Is free will real?
Was I predetermined to end up like this no matter what choices I made?
>>25699228
If free will is not real, you didnt make any choices. So yea.
Free will can't exist as a concept. You cannot describe a being of free will.
>Western culture, traditional philosophy of mind and even cognitive neuroscience have been deeply influenced by the Myth of Cognitive Agency. It is the myth of the Cartesian Ego, the active thinker of thoughts, the epistemic subject that acts--mentally, rationally, in a goal-directed manner--and that always has the capacity to terminate or suspend its own cognitive processing at will. It is the theory that conscious thought is a personal-level process, something that by necessity has to be ascribed to you, the person as a whole. This theory has now been empirically refuted. As it now turns out, most of our conscious thoughts are actually the product of subpersonal processes, like breathing or the peristaltic movements in our gastrointestinal tract. The Myth of Cognitive Agency says that we are mentally autonomous beings. We can now see that this is an old, but self-complacent fairy tale. It is time to put it to rest.
>http://edge.org/response-detail/25446
Rest easy, Anon: we never had a chance.
>>25699228
No.
It's something stupid people invented to blame others and also hide their failure to think of reasons thing happen.
/thread
>>25699258
being unable to describe something doesn't automatically make it unreal
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/compatibilism/
>>25699228
And that is a thing to worry about?
I mean, do what you want.
>>25699287
muslims and feminist think like that, hence they can also be the victim and blame others for their own problem, never take responsibility or agency of your own life, just whine and bitch and cry.
>>25699388
If there is no free will I cant do what I want. Only what I already am determined to do.
Nah, soft determinism
There are certain things you and I have absolutely no control over whatsoever, such as the laws of nature. If you jump off a roof, you're free to do that, you just aren't free from the consequences of your choice, which is that you'll die.
If you delve into personality typing and neurobiology you will realize you are nothing but programming.
I feel, therefore I am.
>>25699405
Wowo did u even read the linked article edgelord of memedom?
>>25699413
But what you want anon is predetermined too
>>25699413
>I cant do what I want.
I misread that as 'I can't do anything I want!!'.
When you think of it, it makes a decent life motton.
>>25699502
Elitist neckbeard
>>25699228
stop making those threads fucking dumbass
yes free will is real
>>25699439
No. Full blown determinism. If someone made the """choice""" to jump off a roof, it would only happen as a result of both their genetics and environmental influences.
>>25700008
I too see life as a slaughtered sheep
>>25700073
What threads? I've never seen any threads on this subject before. If there were, I didn't make them.
What was it about the other threads about this very subject that didn't give you closure? This topic has been beaten to death a hundredfold and the answer is always "Who gives a shit"
>>25699228
there's no way to know that anything is real
>>25700000
No. Full blown determinism. If someone made the """choice""" to jump off a roof, it would only happen as an result of both their genetics and environmental influences.
>>25700138
I know that one thing is real. I am, a statement that is necessarily true each time it is thought.
>>25700551
genetics is way too vague and environmental influences is just that, influences.
>>25700120
always fucking threads about this shit
do you think it's okay to just randomly think about reality defining garbage like free will and just toy with it or something without even having some data of anything?
lemme tell you a tale
it's one guy who got so weak because he kept thinking about free will but he was loaded with cash also
then another guy knows the guy is feeling weak because he keeps thinking about exactly free will so he grabs the opportunity and rapes him and steal his house
>>25699317
>threads his own post
proved yourself wrong yourself
>>25699228
if you cant think by yourself let others think for you. read some shit philosophy
thinking about those things is futile without any sort of data
>>25699439
wow everything has consequences wow i guess we dont have free will!
i click on post and my post is posted! no free will.
Free will is impossible even if there are indeterministic events. If an acausal event determines what you're going to do, you never got to choose it.
>>25701005
huuuh How?
Free will does exist but the choices you make are predetermined. Luck plays a huge role. Your genetics and upbringing decide your personality and habits. Pure luck decides what part of the caste you end up in.
>>25701012
breakingthefreewillillusion com
also keep in mind that the world we're living in is most likely a simulation:
simulation-argument com
>>25699228
the religious concept of free will doesn't exist, as it is self contradictory.
being able to totally choose your path is obviously not possible (knowledge of something has to be acquired in order to be able to choose to do that thing)
the human mind is a sentient computer, which means that you are the result of your conditioning but you can choose how to progress based on your conditioning. stating that this is not free will because your choices are based on experiences is not correct because everything that exists is based on cause and effect in a similar way, except that non-sentient things have no choices to make. free will exists as the means to choose what to do based on who you are.
>>25699228
Every choice you make has already been processed and decided for by your subconcious even before you start rationalizing it so the answer is both yes and no
>>25699228
spirituality wise pretty much all religions say we have free will and what the fuck even suggest we dont have free will?.
Oh Im angry. Definitely cant suppress my anger somehow. oh it will lead me to doing only one specific thing, and a succession of event that's somehow written in the stars or something.
what the fuck. how do you even come up with this stupid idea
>>25701014
oh wow we cant go past what our brain doesnt know who would have thought
>>25701072
nonsense, only rootless people would think we live in a COMPUTER SIMULATION of all things. you clearly have 0 knowledge of the occult. oh yeah definitely buy the book that this person made out of her not free will but some kind of determination whatever you people come up with.
>>25701133
>the religious concept of free will doesn't exist
I dont know what kind of retardation you've been reading but pretty much all religions acknowledge free will.
>>25701180
>what are split-second decisions
like the cops
>>25699228
There is no free will but if you're dumb enough not to be able to work it out for yourself you wont end up with the crippling depression that follows so don't worry about it.
>>25701234
>There is no free will but if you're dumb enough not to be able to work it out for yourself
To be "able" to make it work for himself would imply he has free will, no?
