/sci/ - Science & Math

>>15939058
energy always strives for maximal entropic discharge, so does your "soul" i sloved your riddle.

>>15939058
>>15939065
this is why we dont call it stone hammer or gun anymore but freedom machiens.

>>15939058
An NPC like you just wouldn't understand.

>what's so wrong with being a hard determinist?
>free will is a meme. proof me wrong

>>15939058
You are playing this game:
>A. free will does not exist
>B. any argument that seems to contradict A must be explained as an aspect of determinism
>C.because A is true
The worst part of your game is that you mistake people who are annoyed by your circular reasoning as evidence that you are right and they are wrong instead of understanding that your game sucks. I hope more people see through your game and you get ignored to death.

>>15939058
There's nothing wrong with it - you're free to take whatever philosophical stance you like, but don't force it on other people.

>I have been modeling my surroundings
>I can't model myself
>therefore I don't exist
>wHaT's So WrOnG wItH bEiNg A hArD dEtErMiNiSt???
Nothing's wrong, this is just what science does to midwits.
Sorry you got filtered.

>>15939058
>I have been modeling my surroundings
>I can't model my free will
>therefore I don't have free will
>wHaT's So WrOnG wItH bEiNg A hArD dEtErMiNiSt???
Nothing's wrong, this is just what science does to midwits.
Sorry you got filtered.

>>15939058
there's utility which comes with believing in free will.
it's kind of self-fulfilling as i see it; if you believe in free will, then you have it. if you don't, you don't have it.
i'd rather have an override switch for my brain baked into my philosophy than an excuse baked into it. many people get conquered by their heart, others get conquered by their brain, others get conquered by both.

>>15939058
Wtf even is "free will"?

>>15939098
here let me help you
>anything that could be explained by free will could more easily be explained by determinism
>non-determinism could theoretically be proven but we havent found any such evidence
>determinism cant ever be proven but so far we have only ever observed deterministic things

>>15939128
How do you define ''surroundings''? I assume you mean whatever is perceived: all sensations and thoughts. To autistic /sci/ there is nothing else. To schizo /x/ and /lit/ there is consciousness / being itself. I'm on the fence.

>>15939131
its the idea that humans have “souls” or something like that, and their behavior isnt solely determined by their stimuli, like a machine, but is instead nondeterministic to some degree.

>>15939140
I do like your counterargument if I'm not picky about it. For example: what is ''easy'', is God infinitely complex and is the Big Bang simpler than God, when and how should Occam's Razor be applied or not. However my main concern is this:
>so far we have only ever observed deterministic things
relating to the post of this Anon:
>>I have been modeling my surroundings
The deterministic worldview seems to overlook the oberver itself (no I'm not referencing Deepak Chopra levels of quantum woo).

>>15939142
Point to something you never experienced materialist swine. Then ask yourself how you know it exists and in what is the nature of your deprivation.

>>15939142
The midwit autists around here think their models determine reality rather than the other way around.
Protip: Matter is just a model; it aren't real.

>>15939177
I know nothing but the sum of all things that I call experience. The word experience is tricky because it can be substituted by words like everything, reality, and existence. These words include ''I am'' so I can't agree with cogito ergo sum. Something is happening anyway even before modelling with logic, reason and language.

However all that is happening is happening automatically isn't it? How can you know that there's someone / something doing the happening? Why does the happening need a cause instead of the happening just happening of itself? Any reason needs another reason ad infinitum. The only solution I know is that a thing justifies its own existence. Such thing is a full automatic closed loop.

>>15939185
Your post seems almost self-evident but isn't. Model / reality is so confusing it boggles my mind. Before I have toughts and language there appears to be all sorts of shapes, colors, sounds and feelings. This is already a chicken and egg problem: am I observing these things because I first had an innate model that made me categorize reality in that way or did these categories form adfter observation? That may be a false dichotomy somehow. The confusion gets worse and worse from this starting point. For example: there appears to be continuity but that is a product of memory. What if there is a God that turns existence on / off every moment?

>>15939225
Typical philosofag, digresses conversion into oblivion.
>am I observing these things because I first had an innate model that made me categorize reality in that way or did these categories form adfter observation?
No, there is no "innate model" that made you postulate there are "matter" or "spirits" or whatever the hell else out there that's projecting colors/shapes..etc. Like every hypothesis it's made by choice and can be unmade, by choice.
Not even gonna bother with the rest of your philsofag ramblings.

