Do we have free will?

[Elshaddai]

Am I a biological robot acting out a large chain of cause effect reactions or do I make conscious choices freely as I see fit?

I think i'm agree with the notion that there's no free will but I want to hear other opinions on the topic

[undeather]

I find the intellectual discourse around the topic of free will pretty exhausting.

The hardcore determinists (Robert Sapolsky, Sam Harris, Hossenfelder..) base their argument on the reductionistic notion that human beings are finite automatons. Behaviour is seen as an emergent property of mind-states. Mind emerges from complex interactions between patterns of neuronal activity. Those are regulated by your DNA - which is made out molecules - which are made ouf atoms - which are made out of subatomic particles - which at some point are best described by patterns of excitation of a quantum field. There are a lot of arguments that support this propositon. First and foremost - we can easily observe that nature acts according to the principle of cause & effect. We have mathematical laws that describe those dynamics almost perfectly. Randomness or chaotic systems can be explained by our lack of computational power. Quantum mechanics has explanatory models which are consistent with deterministm (Hidden variables/Many Worlds-Interpretation). From a neurobiological or anthropolgoical point of view its outright shocking how well we understand the emergence of behavioural tendencies through the integration of genotypes and environmental influences. We know that damage to the brain (especially the prefrontal cortex) can result in a complete shift of someones cognitive- & personality-architecture. The case of Phineas Gage shows this pretty spectecularly.
 

Where it falls short: It's usually based on the metaphysical assumption of materialism, which isn't questioned at all. Materialism is a weak form of ontology and suffers from multiple explanatory gaps, some of which are impossible to circumvent. If conciousness takes a primary role, then "will" could be an inherent quality of such substrait. The "uncaused cause" is only a problem in a physicalist paradigm. Idealism or certain forms of panpsychism would allow for freedom to the extent of identification - prior to the deterministic window of genes & environment. Dualism would in principle also allow for free will. We also have no idea how to correctly interpret quantum mechanics - deterministic models are highly criticized. Real randomness would not solve the free will debate - but it could support a plausible case for free will.

There is also a huge problem with this generalization of observed tendencies. Let's say for the sake of the argument that you observe a genetic defect which tends to increase someones propensity towards anger-issues, physical violence and therefore imprisonment. Let's also assume that you use this argument against the reality of free will. The issue is that even if genuine free will was possible, then we could be absolutely certain that it's more like a spectrum than a binary phenomenon. A simple fact of life is that most people sleepwalk through it - in the average persons mind there is slim to none awareness around their thoughts, feelings and impulses. Most people ARE walking automatons, while only an increase of conciousness/awareness could free you from the grip of such tendencies. So, if you are observing a group of random people with this anger-inducing genotype - of course you are going to find evidence that supports the biolgogical-propensity-hypothesis. You are studying NPCs. I would argue that you would in fact see a different outcome studying a more concious group of individuals. Does this count as an argument for free wil? I don't know - but I think it's an point of inquiry. 

 

[zurew]

This is a much much deeper and more nuanced topic, than how it is usually phrased and how most non-philosophers try to debate/talk about it. There is a lot of philosophy knowledge that is needed to be able to properly understand and ground most of the arguments.

If you are interested I would suggest you to dive deep into sources like:

https://iep.utm.edu/foreknow/#H2

https://iep.utm.edu/freewill/

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/determinism-causal/

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/compatibilism/

 

24 minutes ago, undeather said:

 

I like Robert Sapolsky as a biologist, but I think he is pretty much out of his depth here, when it comes to philosophy.

[Rafael Thundercat]

Good that you guys Started this one because I am Reading B.F SKInner " Beyond Freedom and Dignity and was about to ask if someone ready had some Study on Skinner Ideias and if is Worth Checking

this is the summary of the Book:

 

[undeather]

Quote

I like Robert Sapolsky as a biologist, but I think he is pretty much out of his depth here, when it comes to philosophy.

