/sci/ - Science & Math

free will is a spectrum

>>9798558
1)false
2)false
3)false
4)false
5)false

>>9798558
>/lit/ please go

>>9799037

I would like to know what context you gave to the 4th part.
In your context, was teaching the shapes of the continents part of the school's curriculum?

context 1.
The high schooler has had to seek for the information on his own personal time, since teaching children about the shapes of the continents is not part of the schools curriculum.

2. The high schooler has been ill, constantly and for that reason he lacks the necessary attendance in order to be able to fulfill that task.

3. The high schooler has difficulties to comprehend the classes at school, difficulties to learn, therefore the current situation.

4. The topic is taught at school.
The lack of attendance is due to playing video games with friends during these hours at home and adults responsible for this child either have never tried or aren't able to change that.

>>9798858
based on what definition.

>>9798858
like your autism

>>9800545
the big bang(theory) brings the universe into existence, events from thereon follow
>A(original event) + B(result of original event) = C(result of those events) + D(result of C) = E

>E is Student
>student has perceived self awareness
>E needs to study
>in the immediate moment E is overwrought with infinite possibilities (finite)
>E can only make decision based on preceding events
>Choice is decided, regardless of awareness, for E
>No Free Will
>E+D=F

"will" is a non-existent idealistic abstraction.

>>9801051

To the important questions, how does this knowledge affect yourself?
You are tackling a challenging topic at the school and you simply don't learn to apply the information, obviously you don't blame yourself for having these limitations, nor can you blame the teachers for not being able to teach the topic to you properly.

What can you do, since you are aware of the situation?

>>9801478
It doesn't thats why the free will question is pointless and forces compatibilism:
>knowing free will is an illusion is not enough to shatter the illusion and you must still act as if you have free will, knowing that you don't
At best it might change the way you narrate and process your own life

>>9801057
No, "objects" are. You are born with will, a baby wills when it cries for milk. You have will before you can speak, do science, it's more important and core than anything else.

Only a fedora would say otherwise.

>>9801513

Consider this, a person who is aware that a child lacks the free will to act differently, e.g. there is no other option for the child except to throw a tantrum.

This person now observes a child having tantrum and this observation brings up emotions you'd describe as anger and frustration.
Due to being aware of the free will fact, instead of showing signs of anger physically, this person will not, since there is no other for the child.
Could you see yourself in a situation similar to this, where in fact the awareness does make you behave differently?

In the same sense as every other model makes you behave differently. Being aware of the models of physics, you won't do anything that increases the chances of yourself killed by lightning e.g. if you weren't, you might do that unintentionally.

>>9801513

And yea, I'm aware, so no need to bother. You also know exactly what I mean.

Free will is a false illusion of the mind, you either align your actions with the will of the universe in which case they are not truly yours, or, you merely react to outside stimuli according to the logical and emotional processing of your brain in which case your thoughts are nothing more than the chemical response to your situation.

>>9801631
but what you base the decision of not showing anger etc is not free, every time you try to decide in that moment in time you will come up with the same answer; to not show the emotions

>>9801051
>holding such simplistic views
you're a simpleton

>>9801689
refute it

>>9801750
prove the universe follows the simplistic ramblings of a simpleton

>>9801675

Yes, even in this situation the fact applies where you don't have free will, there was no other option except to not show physically the feelings of anger.

What has occured, is that the outcome is different in that persons situation comparing to a similar situation where a person did show signs of anger and who is not aware of that free will fact.

In this case, a person with knowledge behaves differently relative to a person without that knowledge, even though both lack an alternative option in behaviour.

Can you imagine any benefits for being aware of all of this?

6. An OP who is enormously autistic and can not comprehend or empathize with another human being’s situation or mental state will never recover and will forever be alone.

>>9801786
>different information in = different information out
who would've thought

understanding why one caused a crime doesnt mean there shouldn't be a punishment, guilt based punishment will be stripped back to being just deterrent based

>>9801757
>but you replied to what is proof..
its safe to assume you didn't even understand that kek

Your examples don't have anything to do with free will, btw. Free will is proven by being able to decide against conditions

>>9801840


"understanding why one caused a crime doesnt mean there shouldn't be a punishment, guilt based punishment will be stripped back to being just deterrent based"

A person without free will uses words that cause strong feelings on its receiver and gets stoned to death. This death penalty was found just and lawful according to the local law enforfcement.