>>25701226
Do you really believe you can consciously make decisions hundreds of a millisecond quicker before the subconcious is put to work? Even if you could neurology tells us you can't make conscious decisions without first consulting the subconcious, Anon
>>25701204
when I say "the religious concept of free will" I'm referring to being able to choose how to progress despite everything being wholly deterministic and there being some kind of divine plan in place. I grew up catholic and this is very present in catholic religious ideas. If a divine plan is in place, free will (again which is a part of catholic thought and most Christian denominations) can't exist in any form because your fate is entirely predetermined.
>>25701204
>spirituality wise pretty much all religions say we have free will and what the fuck even suggest we dont have free will?.
lmao
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calvinism
This thread pops up all the time but nobody ever defines free will. If free will means a causeless action, then free will is possible because it violates causality. If you think it means something else and I'm wrong, please post what you think "free will" really means.
>>25701391
welp, ruined my whole post with a typo
>is impossible*
>>25701327
>because your fate is entirely predetermined.
only if you choose to be part of it. in traditional societies they worked in accordance with the above and there were castes and etc
then you had the outcasts, people who didnt want to abide by their castes, therefore not working in accordance with the above.
>>25701344
say something instead of linking a god damn wikipedia article
>>25701308
your brain always know more than your conscious thoughts. but your brain is you, not something else. it's YOU, THINKING FOR YOU.
>>25701430
>say something instead of linking a god damn wikipedia article
lol
>claiming to know about "pretty much all religions"
>isn't aware of fucking calvinism
read a book you dumb nigger
>>25701344
>pretty much
>pretty
>calvinism
>being a relevant religion and not a premodern era meme
>>25701458
all religions are premodern t b h
>>25701452
>reformed christianity
no one cares about your irrelevant meme
>>25701344
Also, in calvinism, they believed that you were predestined for heaven or hell, but they did not believe that this gave excuse for one to lead a sinful life.
So no, calvinism does not justify being a neckbeard waste of space
All these people fell into the trap of thinking "I can do whatever I want with no consequences" because it makes life easier for some and very profitable for others. If you fall into one of these categories, then yeah there's no "free will". If you are poor and unhappy, take control of your life and either end it or make something happen. Nobody else will want you to succeed until you prove you deserve it
>>25701493
>justify
Tell me, what does this word mean? To me, it sounds like you're saying
>i believe in objective right and wrong like a cuck
>>25699228
Whatever help you sleep at night, senpai.
Gonna get a wank powered by my free will :^)
>>25699258
>hur durr free will means it must be omnipotent and can do whatever it wants
You can have free will within the confines of our 3d reality bro.
>>25701520
you're either right or you're not, and morality is objective
you're just a plebian trying to justify his terrible life
>>25701391
>>25701391
>>25701391
please respond to my post so we can talk about relevant things instead of getting sidetracked by religion
>>25701391
>>25701391
>>25701391
>>25701391
>>25701391
>>25701391
>>25701430
if you didn't believe that there was a divine plan, you would be seen as a heretic in pre-modern societies. the large majority of people who were/are adherents of a religion with some kind of divine plan believe in this idea.
>>25701458
Lutheranism is really similar to Calvinism and it is a modern religion.
>>25701564
>if you didn't believe that there was a divine plan, you would be seen as a heretic in pre-modern societies. the large majority of people who were/are adherents of a religion with some kind of divine plan believe in this idea.
and? what's your point
>>25701581
You dumb or something? He's saying free will is a relatively new meme.
>>25701581
you stated in response to what I said "only if you choose to be a part of it", and I responded that the large majority of people who are adherents of a religion with a divine plan choose to believe in the divine plan. the divine plan contradicting with free will was my original point, since a divine plan disallows free choices to exist.
>>25701645
>since a divine plan disallows free choices to exist.
Inb4 we start a new sidetrack where he claims this isn't true when we still haven't defined our terms:
>>25701391
>>25701391
>>25701391
>>25701391
>>25701598
>tfw we have computers and our own land and good medicine thanks to a meme.
What bothers me is people who say they don't have any free will of their own but go to doctors or search for good deals on things. Just let nature do everything for you.
>>25701554
Why would free will mean a causeless action? You are the cause of an action. Your free will allowed you to decide to take that course of action and not any other.
Your free will actually caused rality to "solidify" from a cloud of possibilities, one planck-constant at a time.
Thats what Free Will is in my opinion:
The Ability to initiate an desirable action , without external stimuli, or based upon them,within the confines of a given reality.
>>25701598
nowhere did it has been implied
>>25701645
yet heretics and pariahs, yet i dont know what kind of divine plan you have in mind but as i said pretty much all religions acknowledge free will
>>25701672
>What bothers me is people who say they don't have any free will of their own but go to doctors or search for good deals on things. Just let nature do everything for you.
Lmao are you retarded? I'm a determinist not a luddite. Doctors didn't choose to be doctors any more than Hitler chose to be Hitler or you chose to be a nigger.
>>25701706
>Doctors didn't choose to be doctors
...
>>25701674
You're talking in vague terms. When you say "you caused", what do you mean by "you"? Do you mean my brain? If so, are you saying neurons firing is an uncaused event?
>>25701706
>>25701706
>labeling yourself with babbys first philosophy topic
I didnt mention medical school or caring about helping people, lame ass, I said it makes no sense to go see a doctor yourself if you believe you have no free will. You can only have someone else force you to go there or just let whatever health problem run its course. Any decision you make that isn't a natural response forfeits your argument about having no free will
>>25700925
>violates my /thread
You don't get it, do you.
>>25699228
>what choices I made?
The choices you made were predetermined by your biology and the circumstances of your birth.
>>25701813
I go to the doctor if I'm sick. What does that have to do with free will? A robot would go to a repair shop if it had a problem. I'm acknowledging that I'm no different.
>>25701731
I mean your consciousness.
I know how "new-age'y" this is gonna sound, but consciousness is the only thing that can affect reality, because its the only thing we know that collapses probability waves. Read up on the double-slit experiment , and what a probability wave is.
