do ants have free will?
>>7712481
No, the only animals with free will are goats.
No, they aren't conscious. They are purely instinctual animals.
(Idk wtf I'm taking about and am tired of the free will meme)
>>7712481
Free will is physically impossible.
>>7712498
what do you mean physically? dont you simply mean "free will is impossible"? why did you add the "physically"?
>>7712501
because if someone says "free will is impossible" you'll ask why
the fact that it is extremely likely that all motion in the universe is deterministic, implies that your actions are already pre-determined
>>7712501
"Physically" as opposed to "logically". Free will contradicts the laws of physics. Of course it is also logically impossible, but that's a different issue.
I don't understand free will.
So you say that all atoms are predetermined and all that chaos theory stuff right?
Well I say no! I move the atoms in my hand by willingly wanting to! I just did it lol!
>>7712514
that's circular logic
the concept of free will is also pre-determined. The chemicals in your brain that triggered to send a signal to your hand was determined by what you saw and read which was determined by what you did last night which was determined by.....you get the idea.
>>7712498
>>7712503
>>7712509
It has nothing to do with the laws of physics. If you are basing that on that the universe being deterministic, you are wrong. We don't know the universe is deterministic. In fact, I think you'll find most physicists think it isn't.
The problem with "free will" as commonly understood is that it isn't well defined. What makes it incompatible with determinism? If it is, does that make it random? Personally, I don't consider free will incompatible with either a deterministic or non-deterministic universe; free will is simply the conscious decision-making process, which self-evidently exists, regardless of whether it is deterministic on a physical level.
>>7712521
Damn you just mind fucked me.
>>7712527
> I think you'll find most physicists think it isn't.
citation needed
Many physicists believe we live in a simulation.
>. If you are basing that on that the universe being deterministic, you are wrong.
by the definition of free will, a deterministic universe would is a contradiction.
>>7712527
I didn't say anything about determinism, you illiterate piece of shit. The opposite of free will is not determinism but merely the absence of free will. Of course the laws of physics are a mixture of deterministic and random laws, but randomness makes free will even more impossible, because nobody has control over randomness. Are you underaged or trolling?
>>7712535
>by the definition of free will,
Please share what you think that is.
>>7712535
>citation needed
You'll find out when you take your first QM class.
>>7712540
determinism can contradict free will but it doesn't have to necessarily
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compatibilism
>>7712581
Compatibilism is pseudo-intellectual bullshit. Either free will exists or it doesn't. The laws of physics are a mixture of deterministic and random. Both make free will impossible. Therefore free will does not exist. Now fuck off from my science board, you illiterate wannabe philosopher.
>>7712592
>M-M-Muh duality
Free will exists, as does determinism. We can learn from our mistakes, yet if we don't do as such we're going to be stuck in the same rut doing the exact same shit over and over.
>>7712481
define free will.
>>7712581
fuck off please
we all know that that definition of free will isn't the one anyone cares about
>>7712600
>free will exists
> as does determinism
based on what?
nobody is arguing that people don't make choices on an everyday basis. but that's not the classical definition of free will either. It has only more recently been defined that way by optimistic faggots that can't deal with reality.
>mfw I can't be blamed for any of my actions
>>7712612
>yfw other people can't be blamed for punishing you regardless
>>7712592
I'll ask you again to please share with the class what you think the definition of free will is.
>>7712606
I'm not here to argue, Mr. Strawman, I'm just here to tell it like it is. No need to get all moody because someone has a more organized and well thought out opinion than yours.
>>7712620
This isn't pure math. We don't have precise definitions outside of math. Nevertheless most (non-autistic) humans can intuitively agree on the meanings of words without much misunderstanding. If this minimal amount of uncertainty is too hard for you to handle, I suggest taking your autism meds and not engaging in internet debates anymore.
>>7712503
>the fact that it is extremely likely that all motion in the universe is deterministic
This "fact" is incorrect, and we've know it to be incorrect for longer than you've been alive.
>>7712503
>implies that your actions are already pre-determined
Which doesn't really invalidate free will.
I have free will if I am responsible for my decisions, relatively free of outside constraint.
And even if my experiences shape my decisions, they're a part of who I am.
>>7712606
Oh man, if you haven't figured out that we seamlessly step through dimensions every time we make a decision yet you're a far cry from where you think you are intellectually.
>>7712664
I think you may be schizophrenic lol
>>7712674
"I can't comprehend the concepts being purveyed to me because I haven't even gotten close to putting two and two together, this guy must be schizophrenic"
You understand a lot less than you think you do.
>>7712641
> This "fact" is incorrect, and we've know it to be incorrect for longer than you've been alive.
that's why we're still pursuing a unified theory that depends on the existence of a deterministic universe
>Which doesn't really invalidate free will.
if you think free will means that you get to make choices, then sure. But nobody gives a fuck about the definition because it is trivially true. The question is whether or not your choice is predictable, which it is.
no please stop spouting useless nonsense because you clearly have no idea what is being discussed here
>>7712680
>if QM is involved, it's not magic either.
it isnt
Even the book of genesis disputes freewill.