A mother who is found guilty for taking the lives of her two infant daughters gets 35 years in jail for her horrid crime.

A 45 year old male who was found guilty for sexual abuse and unlawful sexual intercourse with over six different underagd teenage girls between the years 2014-2017, he is judged with 6 years in jail and a total of 18'000€ in fines.

A 26 year old male gets arrested for an armed robbery of a local grocery store. Due to having two previous arrests for drug possessions a 15 year sentence is given.

We can gladly announce our crime rate is historically low in our country and over 12 jails have been shut down during the past decade due to lack of criminals.

Only if you and humans in general were aware of this free will fact, the world would a magical place. Is it your job to teach them, or should we not let them become aware of the alternative?

>>9798858
That's how SJWs deal with yes or no answers. Claim it's a spectrum.

>>9798558
1. True
2. True
3. False
4. True
5. N/A

Freewill, whatever it is or isn't, can also be a choice if and only if you discovered new options by deliberately choosing to discover new options or possibilities

WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE DOG

The dog is not as free. It has beliefs, but they aren't even up to IQ 20

tl;dr If you don't think you have free will, you definitely don't, sucks to be you

>>9802308

If the 5th parts male and female worker were replaced with two students tackling a challenging course at school?

>>9802606

If we were to open the free will question from your own perspective, your own possibilities with a quick look in how big of a role knowledge is.

One example - you did not have the option to become alive, to choose your physical and mental potential. You have been surrounded by humans that behave a certain way, who have certain ways to solve problems and
you have been rewarded for a certain type of behaviour to become just like them.
Are you able to imagine any other possible outcome to yourself?

There is a very good reason why you use English language to communicate and you will also continue to do so until your death,
can you imagine a different outcome to this faith you were raised to?

>>9802257
You don't seem to understand, you don't have free will and awareness of not having free will doesn't change the course of your life because the course of your life takes into account all information acquired throughout itself.

>>9802606
>deliberately choosing
That choice is dictated by outside forces, no free will

>>9803156

Yes, all of the rules still apply, there is always one possible outcome.

Now do your absolute best,
since as this claim and your sentences stand, these are rather uninformative and should be rephrased into a theory which could be tested empirically.

For example, you can state you have observed a scenario where a person has been stoned to death for something you'd describe as a minor crime and you have witnessed the similae senario in a different country without this person being punished for these equivalent of that minor crime.
-- you are aware that all the participants lack the option to behave differently, including yourself, but you possess some of the information, the observations that are required in order to change the outcomes of these scenarios and if we were to reward you for changing these outcomes with your information, your actions woukd decrease the chances of the next person being inhumanly punished.

There always was one possible outcome, your observations caused you to behave differently, and none of this broke rule of not having free will.

The next task would be to let your observations of these texts decrease the chances of you repeating the same outcomes you have faced in the past that a negative effect on you.
E.g. can you imagine any observation making you behave differently in any scenario in your everyday life?

Yes, again, there is still only one option, but this outcome can be not to repeat something you've done this past.

>>9803234
> should be rephrased into a theory which could be tested empirically.
you cant prove that we have or dont have free will, the best scientific observations have been rat neuroscience experiments to the best of my knowledge.
And there also is so much theory out there already, from free will to New Dispositionalism (5.1.5) https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/compatibilism/

why it isnt more popular is because society as a whole is still relatively religious and cant find it easy to give up perceived agency

>>9803339
>you cant prove that we have or dont have free will
because there is no such thing as "will". you can't observe "the will".
redefine it in materialistic categories.

>>9803341
you could with enough knowledge; Laplace's Demon theory
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laplace%27s_demon

>>9798558
Our whole way of thinking about "free will" is wrong, due to the Enlightenment ideology that we are our thoughts that is still the dominant model.

When considering choice, we overlook the very root of it: that which initiates that choice in the first place: questioning. The process of conscious selection is question -> reason -> action which is analogous to the Darwinian process of variation -> selection -> reproduction. Questions are requests for information, in asking them explicitly or implicitly they create a variety of potential outcomes from following lines of inquiry. Questioning like reasoning is a learned skill, and instead of "free will" we have free inquiry which isn't absolute but variable based on our ability to question generally and specifically. Questioning expands the pool of potential information to inform reason, without it reasoning is merely a mechanistic process based on what already is known (it selects from based on criterion, i.e. "the will," it doesn't create variation.)