Ok, lets redefine. " The ability of a consciousness, to act out a action desirable by it, within the confines of a given reality."
>>25701846
>consciousness is the only thing that can affect reality, because its the only thing we know that collapses probability waves
I literally cringed.
Also, tip: your 'myself/consciousness creates choices' isn't shit because it's false, it is shit because it is tautological and explains nil in the empirical sense.
But mostly, I came to say that I literally cringed.
>>25701838
>The choices you made were predetermined by your biology
pretty much means retarded or not
>circumstances of your birth.
you cant do things your brain has no idea about so yeah i guess
>>25701820
what
>>25701846
Where does this consciousness reside? If it's not in the brain, can you prove it exists? Are you trying to talk about souls without saying the S-word?
>>25701843
A robot doesn't go to a repair shop on its own, it just rusts. If you can't tell the difference between a human and a toaster then what are you doing in a philosophical argument?
>>25701885
>Are you trying to talk about souls without saying the S-word?
Indeed that's what he does. Imhotep the wise trip has long ago said that 'consciousness' is this century's soul.
>>25701883
>pretty much means retarded or not
Hahaha no. Your personality/temperment is mostly determined genetically, along with pretty much everything else about you.
>>25701887
Okay, hypothetically an android with no free will would go to a repair shop. Happy now you autistic fuck?
>>25701887
>the difference between a human and a toaster
I didn't even read the thread, but there is obviously none. We are machines in the most literal sense.
>>25701915
so yeah, retarded or not, the way your brain is wired, thats what it boils down to
>>25701706
>Should I go to law school or medical school
>I think I'll choose medical school because I want to help save lives
I'm getting trolled lol
>>25701952
jesus christ help us
How can people be so retarded? Fucking kill yourself holy shit.
HOW DO PEOPLE COME UP WITH SUCH RETARDED STATEMENTS AND BEING COMPLETELY SERIOUS ABOUT IT
>>25701952
>he has sex with toasters
>>25701882
>scientifically proven in the double-slit experiment that you need a conscious observer for an interference patern to disappear because the probability wave collapses sooner.
I know its circular and retarded
>" The universe exists because we exist and it wouldnt exist without us"
Im not claiming i understand it...
>>25701885
"Soul" is a vague term, but yes, maybe. Maybe its just a compilation of self-aware chemicals in our brain.
>>25702014
read a little bit of mysticality, you'll have some answers about consciousness and souls
>>25701996
>>25701999
>I can't/won't refute his point, so instead I'll call him retarded!
Why do people still do this.
Are you guys being retarded on purpose to elicit replies?
>>25702014
>Im not claiming i understand it...
Then you can't really debate about it, can you?
>Maybe its just a compilation of self-aware chemicals in our brain.
If this is the case, then free will is impossible.
>>25701999
>>25702007
Consciousness doesn't exist. Our behaviour fully, inherently follows a couple of deterministic functions of perception, definition, pattern recognition, evaluation, choice, decision-making, and so on and so on. We are literally computer programs.
>>25702067
hell some things dont fucking need refutation. go on and remain retarded fucking dumbass.
>>25702107
(In other words, there is no way for a human being to act illogically -- just like a computer cannot do that either. Emotions are just evolutionarily hard-wired constants.)
>>25702109
>hell some things dont fucking need refutation.
>calls me retarded
>common sense fallacying this hard
lmaoing @ u
>>25702107
Modern man at work everyone.
The process of decision making means you're a computer. God is a computer too?
>>25702143
'God' is a meaningless term.
>>25702143
No, God isn't a real thing.
>>25702136
fallacy fallacy now fuck off with your nonsense you're useless.
>>25702170
>fallacy fallacy
This is one cringeful thread.
>>25702170
>joins a debate
>"you mean i have to prove things? FUCK THIS"
>*flips table and stomps off*
what's it like being autistic
>>25702067
My hypoithetical greentaxt storie was refutiation enough bucko
>>25702160
*tips*
>>25702152
*tips*
>>25702193
Don't bring autistic people into this.
>>25702201
Don't be so empathetic as to react hostilely to rightful dismissal.
>>25702131
>mfw all these millennial fucking retards who got confused by the "computers are like brains" analogy and think it works the other way too
Do you believe that Google maps is actually a parallel universe too?
>>25702136
When someone has to trot out "U-UR MAKING A FALLACY!!", you pretty much know they're out of anything meaningful to say.
PROTIP: This isn't a debate club, it's a vietnamese frog cuckoldry forum.
>>25702091
>"If you think you understand quantum mechanics, you don't understand quantum mechanics."
>Richard Feynman
Did'nt stop him
>>25702183
What's cringeful is thinking toasters are no different from humans
>>25702212
*tips*
Stupid positivist nihilistic waste of space
>>25702250
well, what is fundamentally different between humans and toasters, our synapses operate differently from transistors, but maybe quantum phenomena in nerve cells is discrete like the 1s and 0s in a computer
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LRq_SAuQDec
>>25702216
So pray what is the magical difference between humans and lesser beings, such as robots? 'Subjective experience'? This experience is just the structure of decision-making. Any computer program exhibits the same one. If a robot decides to avoid something, for instance if a battle android avoids a bullet, it feels pain.
>>25701344
>Calvinism:
>Human Will: Total depravity:[87] Humanity possesses "free will" [88] but it is in bondage to sin,[89] until it is "transformed".[90]
the source you post says Calvinists DO say we have free will. What point are you trying to make?
>>25699363
How do you know it exists if you can't describe it?
Like, you have no idea what you're even looking for, how would you know when you found it?
>>25701391
>causeless action is impossible
In classical and relativistic physics, but not in Quantum as far as I know.
A particle can decay with no cause, a truly random process. Remember Einstein saying "God does not play dice" in disbelief at this causless process?