>put 2 newborns in a garden
>keep them ignorant of knowing the consequences of their actions
>(fruit of the tree of good and evil)
>allow a snake that talks into the garden
>(snake is arguably the devil)
>god somehow turns a blind eye and leaves
>expect them not to eat the fruit
>punish even, adam and everyone since then, including you and me
>"freewill"
>>7712664
How many dimensions are there?
>>7712684
>that's why we're still pursuing a unified theory that depends on the existence of a deterministic universe
No, we're pursuing a deterministic universe because many /sci/entists really HATE the idea of a non-deterministic universe.
It's "untidy" and the dislike there being unanswerable questions.
Look how many people in this thread insist the universe is deterministic even though we have nearly a century of experimental evidence that says otherwise.
>The question is whether or not your choice is predictable,
Not according to any dictionary I've ever seen.
>which it is.
Not in any practical sense.
You're assuming people are deterministic, even though you can't practically test that assertion.
>>7712680
Biochemistry and QM are exactly what makes free will impossible.
>>7712715
> You're assuming people are deterministic, even though you can't practically test that assertion.
You're assuming that I'm assuming....
I'm assuming the universe is deterministic
You keep saying that it's not. If you want to provide some articles,papers,reasoning why it isn't deterministic i'd be happy to consider your position.
>> Not according to any dictionary I've ever seen.
more ignorance
assuming the universe is deterministic, the exact position of every atom in your human body can be known at every point in time for all time. You might be presented with a choice to post something intelligent or retarded, but that choice has already been decided, you just don't know it yet.
>>7712682
And you think you understand a lot than you know.
>>7712714
It's theoretically infinite in every imaginable direction. The system is operating on a grid. Don't believe me? Look at the moon's reflection on an inactive smartphone.
>>7712664
Conscious decision making does allow us to pass into new dimensions.
Im kind of disappointed you brought this hippy bullshit into the thread.
>>7712746
Does not**
>>7712481
Sooooo ants right?
No, they live for the swarm.
>>7712735
>the exact position of every atom in your human body can be known at every point in time for all time
Nope, this is incorrect, you CAN'T know every particle's position and momentum simultaneously.
...because no particle possesses both these qualities in an absolute sense simultaneously.
And even if they could, I'm STILL making the decisions even if I were a deterministic system.
>>7712751
>>7712751
>misrepresenting the everett many worlds interpretation of a wave equation with alternate dimensions.
>He still hasn't realized that his reality is made up of frame by frame moments moving in dozens of directions at once
>Even if we have the illusion of free will we still have the will to do what we want within that illusion and thus we still have free will
>Just because we can predict what people will do in response to certain stimuli, this somehow means that they can't realize this can be done and can engage in a never ending game of planning steps ahead
>This all implies that both free will and determinism can't exist simultaneously
You're sure an intelligent individual, buddy. If you can't accept that both exist you effectively run your argument into a paradox.
do we?
Probably not. "Free will" denotes a level of executive functioning and decision-making that ants don't have.
It's silly to ask that question of ants. You might as well ask a bear if it can fly.
The more proper question to ask is, in what contexts do we invoke "free will"?
"This criminal has free will."
"This person has free will."
So what we are saying in other words is "these people are going to behave in ways that can defy our models". We might get a few positives but then the negatives will start popping up and oh boy!
A better question is now...who needs which answer?
Who seeks a explicit casual explanation? How deep are you willing to go? And for what purpose?
likewise for the seeker of will
Who seeks to conjure ex nihilo? From what void are you going to draw from? And for what purpose?
>>7712811
in ways that adhere to our casual models*
Darkly enough, advertising probably has a corpus of literature, more vast than any other field, on this subject that it constantly needs to update.
>>7712635
>This isn't pure math. We don't have precise definitions outside of math. Nevertheless most (non-autistic) humans can intuitively agree on the meanings of words without much misunderstanding.
So give me a non-precise, intuitive definition then, Mr. Non-Autist. Can you even do that?
>>7712781
only some of those posts are mine
it's news to me that people are accepting free will as the definition in the wiki article to compatability listed above.
if that's your stance, then I can't disagree but it's also trivially true, and useless
Time is the entropy of the information in our brain.
All occurrences are predetermined and had already happened.
We are simply unable to process the world of information in it wholesomeness, so we process is piece by piece, hence the entropy and the "feeling" of time.
Free will is the interpretation of the information.
It exists since it does not change the world/information itself. It is how we relate one pieces information to one another.
>>7712481
No, they are deterministic Turing machines.
>>7712481
No, but they do have free wifi.
