/sci/ - Science & Math

TLDR

>>12037289
Odds are you wouldn’t understand

>>12037303
Got any proof for that?

>>12037244
>Free Will
Go back to /x/ you uncultured swine.

>>12037244
>non-determinism somehow implies the existence of free will
made me click

>>12037314
>he thinks culture equates to materialism
ultra brainlet detected

free will doesn’t even make sense as a concept. I don’t like it any more than you do but it’s certain we are all NPCs with a complex illusion of agency. the only way around it is to claim literal magic did it.

>>12037244
For there to be free will you need a non physical computation of thought, ie literally magic or whatever /x/ bullshit.

>>12037407
>>12037412
ok copers
you must believe in free will...you have no choice

>>12037419
Haha! Nice joke, fellow 4chan user. I myself am partial to a good knee slapper

I used to believe in determinism until I took a dna test and found out i'm actually a sperm donor child. I realised all the traits I was sure I had inherited from my non biological father were genetic — in actuality they were learned.

>>12037431

>>12037431
that anecdote has nothing to do with determinism

Quantum mechanics literally stands on position that determinism doesnt work.

I can recommend the series "Devs" it's about absolutism in deterministic philosophy.

>>12037244
Jumping from non-determinism to free will is a fallacy.

Also, do you realise that you're simply a psychologically motivated midwit who NEEDS free will to not feel like shit?

This isn't science, it's pure cope.

>>12037407
free will and determinism is not the same thing. I agree that we're just state machines or NPCs but if there is true randomness in the universe, I would simply make my decisions based on a quantum dice or whatever and the future would be nondeterministic i.e. unpredictable, therefore more interesting.

think of a video game where NPCs do the same scripted behavior as long as you act the same, or some random variations, which game would be more interesting?

>>12037320
is that the summary? I'm glad I didn't even click, then.

Free will 1.Existence 2.”Observer”. According to Newtonian Mechanics there cannot be a reaction without an equal and opposite reaction, thus if a nerve is removed you will not feel where it was, if you have an idea, that idea should a.move you physically b.remove an idea from your mind also, removing a part of your body should remove your mind in part. What such force moves the mind?
2. The concept of god. If you can imagine, key word IMAGINE a mind possessing properties (you do not have) you have theory of mind
3.Think, judge, act, & feel are processes of mind. To characterize a person’s behavior as positive or negative; to judge an action as necessary or unnecessary, funny or not funny, or to choose to feel pride; or to emote with another person or about a person in relation to another relate to judge, act, & feel correspondingly. Another layer of each can be created ad infinitum, thus it is an absolute & an infinite

Because you only experience your own mind & existence, if you hold all three proofs to be true, either reality, your consciousness, or your ability to hold a proof should disappear.

>>12037244
>Do we really have free will, or, as a few determined folk maintain, is it all
an illusion? We don’t know
/thread

>>12038880
Quantum mechanics is local you brainlet, not global, unless you consider yourself an atom.

>>12037407
>I don’t like it any more than you do but it’s certain we are all NPCs with a complex illusion of agency
how is illusory agency any different from real agency

>>12038900

>>12038891
>Jumping from non-determinism to free will is a fallacy.
Except this is an actual mathematical proof, not a jump.

>>12041238
Yeah because mathematics can prove free will, and God, and the afterlife, and everything else you want to delude yourself into thinking.

>>12037244
>Suck it determinist scum
You seem to be investing a lot of emotion in this subject. Your objectivity is suspect.

>>12039330
literally irrelevant

>>12041238
>sci still cannot into the Analytic Synthetic distinction

The future not being predetermined is not sufficient evidence for free will.
this thread is brainlet central

>>12042404
>>12042405
How do the morons who wrote that paper even managed to get it published?

>>12042403
filter for dummies

>>12042405
the opposite of determinism is necessarily free will even if its a bad term for it
i think the question is better posed as whether or not the universe is a closed system, and if what part of the universe can an external force affect it, and the process that we use to answer this question is posed AS the question of free will or determinism

a quick skimming of the paper seems like they propose its through some kind of non-random quantum unpredictability allows subatomic particles a route to make 'choices' independent of past events, making our universe a non-closed system

a determinist would then claim that they just follow some kind of pattern that we are unable to understand yet, or at all, and at this point the question may be unassailable as we are nested in a system that we are fundamentally unable to bring ourselves out of to continue the question of free will/determinism, this is analogous to godels incompleteness theorems, which asks the same question but in the domain of thought/mathematics which is more fundamental and which physics is a set of

>>12042405
the opposite of determinism is necessarily free will even if its a bad term for it
i think the question is better posed as whether or not the universe is a closed system, and if it isnt what part of the universe can an external force affect it, and the process that we use to answer this question is posed AS the question of free will or determinism

a quick skimming of the paper seems like they propose its through some kind of non-random quantum unpredictability allows subatomic particles a route to make 'choices' independent of past events, making our universe a non-closed system

a determinist would then claim that they just follow some kind of pattern that we are unable to understand yet, or at all, and at this point the question may be unassailable as we are nested in a system that we are fundamentally unable to bring ourselves out of to continue the question of free will/determinism, this is analogous to godels incompleteness theorems, which asks the same question but in the domain of thought/mathematics which is more fundamental and which physics is a set of

Fuck your shitty determinism