I adore Sapolsky, but I agree.
There is just something about accomplished scientists who go into philosophical topics ...  

[Scholar]

On 21.2.2024 at 0:16 PM, Elshaddai said:

Am I a biological robot acting out a large chain of cause effect reactions or do I make conscious choices freely as I see fit?

I think i'm agree with the notion that there's no free will but I want to hear other opinions on the topic

Free Will is foundational to existence.

 

First we have to inspect what Freedom is, and what Will is.

Freedom is Infinity, Boundlessness.

Will is Function, Constraint, Direction.

 

Reality is a balance between Freedom and Will, and so is your mind. To do something freely is to do it from a place of Infinitude. To do something from a place of Infinitude is to draw it from the Groundless Ground, from the Causeless Cause. That which is not caused, that which has no reason.

The Will is the Directedness, the Intention, into which Infinitude expresses itself.

 

So, no. You are not a biological robot, you are a Free Will. The Universe is a Free Will. Your choices can be more or less an expression of Infinitude, of Freedom. That is a question of the balance of your mind, between Will and Freedom.

 

 

Free Will is fundamentally required for all of existence, because that is what existence is.

 

Even individual particles have a balance between Freedom and WIll. Their Will are their constraints, their constants. Their Freedom is the unpredictability, their total randomness, causlessness. They contain both aspects, otherwise the universe could not possibly contain evolution.

Edited February 23 by Scholar

[Ishanga]

Yes and No. This all depends on one's level of Clarity and Awareness, which is basically called Consciousness.. If You are highly Conscious, then You have Free Will, in the sense that You can create the Experience of Life that You want, Joy or Misery, and how clearly You perceive Reality as it is. Opposite is true if you are not highly Conscious, your Experience is random and by accident and Your a slave to outside situations regarding your Mental health and Emotional States. Your perception is highly filtered and conditioned, not much clarity here at all at this level, just enough so you can live another day..

Our Bodies and Minds are not based on Free Will, Karma rules there, Memory is the basis of Karma and with Identification with memory nothing new ever comes forth so therefore everything is determined and cyclical.

But we are not our Bodies or Minds, both are Gathered/Accumulated, what is you is Soul/Atman/Life in Embodied form, the key is Consciousness...

Edited February 23 by Ishanga

[DocWatts]

My own take is that much like the so-called Mind-Body problem, the question of Free Will is a pseudo-problem born of problematic framing and questionable assumptions.

It's what happens when you try to work backwards to the richness of our lived experience from a metaphysical foundation (such as materialism, idealism, etc).  We can think of this as a 'outside-in' approach.

Instead, I argue that for questions of mind, we'd be much better starting from a phenomenological, or an 'inside-out' approach. Which begins with the immediacy of how the world is disclosed to us in our direct experience, while maintaining a flexible or agnostic stance on the ultimate metaphysical foundations for Reality.

Edited February 25 by DocWatts

[Soul Flight]

@Elshaddai If you experience god realization you could become god and realize you are dreaming this whole life. All that exists is the void or nothingness and so you can control the dream. It is solipsism or simulation theory. You could become the Buddha. But even then you just let it all flow and don't try to change anything because you realize everything is perfect.

But if you want to believe this reality exists then who knows? Maybe or maybe not. It is possible all the aliens and all the alien AIs all proved to themselves there is no free will so they all just accepted life or killed themselves or escaped into another dimension where there is free will.

[Schizophonia]

On 21/02/2024 at 2:41 PM, undeather said:

I find the intellectual discourse around the topic of free will pretty exhausting.