>>15939065
>believes in entropy
>thinks our geocentric view of existence is the ultimate correct one with no other possibilities

Tell me you're an NPC without telling me

>>15939248
>Typical philosofag, digresses conversion into oblivion.
If you see yourself as the gold standard / arbiter of truth and value then there is no point of discussing anything with anyone and you're not better then OP.

>>15939058
what difference does it make?

It is technically correct for an all observer, but agents in this world are subject to incomplete information and ability, thus we are free from such mental burden and able to enjoy our free will.

>>15939058
>what's so wrong with being a hard determinist?
Nothing

>>15939493
Is will, free, at all? Yes. Are there elements of freedom in will? Yes. Is it, what you suggest is impalable will? No.

>>15939058
Nothing in nature escapes the rules of physics. Our brain in within nature, therefore, our brains cannot espace or behave in ways not allowed by the rules of physics, by definition.
>ah, but quantum physics
As far as we can tell quantum behaviors are radom and, well, randomness is illogical and non-adaprtive, so it also implies no reason, no purpose, noise, and therefore, also no order or logic.
Either way, there is no way to empirically demonstrate a "ghost" that acts logically against the laws of physics, of its own desire and will. Everything either follows classic determininism, or it behaves as random noise at the quantum level.
Awareness is but an apparent and emergent illusion that evolved to sustain living organisms alive in a world of atrition, ruled by entropy.
Any entity which did not, simply did not survive and got eliminated.

>>15939493
ugly dog

>>15939509
Wrong. This doesn't account for those that luckily made it. Basically, you view the former dog I posted as having no center of its own and when you regard this center you do so from this one angle and treat it as that rather than a literal universal center. This dog has an element of freedom to it's will but conditions aren't set for impalable will from beyond that would attribute to the term 'free will'. You don't have this personal bubble that goes in every direction - you're quite limited to your body and world. However, there are elements of freedom to conscious life. You can choose left or right, but when thought of in retrospect, these decisions are limited and can be determined by the trail of events that led to the choice being made. Evidence of free will is the crown on top of the head. It's where the trail of events leading to choice begins. Yes you do choose left or right. It's determinable but not pre determined that you choose either. you are free in that way

>>15939517
>It's determinable but not pre determined that you choose either.
Why not? The only difference between you choosing left or right or putting a stick on it's end and letting it fall left or right is the complexity. No matter how rube goldbergian the system is there are only inputs and outputs and the processes in between that lead a given input to a given output.

>>15939531
You exclude you, what the system was made for.

Don't reply to this. It will be ignored. Blissfully doobid person.

>>15939531
NPC detected.

>>15939058
>what's so wrong with being a hard determinist?
It's dishonest.

>>15939509
>Nothing in nature escapes the rules of physics.
False dichotomy. There is no law over here and nature over there. There is only how nature is which is how you are.

>>15939536
I agree with you, we are all NPC because determinism is correct and you have no arguments against it. There is no player character.

>>15939547
Okay.r4n

>>15939065
LMAO, that is not true at all.

>>15939547
>There is no player character.
>A determines B
>therefore B is determined by A
>what determines A?
>B observes A
>what determines B's observation?
>A determines B's observation
>therefore B is like A
>if B is not completely equal to A then B is partially free from A
>therefore B = A
>therefore determiner and determined are the same.

>>15939058
why the fuck in almost 2024, after thousands of years since people started thinking about the topic, people still talk like free will is about determinism vs. indeterminism?????????????????????? should be obvious from thinking about the subject for 5 seconds that shit happening for no reason or cause doesn't make you any more free

feelings more important than thinkings for grug

>>15939517
>You can choose left or right
No, there is no "you", and there is no "choice".

>>15939575
so even if random changes are real, it don't mean free will is real too since it's random and we can't control it anyway?

>>15939575
random future still feels better, at least I have a random chance. as opposed to having zero fucking chances.

We can't see the future anyway, so who gives a shit? What difference does it make when you still feel free and like you're in charge of your life?

>>15939683
>What difference does it make when you still feel free and like you're in charge of your life?
determinism means there's no way you could have avoided anything that you experienced. which gets into other shit.
having a random future eases some acceptance pains

>>15939295
>philosofag sulking
How about you first explain why dragging up that whole Kant noumena/phenomena business ever again is relavent to thread.
Whether or not you got a tinted glass on have nothing to do with free-will either way.

>>15939688
>determinism means there's no way you could have avoided anything that you experienced. which gets into other shit.
So? Still hypothetical. Do you really waste time thinking "ohh what if I had done this instead?" What's done is done. There's only forward.