>>25702306
have some sort of theological discussion with your toaster mate.
you couldnt even do it with an actual living being.
you're thinking way out of bound.
>>25702381
It's just a quantitiative difference. No one says the output of a toaster equals output of a human; but it is just determined physical output nonethless. A toaster produces toasts: a human produces noises that can carry knowledge and shit.
>>25702307
>magical
The fuck is wrong with you? Do you know the difference between a map and a landscape? Do you think magic created that landscape? I'm just saying brains are almost nothing like machines. Your shitty semantics/philosophy discussion that gets covered in high school is a different story
>>25702420
>Do you know the difference between a map and a landscape?
What are you talking about? How is this relevant?
>>25702427
>>25702420
(I mean, I know what, and it's called 'the map and the territory', but again, how is it relevant. Sage.)
>>25702427
Then exercise your free will (or lack of it) by reading a book for a change
>>25702457
Please summarize the purported difference between humans and machines.
>>25702409
Can a toaster come up with an equally retarded argument without anyone on the outside programming it to do so?
>>25702516
So you're basically claiming that there is an arbitrary qualitative difference between the stimuli-determined signalling of a machine such as a toaster and the signalling of a human, such as language. Qualitative differences require definition.
>>25702307
Pain is basically the best counter-argument for your statement.
Lets take your situation - taking a bullet during a fight.
An android would take the bullet, register the damage and fight on.
A human takes a bullet and all fucking hell breaks loose - your nerves in the damage are fire at the same time, you get crippling pain that significantly reduces your fighting capabilities. All sorts of feeling start to churn in your brain-fear, pain, panic, anger, desperation, the will to survive. You may start remembering events from your life in vivid detail. All in the final moments of your life.
There is no logical reason for you to feel more anger, statr remembering your life, or for the pain to disable you. If you even were to create an android that could emulate all of that. It would be just that and emulation and therefore not real.
>>25702563
>just because something is artificial it is also not real
2016 /r9k/
>>25702563
Thank you for flawlessly confirming my very point.
Situation:
>robot: taking a bullet during a fight
>human: taking a bullet during a fight
Immediate reaction:
>robot: register the damage
>human: fucking hell breaks loose - your nerves in the damage are fire at the same time, you get crippling pain that significantly reduces your fighting capabilities.
Further reaction:
>robot: fight on
>human: All sorts of feeling start to churn in your brain-fear, pain, panic, anger, desperation, the will to survive. You may start remembering events from your life in vivid detail. All in the final moments of your life.
Perfect correspondence. Human reactions are just a bit more complex. Again, the difference is strictly quantitiative: human evolution has come
>There is no logical reason for you to feel more anger, statr remembering your life, or for the pain to disable you.
This is nonsense. It *is* perfectly, inherently logical. Evolution has made its necessarily, inherently logical educated guess with respect to the reactions that best equip you to deal with the situation -- just like the programmer of a robot dues his inherently logical guess with respect to best battle routines. The fact that there are *some* circumstances in which the amount of reactive anger or fear might be seen as disproportionate in no way at all makes those reactions illogical.
tl;dr you don't know what you're talking about and your argument is shit.
>>25702381
>but it is just determined physical output nonethless.
well if that means toasters and humans are ultimately the same thing that's a very gross oversimplification.
I am affected by gravity like a rock, therefore i am no different from a rock.
>>25702476
1. Machines do not have life, as they are mechanical. On the other hand, humans are made of flesh and blood; life is not mechanical for humans.
2. Humans have feelings and emotions, and they can express these emotions. Machines have no feelings and emotions. They just work as per the details fed into their mechanical brain.
3. Humans can do anything original, and machines cannot.
4. Humans have the capability to understand situations, and behave accordingly. On the contrary, machines do not have this capability.
5. While humans behave as per their consciousness, machines just perform as they are taught.
6. Humans perform activities as per their own intelligence. On the contrary, machines only have an artificial intelligence
If I was to get out of your shitty dumb fucking ass set debate criteria I would also say we have a soul which transcends this physical plane that also has a will of its own and that outer struggles are merely symbols of inner transcendant struggles such as the will of our soul to escape earth or something but hey you're fucking retarded and you went full mechanical, there is no saving you.
>>25702670
>human evolution has come
Oops.
Human evolution has come to define our reactions a bit more broadly than usual -- we *are* the Earth's pinnacle species, after all.
>>25702655
Also this. Cheers.
>>25702554
>arbitrary
Friendo you aren't allowed to use arbitrary as a descriptor if your world has toasters and humans on the same level in terms of consciousness. The reason people laugh at your worldview is that it's far too simplified. copper wires don't transfer information at all like neurons, and if that's where you're starting from then why define anything at all? The sun is a toaster is a horse.
>>25702679
Oh Jesus, more fairy tales how human intelligence is different from machine intelligence because reasons. Get your head out of your anthropocentric ass.
>>25702708
If it's no different then why don't you go shitpost with a chatbot instead of bullying people on the Internet?
>>25702708
that's right you're a dumbass who doesnt understand shit and I've had enough of debating such a pointless thing on your shitty criterias.
Point me out 1 single atheistic billionaire.
But I'll reply.
>>25702679
>Machines do not have life, as they are mechanical. On the other hand, humans are made of flesh and blood; life is not mechanical for humans.
Imaginary distinction that flesh is somehow a special material.
>Humans have feelings and emotions, and they can express these emotions. Machines have no feelings and emotions.
False, machines have emotions. Emotions are repellents and attractors: negative and positive judgements in decision-making.
>Humans can do anything original, and machines cannot.
Utter nonsense. What is machine-generated literature, poetry, music, art... It is just a matter of number of variables, and we're catching up very quick.
>Humans have the capability to understand situations, and behave accordingly. On the contrary, machines do not have this capability.
This is so preposterously vague and naive at the same time I don't even know how to reply.
>While humans behave as per their consciousness, machines just perform as they are taught.
