Free-will, does it exist?

[Michaelas10]

I don't believe it does. I don't believe in absolute determinism either, but free-will referring to some kind of magical ability of the human race to split time into many different continuums is absolute bullshit. Here's why:

1) Macro (logistic) argument

Whenever a person makes a decision he simply wages out the best choice. The decision-making process is the process in which the person considers all factors in determining which choice is the best. If the factors stay the same, the outcome of the decision process will always stay the same too.

2) Micro (microscopic) argument

We are made from atoms which exist in nature. If we were to look at the individual atoms, we would see they move and interact in a semi-predictable manner. You will not see anything that resembles free-will on that scale. According to reductionism, if the components of a system function in a semi-predictable manner, then the system functions in a semi-predictable manner, too.

To me free-will is simply an illusion caused by our brain. I'm not sure what is causing it or what is the evolutionary advantage of this mechanism. Please post your opinion.

[Leidolfr]

free will is limited,I think, i mean yes, you can kill yourself, and thats free will, you can not work, and be homeless, and die of exposure, thats free will, but in actuality, you only have moments of free will, and even those are driven by factors youre not entirely aware of

[tom641]

so by the microscopic thory, he would have known that he would say that you can predict what someone will do? free-will is real, he can say what i'll do, and then i'll do something else.

[lilninja]

Free will does exist, and its right here.

[REDSPADES]

I believe that we're either random little unpredictable collaborations of particles or we're apart of a giant predeterminative machine.

Check this out my man, if you haven't already.

[DevourerJay]

not in NG... or on a lot of sites... however the WILL to go to those sites does remain, so yes, there IS free will... people just take it for granted

[Michaelas10]

At 7/8/09 05:26 AM, tom641 wrote: so by the microscopic thory, he would have known that he would say that you can predict what someone will do?

No, we can't predict anything on the microscopic scale because of the uncertainty principle. We can only predict the outcome of your decision on the logistic level of how your mind works. Current technology doesn't allow for it, though.

free-will is real, he can say what i'll do, and then i'll do something else.

But once he said what he thinks you'll do, you would try to avoid that option in the decision-making process. Therefore, a factor has changed.

[Hoeloe]

Oddly enough, the OP actually has his arguments straight for once. He's much more convincing than the responses. I personally don't believe that animals are different to humans, and so therefore humans do not have any system that makes them particularly special. However, life itself is something I am not sure of the cause, and free will may be what that entails. Although, without any proof, and such evidence against "total" free will, I am inclined to agree with the OP.

[Aigis]

Okay, wow.

I came in here thinking I could totally shit all over your argument but you've really stumped me.

I suppose to support the idea that free will doesn't exist there is the idea that our brains are made in a certain way upon birth. As we grow our personality is dictated by the brain that we were given, our other experiences, and circumstance. Our personality will influence what we do in any given situation, and anyone given our brain and our past would make that same decision.

However, there's a huge problem with thinking in this sort of way.

If there's no such thing as free will, how can one be held accountable for their actions?

[Michaelas10]

At 7/8/09 06:01 AM, Aigis wrote: If there's no such thing as free will, how can one be held accountable for their actions?

They shouldn't. As your understanding of this worldview evolves, you start seeing how we don't exist. People should be as much accountable for their actions as a leaf is for falling from a tree.

[6r0undZ3r0]

According to Skinner, free will doesn't exist because organisms tend to repeat responses that lead to a rewarding consequence, and tend not to repeat responses that lead to negative ones. So our "free will" is just trying to reward ourselves.

[TotalHarmonicControl]

This question always amuses me. How can a hypothesis for this ever be tested? Free Will or "The illusion of free will"? It doesnt really matter either way, since no-one really has a hold on what is going to happen, or what MAY happen (depending entirely on your beliefs on this particular subject).