>>15939691
yeah sure but forward outlook is also bleak. whatever is set to happen I cannot change, only find out eventually. pretty shit. means whatever I do I cannot change it. seems kind of pointless, apart from the inevitable "yeah you're supposed to get fucked loser"

>>15939689
>noumena/phenomena business
The word ''determined'' entails a ''determiner''. If all phenomena are determined then the determiner is either outside phenomena or equal to phenomena..

>>15939702
Well, if you set yourself goals, and do everything in your power to achieve them, you WILL succeed. Or die trying. Anything else just reeks of /weakmind/ coping.

>>15939705
random can still allow for a determiner. outside of this world. somebody can press some buttons, selectively. you wouldn't be able to tell in an otherwise purely random system.
some god "correcting" some shit could do it through randomness and you wouldn't be able to tell, as long as whatever happened is permitted by our universe.

>>15939509
it seems like nervous systems are necessary for consciousness, but whether or not they are sufficient remains to be seen
don't fall for the neural identity meme just yet

Consciousness exists outside of the physical plane, we just can't prove it

>>15939709
Look I've already made such argument today in another thread:
>>15938927
I already include randomness in phenomena and indeed a possible noumenon. Since we have no way of knowing the difference between regularity, randomness and God then still everything seems automatic including the joker / wildcard.

>>15939716
"self-evident" shit can fool you.

>>15939705
>If all phenomena are determined then the determiner is either outside phenomena or equal to phenomena..
>If all of observable reality is determined, then the determiner is either outside of observable reality or part of observable reality
Real deep insight there. That really narrows it down.

>>15939739
It unironically does because the only reality you know is the reality that you experience. You are not in reality but part of reality and identical to what the whole reality is doing at a particular location in space and time. There is no difference.

>>15939749
What does any of that have to do with free-will.

>>15939781
Absence of free-will is not presence of determinism or vice versa. There is a happening including possible randomness and chaos. That's all. Any sort of duality like you vs. physics is false.

>>15939128
prove that you could have done otherwise.

>>15940100
Sure thing, send me back in time.

Determinism is an NPC riddle meant to keep the act going until someone gets the final question right and they start taking props and the background from life.

>>15940159
Determined system doesn't mean no freedom in will, but does mean no 'free will' (as in impalable, omni-direction will).

>>15940159
DEY WANT US TO GO DEEP. Tfw NPCs of Earth ARE G_d.

I think free will is a choice

>>15940167
human is just biological machine reacting on stimuli.
a man can believe he's a woman the fact stay the same.

>>15939131
everyday lifestyle habits

>>15939058
Whatever determines your behaviour, even if it is determined, it is determined by something within yourself. So put yourself into the superposition leading to success.

>>15939058
Hard determinist is a view of the God, which doesn't exist. We can only have multi local organics fighting against the inorganics where by the "will" is localized. The will is the entire system of body of the organics.

>>15939058
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8TDC9s-Kt-8
Oh look another 13 year old with a profound discovery. You can choose to be a hard determinist AKA retard and you can choose to throw yourself off of a cliff

>>15939131
This is free will

>>15939547
>He chooses to waste his time arguing for determinism on an anonymous basket weaving forum
Your actions prove free will

>>15940381
A chemical reaction in (You)r brain caused (You) to reply. There is no choice just the illusion created by a complex system.

>>15940395
>christmas
>the birth of our Lord
>being euphoric in this moment

>>15939125
>you're free to
Got em

>>15939058
Would a robot ever ask itself a question about free will?

>>15939058
why would i? i have the illusion of free will and thats what matters for me, if i actually have or not wont change my life unless im a faggot who whines about shit

>>15939058
It’s like a brain cancer extreme. Enjoy being meat

>>15939125
How are you not actively trying to a force a philosophical stance right now with that statement?

>>15940395
What causes chemical reactions? If physical laws then what causes physical laws? If God then what causes God? If turtles all the way down then what causes turtles all the way down? You see at some point you need to stop and see that existence is uncaused. Where you draw the line is arbitrary.

>>15939058
Some ways free will could potentially exist:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x8EkwRgG4OE

>>15939058
if there's true randomness in the universe then the universe would be non-deterministic, we just don't know yet, those weird quantum phenomena could be true random for all we know so far

>>15939098
>>15939140
I hope op gets stoned to death
I hope the deterministic trajectory of the stones invariably shatters his skull
I determined that I won't be bumping this thread

Quantum systems are non-deterministic. Now, as an amalgamation of quantum systems, you are fundamentally non-deterministic.

At best you could say that you are propabilistic and discuss free will from that place.