>Humans perform activities as per their own intelligence. On the contrary, machines only have an artificial intelligence
Our consciousness is just a handful of evolution-based, environment-fine-tuned algorithms.
>we have a soul which transcends this physical plane that also has a will of its own and
Shit, wasted my time on bait.
>>25702738
>>25702767
>If it's no different then why don't you go shitpost with a chatbot instead of bullying people on the Internet?
Because so far, complexity and relevance of reactions is on the human side.
>he hasn't realised that quantum theory allows for causeless events.
>he hasn't realised that the brain is a quantum machine
Just as it is impossible to predict when a particular nucleus will decay, it is impossible to predict what a sentient being is about to think or do.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3WXTX0IUaOg
>>25702831
>no difference
>because there are differences
Fuck off
from this thread I learned there are in /r9k/ right now unironic /fringe/-tier retards that believe humans aren't just biological machines and there's something intangibly speshul about them
>>25702109
>hell some things dont fucking need refutation
gives no reason why
>>25702862
>there is a DIFFERENCE between short-legged and long-legged dogs!
>>25702872
definitely nothing special about you chump
>>25702670
>no way at all makes those reactions illogical.
If you get shot through the thigh only a small fraction of the actual muscle fibers and skin is damaged, yet you cannot walk. There is no logical reason for this as the brain can, theoretically, control much smaller muscle groups, and could so avoid the injured part, while keeping you mobile.
But if you keep dissmissing involuntary actions as "lol its your programming" then fuck off with this entire argument because its pointless by default.
A robot will never get a bad habit, like smoking, it will never go mad if its depressed, i would never push the history eraser button, because "YOLO".
now fuck off.
>>25702872
>machines made by people
>he's surprised they resemble some of our functions on the system scale
>>25699228
Predestination hasn't been proven true or false- however, I believe it to be an unhealthy world-view no matter whether it's true or not. If you believe everything is pre-determined, you will feel like you have less purpose, and will be less likely to work towards goals or happiness.
>>25702964
This is false you know.
>>25699287
>>edge.org
simply ebin
>>25701012
What he means is: if you assume effect doesn't need a cause, so you could argue you are an actor that interfaces with the brain (making a choice, recalling memory, etc.) rather than just experiencing the ride your brain makes (you feel like you're making choices but it's chemistry and physics that do the work), you'd still be left with the issue of other things happening (without event) to influence how a choice is made.
Of course it does.
If you do not consider your everyday experience to me reflective of reality you may as well be talking about fantasy.
In other words, there is literally no difference between thinking you have free will, and actually having it.
>>25702978
>>25702964
I mean, the it'll make you lazy bit.
>>25702955
>If you get shot through the thigh only a small fraction of the actual muscle fibers and skin is damaged, yet you cannot walk. There is no logical reason for this as the brain can, theoretically, control much smaller muscle groups, and could so avoid the injured part, while keeping you mobile.
YOU know this, because YOU INDIVIDUALLY have exceeded evolution's/the individual in question's knowledge. Logicality of a decision is contained within the knowledge engaged in the decision-making. Humans and machines alike are inherently logical and utilitarian within the scope of factors they are aware of -- a decision is made logical by the very virtue of being to be chosen.
>But if you keep dissmissing involuntary actions as "lol its your programming" then fuck off with this entire argument because its pointless by default.
'You're wrong, but if you're right, then you're wrong, so fuck off.'
k
>ITT: high schoolers claim onions are bulletproof because designers of bulletproof glass describe it as having layers
>>25703064
Elaborate, analogy sounds interesting.
>>25702801
>Emotions are repellents and attractors: negative and positive judgements in decision-making.
weighting positive and negative has nothing to do with emotions
>What is machine-generated literature, poetry, music, art...
oh link me to some of this great machine generated art that isnt some abstract nonsense.
>This is so preposterously vague and naive at the same time I don't even know how to reply.
robots cant defuse a situation between 2 humans.
>Our consciousness is just a handful of evolution-based, environment-fine-tuned algorithms
Explain to me great philosophers who sit at home all day
>Shit, wasted my time on bait.
calcified brain at its finest. well at least you make some fine rootless human capital.
>>25701264
Why would someone being "able" be dependent on having free will?
>>25700891
I'm sorry, are you literally retarded? Just end your autistic life already.
>>25703093
>weighting positive and negative has nothing to do with emotions
This is literally what emotions are. Love, hate, compassion, disgust, are just names of evolutionary or cultural determinants which step in in certain situations (on recognition of certain patterns) and colour preferences regarding one's choice of the next step, the next thing to do.
>great machine generated art that isnt some abstract nonsense
'No true art' fallacy.
>Explain to me great philosophers who sit at home all day
You're not even trying. Shit, wasted my time on bait AGAIN.
>>25703161
>colour preferences regarding one's choice of the next step, the next thing to do
(E.g. presence of love increases the positive evaluation of the prospect of 'cheer up my gf', and presence of hate increases the negative evaluation of the prospect of 'compliment my bully'.)
>>25701204
Are you 14 years old? This might be the most offensively retarded thing I've ever read that isn't blatant bait.
If I don't have free will can't I just go out and kill a bunch of people and not be punished for it? Since I didn't choose to do it, it would have happened no matter what. The atoms of my body simply followed deterministic processes.
>>25703027
What im desperately trying to make you to see is this:
A self-aware, learning robot, could never, ever, fucking, ever do something disadvantageous to it. Because it simply fucking cant.
If it had the ability i would be artificially forced.
Thats the difference - as a human you have no choice what you take away from a experience, but a robot cannot and if it has that function then its just there to
>lol gotta be like a human, lets take this crack
it wouldt be real.
And, for the retards, by "not real" and "artificial" i mean "telling a girl your rich" not fucking "doesnt exist"
>>25703146
the useless and brainless retard is you
>>25703142
because he has the will to do so? he has to tell himself if he's gonna do it or not taking into account this whole free will garbage?