The hardcore determinists (Robert Sapolsky, Sam Harris, Hossenfelder..) base their argument on the reductionistic notion that human beings are finite automatons. Behaviour is seen as an emergent property of mind-states. Mind emerges from complex interactions between patterns of neuronal activity. Those are regulated by your DNA - which is made out molecules - which are made ouf atoms - which are made out of subatomic particles - which at some point are best described by patterns of excitation of a quantum field. There are a lot of arguments that support this propositon. First and foremost - we can easily observe that nature acts according to the principle of cause & effect. We have mathematical laws that describe those dynamics almost perfectly. Randomness or chaotic systems can be explained by our lack of computational power. Quantum mechanics has explanatory models which are consistent with deterministm (Hidden variables/Many Worlds-Interpretation). From a neurobiological or anthropolgoical point of view its outright shocking how well we understand the emergence of behavioural tendencies through the integration of genotypes and environmental influences. We know that damage to the brain (especially the prefrontal cortex) can result in a complete shift of someones cognitive- & personality-architecture. The case of Phineas Gage shows this pretty spectecularly.
 

Where it falls short: It's usually based on the metaphysical assumption of materialism, which isn't questioned at all. Materialism is a weak form of ontology and suffers from multiple explanatory gaps, some of which are impossible to circumvent. If conciousness takes a primary role, then "will" could be an inherent quality of such substrait. The "uncaused cause" is only a problem in a physicalist paradigm. Idealism or certain forms of panpsychism would allow for freedom to the extent of identification - prior to the deterministic window of genes & environment. Dualism would in principle also allow for free will. We also have no idea how to correctly interpret quantum mechanics - deterministic models are highly criticized. Real randomness would not solve the free will debate - but it could support a plausible case for free will.

There is also a huge problem with this generalization of observed tendencies. Let's say for the sake of the argument that you observe a genetic defect which tends to increase someones propensity towards anger-issues, physical violence and therefore imprisonment. Let's also assume that you use this argument against the reality of free will. The issue is that even if genuine free will was possible, then we could be absolutely certain that it's more like a spectrum than a binary phenomenon. A simple fact of life is that most people sleepwalk through it - in the average persons mind there is slim to none awareness around their thoughts, feelings and impulses. Most people ARE walking automatons, while only an increase of conciousness/awareness could free you from the grip of such tendencies. So, if you are observing a group of random people with this anger-inducing genotype - of course you are going to find evidence that supports the biolgogical-propensity-hypothesis. You are studying NPCs. I would argue that you would in fact see a different outcome studying a more concious group of individuals. Does this count as an argument for free wil? I don't know - but I think it's an point of inquiry. 

 

It has nothing to do with the level of consciousness.
The extent of your ability to step back and contemplate your relative experience of the world and make decisions accordingly is not proof of freedom at all, it would be like saying that the nature of a film is less "linear". " because it's 4k rather than 1080p.
It's not just a matter of acting impulsively or, on the contrary, in a very thoughtful manner.
If I rewind time, if things happen in an "infinitely logical" way then everything will happen in exactly the same way, so you're not basically free.
If somewhere there is some form of "chaos" (which is probably false, another illusory concept) then you are still a prisoner of that outcome and the result is the same.
And,btw, can we only declare that infinity/non duality experience is free? It doesn't really make sense.

 

Edited March 23 by Schizophonia

[Consept]

To give a simple answer - every decision you make is predicated on foundational factors, 1 is where and to who you were born to and another is what body and brain you were born with. You did not have a choice in these 2 things at the very least your current consciousness does not know whether you chose these circumstances. So every decision made after birth is completely influenced by these circumstances that you had no choice over. In which case where does the free will come in?

Its kinda like saying, 'I got forced to be in prison, but I chose to play cards', well you only played cards because you were locked up. 

There is no decision you can make that is not because of something else that was out of your control. Another way to ask the question is can you think of an action that could be completely independent where a choice can be made freely without prior influence? 

[Razard86]

A human has never had free will. Free Will means you have absolute control. This is not the case. A human does not determine what age of history they were borne in, what family they were borne into, what their gene expression is and how it will change, what food and water they consume or its quality, what quality of relationships they will be exposed too in their life, what language they learn. You don't even control your flight/fight response, your heart beat, your endocrine system, the list goes on..... So no a human does not have free will. A human being is a byproduct of their environment like an apple is a byproduct of a tree.

