Christopher Hitchens once averred that you don't.  Religionists claim that it is divinely endowed. Others claim that all are freelancers subject to subornation by others. Your thoughts?

Views: 2626

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

While it certainly seems to be the case that it's not possible to predict future states exactly, that's a bit too much to claim as a consequence of Gödel's theorems about formal systems, don't you think? 

But that is precisely what is claimed by the theory and the theory deals with formal systems.

But that is precisely what is claimed by the theory and the theory deals with formal systems.

That does not seem to me a reasonable interpretation of Gödel's theorems at all. They have nothing to do with prediction.

There's a YouTube user that made a similar case using a very articulate analogy. Although, he made this video a while back, I haven't seen anything new from this guy. 

Infinite Incomputable Loop

Actually if there were a lot of randomness at the macroscopic level, you would have less free will, not more.  You would not be able to make significant choices, because your choices wouldn't have predictable results. 

If the power of the addiction wins out over the power of the will nearly every time is it free?

Addictions do indeed feel like a force pulling you around.  They feel like part of the environment that's also "part of me" but somehow alien.  An addiction is like hunger or thirst.  You don't have much choice about whether you are hungry or thirsty, and you don't necessarily control how you satisfy the hunger or thirst. 

However you can cope consciously with an addiction, by trying to integrate it into your conscious actions, by figuring out ways to counteract it.  You can work to end an addiction if you think it's dysfunctional. 

It's often unpleasant to have an addiction.  We feel something is wrong when we feel we're being "run" by some part of ourselves, and we want to change that.  Thus we seek free will. 

Also, we do not have free will to determine the past.  We have a direction in time, and our will points towards the future. 

This probably is related to the increase of entropy with time.  Our will is inextricable from ourselves as creatures who evolved in a universe that's increasing in entropy.

Many people have wished their will did affect the past! 

Daniel Dennett on free will and why determinism is not an obstacle to free will.

Very lucid.

Here's another contribution to the puzzle—the Necker cube, an optical illusion discovered by a crystallographer almost two hundred years ago.

There are two possible interpretations the brain can make in seeing it as a three dimensional image. It seems you can switch between them at will so determinism would have to say that the timing of your decision to switch is preset by other neuronal configurations in your brain. Does that seem correct?

My switch was determined by your suggestion that I could switch.  I hold to my position that human behavior cannot be understood except in conjunction with conscious linguistic communication, whether of experimenter to subject or atheist to atheist.

Can't you switch between views of your own volition or do you always require a vocal cue?

I don't usually work on weekends so I can't always be available when you want to switch so perhaps your significant other could get involved here.

 I hold to my position that human behavior cannot be understood except in conjunction with conscious linguistic communication, whether of experimenter to subject or atheist to atheist.

 I can accept the truth of that to some extent, but I may not be placing the same interpretation on it you do. Maybe you can expand on your thesis when you have a moment.

RSS

Support Atheist Nexus

Donate Today

Donate

 

Help Nexus When You Buy From Amazon

Amazon

AJY

 

© 2014   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service