>>25703161
>This is literally what emotions are.
yet robots cant process human emotions nor act according to them.
>'No true art' fallacy.
jesus christ. fallacy fallacy.
>You're not even trying. Shit, wasted my time on bait AGAIN.
Hey I'm here arguing with a retard based on what he can only understand and not with the most of what I know. So fuck off with that shit.
>>25703229
explain or kill yourself
>>25703254
>fallacy fallacy
Literally kill yourself.
You know whats funny? Nihilists and Atheistic-leaning people in general will point out that the causes that are inherent in fundamental physics/chemistry suggest the ability to impart change on the environment of its own accord that is wholly determined by strict laws is somehow exclusive to these, whilst decrying the conscious self as being an anthropocentric, flawed view.
Is the irony not clear?
At the atomic level, cause and effect are not as you imagine them, atoms are not discrete structures as you are used to dealing with in your day to day life. There is no reason to point to these interactions as being the agents responsible for imparting their will on their environment, aside from the bias YOU have.
The 'I', the self, is ironically nudged out of the picture on the basis that to espouse it's fundamental role as 'the' agent responsible for taking action on its own accord, is to display hubris or an egotistical worldview, when in realty there is no more reason to ascribe these qualities, anthropocentric themselves, to what is in fact the all in all that is reality. You are carving out a special set of rules and restrictions for yourself that you claim your opponents are doing.
>>25703075
In the 80s people had no fucking clue how computers worked. They still don't, but engineers just referenced humans for examples of how information gets processed and transferred. Having no background in biology makes these examples sound like one equals the other, which makes the whole analogy meaningless. It's like if someone told you space is a vacuum and you decided that the inside of a light bulb is its own universe. Sounds cool or whatever, but there's no information there. An r9k analogy would be a woman claiming that staring at somebody is rape because they heard rape makes people uncomfortable.
>>25703263
>Literally kill yourself.
Literally kill yourself dude.
>>25699228
>Is free will real?
in this day and age? no. you cant do anything on this planet without money, and the only way to get money (reliably) is to become a wageslave and trade half your life for it. its the be all end all. your choices in life are ultimately limited by how much money you have.
>>25701674
Do you think a neuron fires because you want it to?
>>25703252
>A self-aware, learning robot, could never, ever, fucking, ever do something disadvantageous to it. Because it simply fucking cant.
Agreed. And exactly the same with humans. A human being ALWAYS chooses the most advantageous path. Purportedly 'irrational' decisions -- acting 'randomly', suicide, self-harm, lashing/chimping out, are ALWAYS reflective of a -- sometimes momentary, sometimes not -- fluctuation of priorities that shot one's decisions into the 'raises other people's eyebrows' territory. Come on, I was fucking 17 when I understood this.
>>25703254
>yet robots cant process human emotions nor act according to them.
Because my magical flesh fairy difference that I can't explain.
>>25703289
mate thats not what we mean by free will. read the thread
determinism. the past future and present are all predestined, you're just riding a train on tracks. Choices aren't real because whatever happens in the end was your only option, the only possible outcome, because you can't go back in time to change things.
Funny how not a single anon bothers to ask what we mean when we debate the role of 'you' in the world. What is this 'you'?
That should at least provide some framework instead of this sloppy style you idiots have going on here.
>>25703289
Nothing to do with free will m8. thats freedom your thinking of.
>>25703343
>I was fucking 17 when I understood this
(And I was a lategetter still.)
Holy fuck, the amount of retards completely unable to comprehend the concept of a deterministic universe really just cofirms this entire board is underage b& cancer. Fuck me, this board is finished.
>>25703343
>Because my magical flesh fairy difference that I can't explain.
i know you cant
>A human being ALWAYS chooses the most advantageous path.
>Purportedly 'irrational' decisions -- acting 'randomly', suicide, self-harm, lashing/chimping out, are ALWAYS reflective of a -- sometimes momentary, sometimes not -- fluctuation of priorities that shot one's decisions into the 'raises other people's eyebrows' territory.
>>im gonna kill myself because i dont know anything else
>>mate dont kill yourself you have so much to live for
>>oh thats right i do. my past decision was definitely not for my best.
No first cause ---> effect --> cause ---> effect --> cause ---> effect --> etc infinite
This is not that hard.
and dont bring morality into this, it has nothing to do with it. We all agree that will exists, but it is not free, of couse you weigh in different factors but you can only make it one way.
Think about it, the burden of proof is on you becouse we have never observed free will. We only know it can happen ONE way not multiple. Everthing that ever happen could only happen that way, and everything that will happen is alredy determined.
I know this is scary and hurts peoples world view but its obvious when you think about it
I see free will as the the ability to make choices. Everyone has free will but individuals who are higher ranking, smarter, or equal can sway others choices(bosses/superiors/friends) . You have free will to quit your job, avoid people, or even suck cocks but, the fact that you can make a choice to do anything is free will and the outcome of those things is cause and effect.
>>25703410
>enter thread
>call other anons underage
>tfw underage myself
>>25703422
have you ever observed free will? why is "will" not subject to cause and effect?
>>25703417
If you think that rationality of a decision is defined by its consistency with the majority's arbitrary, contextual, cultural, shifting priorities ('suicide is irrational because it makes your family cry and making people cry is bad okay? ;_; '), as opposed to being inherently rational in the sense of being the dominant, resultant vector of all sub-priorities the person has been having at the moment of his decision (e.g., suicide being the end vector of subvectors of wanting to no longer disappoint others, wanting to avoid physical pain, wanting to spite others, wanting for one's decision to be consistent with one's declarations, ... ... ...), you might be underage indeed.
>>25703410
I know what you mean.
>>25703274
>your wrong because words does not contain information
you wut m8?
