physical system. just try to give me a definition of free will that isn't in some way self contradictory
I got around it by realizing that it doesn't matter as much. I let go of it by putting my faith that there is a God with ways far beyond my understanding. If he wanted us to have free will I'm sure there is some complex method or reason why it's possible; that we don't fully understand try.
>>27671289
I like this picture, ultimately all reason goes out the window because the tools we use to determine our free will are found suspect.
>>27674283
This.This post would have been more impactful if I could have avoided adding text just to get past the robot.
