Free Will.

[RustedCorpse]

Ok I rarely post in this forum but my roomate and I are having a talk and in the process of playing the devil's advocate I kinda convinced myself I was actually right. In short my roomate was arguing that free will exists allows us various things. My argument to him is that free will doesn't exist.

My opinion (not whole heartedly believed) was how would I ever really know if I have free will? I mean doctor's have shown certain parts of the brain become active when certain TYPES of desicions are made. Furthermore wouldn't any free will really just be the sum of all my experiences? Also what about when things like drugs are invovled? When I'm drunk/high/tripping aren't I going to tend to make different decisions then when sober? Why? Can it be "free will" if a chemical state affects it? I would think the fact that states of mind affecting choices would be more a matter of cause and effect thus giving the perception of choice.

I'm curious what is the standard argument on this? How would you ever know if what you're doing is "free will" or a chemical result of your brain's thinking process?

any books on this would be welcome.

[Rduke55]

It's been argued that since neural activity has some noise to it that this can result in different behaviors in the same situations. Could this be construed as free will? Who knows?
More to your argument, the crux of the chemical/deterministic argument is that all behavior is either selected for in evolution or conditioned by experience. This is clearly not true.

[jt1]

I haven't believed in free will for about 8 years now. I was going through some hard times and used to take long walks to get away from my situation. On one of these walks, I came up with a theory that I later learned is similar to if not exactly like what Buddhists call the law of dependent origination. I don't know if I have the buddhists philosophy right but to to me it means that every action is based on the action/decision/perception that directly preceded it. And of course that action/decesion/perception was based on the one right before it. And you can go back all the way until the time when you or any individual was just a toddler.

To test this theory just pick a random decision you made recently and ask yourself why you chose that path instead of another. The answer will probably start with, i felt or i needed or i wanted. Then ask why did you feel or wanted or why you needed this or that. And do this until your head explodes.

I have not since heard any argument that explains away this phenomenon. I guess, I should write out the process in an actual example, but not right now....

[DougShrapnel]

[ QUOTE ]
I haven't believed in free will for about 8 years now. I was going through some hard times and used to take long walks to get away from my situation. On one of these walks, I came up with a theory that I later learned is similar to if not exactly like what Buddhists call the law of dependent origination. I don't know if I have the buddhists philosophy right but to to me it means that every action is based on the action/decision/perception that directly preceded it. And of course that action/decesion/perception was based on the one right before it. And you can go back all the way until the time when you or any individual was just a toddler.

To test this theory just pick a random decision you made recently and ask yourself why you chose that path instead of another. The answer will probably start with, i felt or i needed or i wanted. Then ask why did you feel or wanted or why you needed this or that. And do this until your head explodes.

I have not since heard any argument that explains away this phenomenon. I guess, I should write out the process in an actual example, but not right now....

[/ QUOTE ]How did learning this affect your decisions? Did you then look for ways in which your "map" of experiences would lead you in the wrong direction, or did you just say that there was nothing you could do about fatalism, determinism, sub humanism?

[jt1]

[ QUOTE ]
It's been argued that since neural activity has some noise to it that this can result in different behaviors in the same situations. Could this be construed as free will? Who knows?


[/ QUOTE ]

Of all the things that I have read, the one thing that could possibly lead me to believe in free will is the theory of Quantam mechanics. And, unfortunately, I don't think I'm cerebral enough to understand the full implications of this theory. I think that is what you were referring to in the above quote. How I understand it is that elementary particles behave in a way that is completely random and unpredictable. Since these elementary particles can influence the sub atomic particles that they create and since the sub atomic particles create atoms and our brains are goverened by small groups of molecules then it isn't a huge leap to imagine that the randomness of the elementary particles in our brains can lead to decisions that are independent from the decisions that preceded them. But even here, we're not talking about free will, but rather, the laws of Quantum Mechanics of which we are not free to change.