God does have free will, but in another sense you could say God gave up its will to love and can only be love so as a result God is bound to love. So in that sense you could Say God doesn't have free will because it gave it up to be the total expression of love manifest. Which is the highest use of intelligence because its the highest creative expression. God only creates love and that's it. 

So in one sense free will exists, in that only God which is the totality of everything is free. In one sense it doesn't because even God is bound and its bound by love. Why? Because its the highest intelligence. Whatever happens is the highest expression of Love but its hidden by all the delusion. As your intelligence raises your ability to see clearly raises. As a result you get closer to God's will the more loving you are. 

God is that which has no bias, because bias would disrupt God's creativity. So remove your bias and you can be as Objective as God. But the search for God is a personal endeavor, you must take this journey yourself and discover the answers yourself.

[Davino]

@Razard86 Good input

I have a doubt about this part

4 hours ago, Razard86 said:

A human has never had free will. Free Will means you have absolute control. This is not the case. A human does not determine what age of history they were borne in, what family they were borne into, what their gene expression is and how it will change, what food and water they consume or its quality, what quality of relationships they will be exposed too in their life, what language they learn. You don't even control your flight/fight response, your heart beat, your endocrine system, the list goes on..... So no a human does not have free will. A human being is a byproduct of their environment like an apple is a byproduct of a tree.

So could we say that a human has free will as far as he is conscious but has not free will over what he is unconscious of?

 

[Hojo]

You have free will to stop or go. Focus on things everything else is programmed into the body and it moves automatically.

[Razard86]

11 hours ago, Davino said:

@Razard86 Good input

I have a doubt about this part

So could we say that a human has free will as far as he is conscious but has not free will over what he is unconscious of?

 

When I say human I mean human consciousness. But no human consciousness doesn't have free will. It has a will that is limited so it has limited will. Free Will implies absolute freedom with no constraints but the ability to place restraints as well. Only God can do both while the human consciousness is stuck. The human does have the freedom to raise their consciousness beyond human consciousness...but they will have to be ok with losing their mind and feeling insane.

Good luck convincing most humans to lose their mind.

[Princess Arabia]

20 hours ago, Consept said:

1 is where and to who you were born to and another is what body and brain you were born with.

I thought we were never born, will never die, and that the brain is imaginary.

[Princess Arabia]

20 hours ago, Consept said:

There is no decision you can make that is not because of something else that was out of your control.

Two negatives cancels out each other in a sentence.

 

20 hours ago, Consept said:

Another way to ask the question is can you think of an action that could be completely independent where a choice can be made freely without prior influence?

So you're saying the choices we make has to be dependent on a prior choice that was dependent on a prior influence? So we are making choices but the choice is already predetermined? 

[Jehovah increases]

[Consept]

5 hours ago, Princess Arabia said:

So you're saying the choices we make has to be dependent on a prior choice that was dependent on a prior influence? So we are making choices but the choice is already predetermined? 

Kind of, its like this, let's say theres a computer where you can input all the information about your genetics, your whole history, your previous 'choices', how your brain is wired etc. It wouldnt be a stretch for this computer to accurately predict what your next choice would be and then if it can predict that it could predict all your choices going forward and map out what your life would be. We're probably not that far from something like this even existing. 

Every choice that you make is made within the confines of you and all the factors that make you 'you'. For you to have 'free will' it would be a choice made completely independent of those factors that you have no control of. If you like there is 'God's will' like a unified will, but there can not be both God's will and individual free will. 

[Yimpa]

Do you follow every thought and idea that comes through your mind? Everything that anyone tells you? That would be bananas.

I find that when you realize you are not in control of the show, a much greater intelligence can reveal its work. There’s much freedom in not knowing what the hell is going on, yet also appreciating all of it simultaneously.