Moreover the process of conscious selection is folded over on itself when we ask questions about our questions, reasons, or actions, which is an ability called self-awareness. Self-awareness is a query querying itself, and the narrative model of ourselves we mistake as "our self" is a model created to facilitate self-inquiry. This is the source of our freedom to change ourselves, to examine and re-write our own narrative via interaction with the world. The question "How do I improve my ability to question?" or more intuitively "How do I learn how to learn?" is a recursively self-improving question that is implicitly at the core of consciousness.

>>9803362
Why has our society neglected questions for so long? The answer is that the most powerful thing in the world is to retard people's ability to question so that you may feed them the answers you desire for your own benefit. Informational authoritarianism seeks to minimize question in favor of reason and action, which is informational incest. The effect is similar as if you remove variation from the Darwinian process: stagnation / reduced change. If you are powerful and the world is set up in your favor, change is your worst enemy. Informational authoritarianism is in every part of our culture, from our school systems (get the right answers to these questions or enjoy working at Burger King for the rest of your life) to religion (praise these answers or go to hell) and the criminal "justice" system. We live in a regime of anti-error, whereas error is the wellspring of all learning.

This isn't just theory, you can utilize the method of question -> reason -> action anywhere in your life, including by journaling or "writing to yourself." Make a study of yourself starting with questions, and ask question of those questions and you'll be on your way to liberating yourself from the omnipresent informational authoritarianism that rules you.

It already was born, to describe it will require me to describe a few necessary concepts first.

The extended phenotype is a concept coined by Richard Dawkins (who also coined the word "meme") to describe the effects of an organism's genes beyond that of the organism's body. The classic example is that a beaver dam is the extended phenotype of beaver genes, and also all the effects of a beaver dam on the waterway and surrounding landscape. From a gene-centric perspective there's no reason to stop at the body of the organism when defining "organism," and the concept of organism becomes hazy with a long tail of causal influence that interacts with those of other organisms as well.

Similarly, extended cognition extends mental processes and the mind "beyond the body to include aspects of the environment in which an organism is embedded and the organism's interaction with that environment." This includes the tools we use, and written language, which was a phenomenal enhancement of our extended cognition, allowing us to use external memory to enhance our cognitive capabilities and reach to profound degrees. Calculators, computers, and cell phones are other obvious examples, and the internet has extended our cognition to degrees we don't fully appreciate. The internet is nothing less than a phenomenal expansion of our collective unconscious, which has shown by it magnifying both the neuroses and virtues of human psychology.

>>9803400
If you're looking for a God-computer to be created as a monolithic supercomputer, you're looking in the wrong place. You don't need a God-computer for a singularity when you have hundreds of millions of human brains connected together in a near-instantaneous communications network, their abilities of informational manipulation augmented to superhuman degrees by the devices and services they use. Recursive self-improvement is the theme of cultural evolution, and the internet is a hyper-accelerator of cultural change. The memetic singularity is the point where this accelerating change becomes self-reinforcing and explosive, and will catalyze the collective unconscious awakening as a collective consciousness: the internet itself will awaken once a critical mass is reached, which we are quickly nearing.

Evidence for the memetic singularity being near is seen by the violent reaction to exponentially increasing cultural change in the form of the alt-right fake news apocalypse we're now in, and more subtly the neoliberal status quo that is desperately trying to hide the contradictions of our society that the alt-right are exposing by being the ultimate manifestation of them. Cultural forces that cannot survive exponential cultural change are reacting in an emergent fashion to preserve themselves by trying to derail and recuperate this change.

>>9803401
What will the near-future look like? The memetic singularity is also a social singularity, and once the tipping point is reached we will see rapid recursive self-improvement in tangible social relationships, the most radical social change the world has ever seen. As this will appear to have no central cause, and be the greatest happening in human history, many will suspect divine intervention is at work, but it will actually be the collective consciousness of humanity that is awakening. This will in turn catalyze the technological singularity, as the source of technological change is human creativity and cultural evolution.