[Cooker]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It's been argued that since neural activity has some noise to it that this can result in different behaviors in the same situations. Could this be construed as free will? Who knows?


[/ QUOTE ]

Of all the things that I have read, the one thing that could possibly lead me to believe in free will is the theory of Quantam mechanics. And, unfortunately, I don't think I'm cerebral enough to understand the full implications of this theory. I think that is what you were referring to in the above quote. How I understand it is that elementary particles behave in a way that is completely random and unpredictable. Since these elementary particles can influence the sub atomic particles that they create and since the sub atomic particles create atoms and our brains are goverened by small groups of molecules then it isn't a huge leap to imagine that the randomness of the elementary particles in our brains can lead to decisions that are independent from the decisions that preceded them. But even here, we're not talking about free will, but rather, the laws of Quantum Mechanics of which we are not free to change.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't believe any physical theory thus far allows for free will. QM allows for randomness, but I don't see any way this allows for free will. I believe the lack of determinism may lead to the appearence of free will (i.e. the ability to behave differently under identical situations), but it is not occuring because you have a choice it is just because a random physical process occured differently in your brain. This is mostly my speculative opinion.

[EnderIII]

The Oxford Handbook of Freewill editted by Kane is a very thorough treatment of the subject from many different perspecitves. It is not the most accessible book, but excellent if you want that level of detail. If you want an easier to digest version that describes compatibilism (free will and determinism are compatible under that account) then read Simon Blackburn's Think. A cautionary note, it seems very likely that compatibilism is untenable, but it is very popular in many philosophical circles. Best of luck in your search.

[jt1]

[ QUOTE ]
How did learning this affect your decisions? Did you then look for ways in which your "map" of experiences would lead you in the wrong direction, or did you just say that there was nothing you could do about fatalism, determinism, sub humanism?

[/ QUOTE ]

I thought to myself, "well that's pretty amazing." I then probably went home. I have since continued to pursue my passions and resolve my conflicts in the most effective way that I am capable of. Animals don't have free will but they still scourge for food and depend on each other for protection. Say one of them knew that it was just an animal, would it stop living like one?

A good exercise is to take the Genisis story and try to trace Eve's actions from when she bites the fruit back to when she meets the Serpent. If all the actions/decisions/perceptions can be explained by the ones before them and the first decision to listen to the Serpent wasn't a decision but more like a natural force like "choosing" to be swept up by the tornado that tore through your house in the middle of the night then Eve truly (or metaphorically) had no choice but to eat the fruit. I've never thought of testing my theory out like that before but I think I will.

[purnell]

Free will cannot be understood in a scientific framework. It is an illusion or it is supernatural.

[hmkpoker]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It's been argued that since neural activity has some noise to it that this can result in different behaviors in the same situations. Could this be construed as free will? Who knows?


[/ QUOTE ]

Of all the things that I have read, the one thing that could possibly lead me to believe in free will is the theory of Quantam mechanics. And, unfortunately, I don't think I'm cerebral enough to understand the full implications of this theory. I think that is what you were referring to in the above quote. How I understand it is that elementary particles behave in a way that is completely random and unpredictable. Since these elementary particles can influence the sub atomic particles that they create and since the sub atomic particles create atoms and our brains are goverened by small groups of molecules then it isn't a huge leap to imagine that the randomness of the elementary particles in our brains can lead to decisions that are independent from the decisions that preceded them. But even here, we're not talking about free will, but rather, the laws of Quantum Mechanics of which we are not free to change.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't believe any physical theory thus far allows for free will. QM allows for randomness, but I don't see any way this allows for free will. I believe the lack of determinism may lead to the appearence of free will (i.e. the ability to behave differently under identical situations), but it is not occuring because you have a choice it is just because a random physical process occured differently in your brain. This is mostly my speculative opinion.

[/ QUOTE ]

A computer, when programmed with "if A then B" may feel that it chooses B, but doesn't quite know the reason why.