>>25703410
Determinism was debunked in the 1920s when quantum theory showed causeless action. Get your head out of the 19th century einstein
>>25703515
In other words, 'irrationality' only exists when ONE model of decision-making (for instance, a decision why one should kill oneself, complete with every argument and counterargument one considers) is contrasted with ANOTHER in the light of which it can be FOUND inadequate. But this 'irrationality' is only a product of the COMPARISON, of one decision being contemplated being replaced with another, that one has found preferable. But considered in itself, every fucking decision is perfectly rational.
>>25703477
It is, everything is. Cause: you choose to quit. Effect: you lose a job or get a different one.
DUDE
CAUSALITY
LMAO
>>25703515
when the person realizes the objectively better choice was to not kill himself in the end. he got to have a good life.
human life has no value to you, nothing means anything to you. stop reading stirner or whatever led you to be this much of a half-man.
>>25703578
>But considered in itself, every fucking decision is perfectly rational.
not in the grand scheme of things, point discarded. >>25703589
>>25703548
we can see all causes exept one
next you gonna say that the romans did not know about the strong nuclear force
>>25703581
Cause: ???
Effect: I choose to quit
>>25703343
Its like fucking talking in circles.
The difference between a robot and you, is the vague notion, that if you become badyou did it out of your ownfree will
>tfw nobody itt smart enough to come up with a way to refute your argument against the status quo.
You're all idiots, SCIENCE RULES Bill Bill Bill Bill Bill Bill Bill Bill Bill Bill
>>25703581
ok i dont really know what side your debating
but you better not be implying that the decision was exempt from that chain
>>25703635
the only real answers lie in what is more than human and dumbasses are not allowed in this club since they have no pass to come in anyway.
>>25702801
>we're catching up very quick
skynet?
>>25703578
(In yet other words, rationality/logic and irrationality/logic are not unlike (im)perfectness. There is no such thing as 'objectively perfect'; perfection is a label, a property of a model in the mind. If the model of something contains a quality conceived as 'im-', 'mis-', 'mal-', then it is imperfect. Everything is perfect until it is conceived otherwise. When you think of a cat, it is a perfect cat unless you conceive of a flaw, such as a broken tail. Similarly, all decisions are rational until/unless they are conceived as 'irrational' by way of comparison and forming of a difference. Fucking tard.)
>>25703610
See above, I would have told you were you not a shitty baiter, I would have told you were you not underage.
>>25703636
the only dumbass here is you only taking into account modern "science"
>>25703636
An the status quo in this case is?
>>25703251
GIVE ME ONE GOOD REASON NOT TO KILL PEOPLE IF THERE IS NO FREE WILL!
>>25703665
Ha, yes, noticed that too. I don't know why I used the wrong pronoun; I don't have autism. I suppose I'm just enthusiastic for artificial intelligence.
>>25703692
jail, cops and shit
>>25703630
>>25703653
ha, I think we're using 2 different concepts of what "will' is.
>>25703692
Your own moral fiber.
>>25703758
>morality
>objective
>>25703692
There is no such thing as a 'good reason'. Goodness of reasons is, so to say, evaluated at runtime, and not at compile-time.
>>25703691
That the world is strictly deterministic im a way that determines the actions of the self. Obviously contrasts to the mainstream societal view that is the opposite, but this is fedora central.
>>25703679
I share the same mentality as you bud I was being ironic hence the deceptively smug Pepe.
>>25703708
Ill just debate them. Explain that I didn't chose to do it, I was determined to do it all along.
Someone actually used that argument in court, got acquited for insanity.
>>25703666
>666
been arguing with satan this whole time.
evolution and everything, no healthy man will kill himself or inflict himself harm for no reason. Unless he has a perfect reason to do so. Which is
never happen
>>25703692
thats right theres no free will there is absolutely no way you could weight the right and wrong, at least thats what people itt think
>>25703774
i think you ment "subjective" fellow robot
>>25703806
oh well im tired as hell i cant tell anymore
>>25703841
no. Im meme arrowing the word objective to imply that morality ISNT objective.
>>25703692
You mean you haven't heard what Tyrone gets up to in the big house??
>>25703821
in that case they didn't chose to shoot you in the head
>>25703830
>no healthy man will kill himself or inflict himself harm for no reason
>no reason
You're just not getting it, I see.
The mercilessly logical process of evolution can lead to behaviours that are SEEN as illogical by the majority. Again, evolution makes educated guesses. Sometimes its logical guesses are seen to misfire, as in cases of misfits who decide to quit. But logic, just like morality indeed, is relative. Or rather, logicality pertains strictly to *structure*; it is not informed by *content*. Logicality of a decision has fuck all to do with *what* one chooses to do. As soon as a decision consists of if-then-else-because-unless, it is logical (rational).
>>25703636
Wait, which one is the status quo? I'd say most philosophers don't believe in free will.
>mfw determinists lose their minds when I argue that like their idea of free will, reality too doesn't exist
B-b-but I can "feeeel" it!
>>25703865
yes i got that the post you reponded to said, "Your own moral fiber."
which is subjective
>>25703910
yeah we're all here interacting with each others but reality is not existing
>tfw girls don't fuck these guys
>"well they didn't have a choice anyways :)"
I'm glad r9k is accepting modern women as just the same as them
>>25703894
(In other words, a mentally ill person who chooses to do and cry whatever and changes their mind literally every minute is just as logical (rational) as everyone else. What they are is incongruous, inconsistent, incompatible. But not illogical. Because (il)logical describes the conjunctions involved, nothing more.)
>>25703905
Status quo is determinism on 4chan either because of a vocal minority or the majority of anons believing in it.
>>25703910
Reality by definition is real. Even if it wasn't real. Whatever was left would become the new "reality"
>>25703937
>yeah I'm here choosing to shitpost but free will doesn't exist
It's all an illusion, cumslut. If you can argue one and not the other, you don't have a clue what determinism is, let alone philosophy
>>25703894
>>25703947
>What they are is incongruous, inconsistent, incompatible.
okay so now what's your point? If they are "logical" it certainly doesn't mean it's the best for them nor that they really know what they're doing.