I mean, I decide that I'm going to post a reply to this. I believe I made the decision to do so, and that the choice to either reply, or not to reply was entirely in my hands.....prove me wrong!! :) but at the same time, the argument stands, that maybe at this exact point in time, all of the events leading up to my posting on this bbs were predetermined, and that all subsequent interactions are also going to happen exactly as "its planned out"...I mean, maybe It was my destiny!?

HG Wells "the time machine" has all of this as a theme. So people have been pondering this question for quite some time!

So, to conclude, I don't lean either way, as no empirical evidence exists to prove one or the other. To the average person, it really makes no difference as we have no direct control over the flow of time or what direction that time flows.

I just go with the flow...seems to work out pretty well for me at least!

Peace!

PS Check my tunes!!! :):)

[Wonderful]

Free will does exist, and it's right here.

[Dropkicked]

At 7/8/09 05:17 AM, Michaelas10 wrote:

1) Macro (logistic) argument

Whenever a person makes a decision he simply wages out the best choice. The decision-making process is the process in which the person considers all factors in determining which choice is the best. If the factors stay the same, the outcome of the decision process will always stay the same too.

The factors won't always stay the same, and I can honestly say that whenever I make a decision I never make the "best" choice. I'm sure there are plenty of people who continually make horrible choices, but also do make good or the best ones, so there are really a multitude of options.

To me free-will is simply an illusion caused by our brain. I'm not sure what is causing it or what is the evolutionary advantage of this mechanism. Please post your opinion.

I think our definitions of free will are different. What I understand it to be is the ability of a human to determine their life by a series of choices according to their ideals, morality or individual thought processes. If you don't believe in supreme predetermination then free will seems the only viable option.

Personally, I'm a firm believer of free will.

[Yiffy]

What we know as free will does exist to some extend, but is limited and governed by automatic processes in our mind.

You can stretch your arm, and it will stay like that for as long as you like or is possible. You can hold your breath if you want to, but at some point your body will force you to breath. But some things happen even if you don't want to, like heartbeat.

So yes, to some extend the human has free will, but at some point automated processes take over if the free will doesn't make the right choice according to the brain.

[Bladezguy]

Why?

[Michaelas10]

At 7/8/09 10:47 AM, Dropkicked wrote:

At 7/8/09 05:17 AM, Michaelas10 wrote:

1) Macro (logistic) argument

Whenever a person makes a decision he simply wages out the best choice. The decision-making process is the process in which the person considers all factors in determining which choice is the best. If the factors stay the same, the outcome of the decision process will always stay the same too.

The factors won't always stay the same

Of course.That's what makes this illusion so great.

and I can honestly say that whenever I make a decision I never make the "best" choice. I'm sure there are plenty of people who continually make horrible choices, but also do make good or the best ones, so there are really a multitude of options.

Not best morally-speaking, or logically-speaking, best referring to the one that your mind believes that is the most beneficial to you. Your mind may be messed up and always choose the worst options thinking they're the best, but it's always trying. Even when you're purposefully choosing the worst of options, you always have a cause for doing so and therefore that choice is still considered predictable.

To me free-will is simply an illusion caused by our brain. I'm not sure what is causing it or what is the evolutionary advantage of this mechanism. Please post your opinion.

I think our definitions of free will are different. What I understand it to be is the ability of a human to determine their life by a series of choices according to their ideals, morality or individual thought processes.

Chemical reactions trigger our brain, and the result is a predictable outcome. That's all there is to it. No one has any special "ability".

If you don't believe in supreme predetermination then free will seems the only viable option.

I'm not a fatalist. I'm a naturalist. Things casually happen. No one set them on a path. No one knows the outcome, and never will know it.

Personally, I'm a firm believer of free will.

[darthduba]

If you see free will as behaviour in general, it is influenced by three factors.

Enviroment
DNA
Self Determination

So you could say that what you do is only one third free will. Your other behaviour will be influenced by DNA en Enviroment. Using cognition you will addapt your behaviour, to what is cultural accepted. But does that mean that your not acting out of free will ?

[Drake]

Don't you see we are bound to a fate that we ourselves cannot change or shape differently? It's just how life is.