>>9803362

Could you reprhase your claims into a theory that could be emprically tested?
Some real life examples how your claims explain the phenomena in it would help greatly, otherwise your sentences are rather uninformative in the sense I'm not able to respond to them without hours of remodelling them.

>>9803339

As you might notice, "free will" is a word and every word is a model, a model of reality, this varies dependent on the observes.. that's why the model "car" had many meanings.

Now there are two options, free will is either a theorised phenomenon which can be used to predict outcomes in another model, like you can use the theory to gravity, an observed phenomenon, to theorise how a ball in your hand will accelerate towards the ground after its release, even before you have actually released the ball.

Or free will can be just a set of elementary particles you interact with, a model which definition you are not able to turn into an empricially testable theory, you are doing that at the moment.

First you observe the nature, then you model it.
-> You observe something in the nature, you name a phenomenon as "free will", not vice versa, that'd non informative.
Or you can theorise it using models you already have, which is the same thing basically.

>>9798558
>A child of a slave has the option to choose if he or she is taught to question the pre-existing inhumane conditions.
What a bizarre question (and the others aren't much better). First of all, there is nowhere near enough information to answer it conclusively. Second, it is oddly specific in its formulation and yet seemingly completely aimless in its intent. What could you possibly infer from either answer, be it "yes", "no" or "it depends"?

>>9803348
And? will is not material. It's an idea to which people came when they did not know anything about nervous system.
Nervous system is material. You can observe, measure it, make experiments, find causes. Will is just speculation. You can't make science with concept of "will", because it's not real.

>>9803472
>Semantics.. alright
Ill use the word (model) agency.
We're discussing how much agency does a person have over their own being.
I understand, this should be in /lit/

Retard

>>9803445
I understand to the extent that you want to create a theory that explains it but that's been done multiple times since the Greeks, its of no interest to the general masses.
Am I missing something?

>>9803514
if this is a reply to >>9803509
I've already explained in the thread that "will" is a theory and cant be proven through the scientific method and we'd be better off looking at it through the lens on neuroscience where your "materialism" comes in
but I dont understand why you would state that you cant discuss metaphorical theories

>>9803450

How about this?

Did you have the free will, the option to choose whether to learn English language or not?
- there is a good reason, as you know, why children learn to use different languages, why cultures, strict habits, religions come to exist.

Or

Have you ever had the option to learn to question the poor teaching methods teachers use to teach you and the others?
- If you have observed the results teachers get in other countries, schools you would question why we choose the poor methods over better ones.. but you woukd not demand for change, because you don't know how to, you'd feel scared even.

Why is it important for you to be aware of the progress how adults with their behaviours come to be, can you see any way to take advantage of this information?

This thread made me gay.

>>9803515

With your question "What am I missing?" I would describe you as a human with great intelligence, that is a full heart out compliment, cherish it.

It's not that I want to a create theory, I already have it and I'm just here to gather the responses you have given for creating a model of the present reality where I can successfully teach it to you, without fail, that will happen without using a single pre-existing word.

And yes, you, and very likely, hopefully everyone else too has missed the most important theory in front of their very eyes so far, which the model of all models.

If you want to enter the game independently, you can spend some time modelling the actions that are required for creating models from scratch, natural numbers are something easy to start with.
Just kidding, focus on answering from the very beginning how to recreate any model in existence.

Free will is really just a game of semantics.

If you're going to discuss it, be rigorous on how you actually define it.

>>9802289
That's how the alt-right deals with spectral answers. Claim it's a yes or no question.

can people with free will use their free will to turn off their free will?

>>9803790
Let's rephrase free will as the awareness of different models of realities, the potential you have and being affected by these.
e.g. you are walking home from the school, you want to go home, you want to go play video games with friends.
Suddenly you become aware of the situation, there is an option to go left, instead to the right where your home would be. Being aware of this alternative, you end up walking left instead of going home like you always have before. You end up observing a reality you wouldn't had otherwise.

That is an example of a moment, when a person can stop swimming down the mainstream, become different and become an explorer.

You can definitely outlearn that, just always accept what feels the most comfortable, stop questioning and accept the reality you are offered at home, work, school, life in general, humans do that by standard usually in the big picture.

>>9803681

I like your style, respect.