>>25703987
>whatever
a sound argument. So what's reality?
>>25703806
The discussion "Deterministic vs Free Will" is literally the exact opposite of status quo.
>>25704009
>okay so now what's your point?
It came from your mistaken belief that humans are unlike machines because they can act irrationally.
>>25703995
an illusion is very real
im sorry but you cant really escape reality
>>25703251
You could always argue your case in court.
>>25699228
There is no free will. There is an illusion of free will. You are enslaved by chemical reactions. If you abandon the comfort of perpetuating the human race you'll experience the closest you'll ever get to free will. Your existence, let alone your consciousness, is a correlation of random events.
Give up women and embrace epicureanism. It's the only way of going through life with the least torment.
>>25703995
I'm talking to you faggot, what's between us is reality.
If you dont agree then fuck off outta with your solipsism and stop talking to people.
>>25703939
So is all sex rape, because there is no such thing as choice?
Maybe those feminists were right all along.
>>25699502
What is the theme of this image?
>>25704009
>it certainly doesn't mean it's the best for them nor that they really know what they're doing
Also, >objective morality again.
Make no mistake, objective morality needn't have the form of 'killing is always bad'. You're still displaying belief in 'things objectively better/worse for you'.
>>25704018
Reality: That which is real.
Try refute that shit.protip:you cant
>>25704026
Okay then, rewording, they can act incongruous, inconsistent, incompatible, unlike machines.
>>25704061
Nah, if the guy reflects on the past and realizes he did good not killing himself, you get my point.
You're devitating so hard from the obvious.
>>25704051
yes but think about this, no one choose to rape it was determend
>>25704018
Descartes. We are conscious. That is real. Denying it requires consciousness. And before that is the law on non-contradiction. Same proof.
>>25704080
lol its like trying to prove somthing that is not real
>>25703417
>im gonna kill myself because i dont know anything else
>mate dont kill yourself you have so much to live for
>oh thats right i do. my past decision was definitely not for my best.
Do you really think talking someone down from suicide is this easy?
>>25704040
>embrace epicureanism. It's the only way of going through life with the least torment.
but that's just the poor fuccboi's stoicism.
>>25704096
>they can act incongruous, inconsistent, incompatible, unlike machines
And, of course, this is false as well. Because unlike 'logical', the above three are subjective. Cf. >>25703666 and 'perfectness'. An observer might perfectly well declare a group of robots' actions as 'incongruous' ('bizarre') if he watches them, for instance, vandalize some stuff, not knowing that they're acting rationally owing to a backdoor implemented in them or something. But to the abuser of that backdoor, their behaviour will not be 'incongruous' because he will have planned it from the beginning.
>if the guy reflects on the past and realizes he did good not killing himself
I always draw the line at repeating myself.
>>25704156
lol no but you get my point, im not gonna make a full conversation
>>25703357
The observer.
>>25704184
And now Buddhists are in the thread as well.
I'm out.
Decent thread everyone.
>>25704170
>stoicism
But that's just the rich fuccboi's insecurity.
>>25704173
difference is a robot will always act according to the way he has been made/programmed/modified. But he is behaving perfectly the way it is programmed for the time hes being backdoored.
>I always draw the line at repeating myself.
ok, i suppose you just usually let people kill themselves without talking them out of it?
Next time we should discuss whether or not blue is a color
>>25704255
>difference is a robot will always act according to the way he has been made/programmed/modified.
Just like a human. Every 'unpredictable', 'programming-defying' act of a human being just reflects its agent's/its witnesses' inability to penetrate the underlying algorithm, the underlying factors responsible for that act. This is the true issue with free will.
>i suppose you just usually let people kill themselves without talking them out of it?
Sometimes I do, sometimes I don't. Depends -- not on me, but, of course, on nature and on nurture. What matters is that I never imply that 'you should' or 'you shoudn't' is objective.
>>25703696
Haha, sure thing, tell me how your skin feels, just to be sure.
>>25704204
>this kills the man of scientism
>>25699228
Program your mind, program reality.
also try nofap
>this whole thread and everyone in it
>>25703692
You don't want the consequences of shooting people.
>>25704184
That doesn't work well because the tirle suggests a suite of characteristics when the matter is still up for debate.
A true answer would be one that provides some sort of framework in which arguments can be said to be true or false in whether they describe the nature of this 'you.'
I would say that the self is that all-encompassing oneness which can be found in the entity that calls itself 'I'
This is the most basic definition, and yet includes everything necessary insofar as the language with which that entity comes to internally regard itself.
This is what reality is after all, by definition.
Who else /monism/ here?
>all these misguided anons speaking of a world in which the self is not all in all but divided between subject and observer
>>25704352
But why should there be consequences if I didn't choose to do it. Logically speaking.
>>25704352
Hold on there cowboy. Determinists choose to believe that there is no "want" and there is nothing they can do about it. They only get what they deserve and that's predetermined to them
>>25704391
The consequences aren't to you, but to the person who did it.
>>25704382
If it were possible to fatally OD on LSD, the world would be a much better place.
>>25704302
Heres a situation
niggerman is born in killer facility and they raise him to be a killer who mindless kill people on sight, and thats the only thing he know
yeah he acts "rationally" and "perfectly", but does he work in accordance with Man
After all if you remove all technologies and bring man back to his primitive state, the only people who could have been remotely considered sane were those who were able to have some sort of sociability, to be cooperative and such
What "works" and is "rational" in a human is therefore is ability to help his commune and such. His ability to lead it higher.
We CANNOT mesh human and machine morality.
I dont think I can argue a whole lot more after that im very tired.
>>25704382
>talking about new age bullshit
>calls people misguided
Dont make me open your ass chakra
>>25704391
You're getting upset at people for consequences. You're literally creating a consequence. Stop that.
