/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.12481804]

Do humans have free will?

[Anonymous No.12481815]

I do. Idk about you.

[Anonymous No.12481818]

No

[Anonymous No.12481826]

>>12481804
Are you asking me to design an experiment here or what's the difficulty?

[Anonymous No.12481829]

Only I have

[Anonymous No.12481838]

The stronger the will, the freer it is. So free will, like everything else in this world, is a spectrum.

[Anonymous No.12481842]

The real redpill is that there are genuine NPCs in this world that don't have free will and no amount of logic, reason or philosophy will convince them to doubt their own experience of being an automaton.
You'll see a lot of them in this thread. And they are ALWAYS repeating the same 7-8 memes, all of which have been rebutted numerous times:
- Everything has reasons, including our own actions, and if you follow the causal chain you eventually go outside of yourself which means they aren't your choice.
- We're made up of atoms and none of the particles have free will, the just behave according to physical laws so thinking we have free will just a human superstition.
- Even if some physical laws are fundamentally random, that doesn't give us free will, because randomness just gives us randomness, not free will.
- We are just biological machines acting by instinct, trying to fulfill our biological duty. There's no free will in that.
- The media and other manipulation techniques are too effective to think anyone actually has free will. We're all just robots being controlled by the environment. No free will.
- Experiments show machine can predict what we think before we become consciously aware of it, therefore no free will.
- If anyone actually had free will they would be able to have self-control and achieve anything they want.
- Anyway, the phrase free will is meaningless and it doesn't matter either way if you have it or not, so the discussion is pointless.
No matter how many times I debunk every single one of these claims, they'll just jump to another, never even acknowledging the validity of my points and never admitting defeat. They also get extremely angry after a while. That has been my personal experience.

[Anonymous No.12481857]

>>12481842
>We're made up of atoms and none of the particles have free will, the just behave according to physical laws so thinking we have free will just a human superstition.
How has this been rebutted?

[Anonymous No.12481860]

>>12481857
If you want I can post the rebuttal tomorrow. I am going to sleep now.

[Anonymous No.12481861]

>>12481857
We're greater than the sum of our parts.

[Anonymous No.12481867]

Just read Sam Harris

[Anonymous No.12481871]

>>12481857
It's like saying "none of the atoms in this glass of water has a temperature (which is true), therefore the water doesn't have a temperature". There can be qualities in a compound structure of simple things that aren't in the simple things themselves.

[Anonymous No.12481873]

>>12481842
>We're made up of atoms and none of the particles have free will
We're made up of atoms and none of the particles are alive.
We're made up of atoms and none of the particles are conscious.
We're made up of atoms and none of the particles age.

[Anonymous No.12481877]

>>12481861
Sounds like you're not worth being a part of honestly.

[Anonymous No.12481925]

>>12481877
I'm not the moron who thinks free will doesnt exist

[Anonymous No.12481934]

>>12481867
Bait

[Anonymous No.12481954]

>>12481804
>Do humans have free will?
I'd explain why we don't, but it's easier to deceive humans than it is to show them the deception. -
t.mutant

[Anonymous No.12481965]

If there is no such thing as God*, and as a whole, demons or angels, which are semantics for deeper plane entities, then no, free will does not exist, or cannot exist. God*, could also be god(s). God* could also be a universal membrane. God* could technically be a cerebral soup that we're actually just phased from. The point is, that without a greater power, whether encompassing us or above us, there is no available law that grants us free will.

[Anonymous No.12482061]

>>12481804
if u ever experienced with some drugs ud know the answer is no.
All what humans have is consciousness and memory

[Anonymous No.12482797]

>>12481804
Free will have humans.

[Anonymous No.12483089]

>>12481965
I like this agnostic truth.
t. Agnostic.

[Anonymous No.12483884]

>>12481965
Ok agnostic, now burn in hell

[Anonymous No.12483890]

>>12481842
was it your choice to make this post?

[Anonymous No.12483896]

>>12483884
Not that anon but why are christians so comfortable with telling people they will burn in hell? Didn’t Jesus specifically tell you not to do that?

[Anonymous No.12483941]

>>12481804

>finite number of possible states
>severely curtailed by societal circumstances

No. Insanity is the closest thing to true free will, full of surprises and unpredictability.

[Anonymous No.12483952]

Only bears have free will, everyone knows that

[Anonymous No.12483961]

No, and it goes beyond that, actions and thoughts are like a mirror for several individuals that don't have connection between each other. It's not just falling for a shilling tactic, those craves and desires (not just for consoom) but the mere intention of doing something in particular are shared by a specific group of people at the same time, as if a parasite was the leader of your cell and gave your group those instructions.

[Anonymous No.12483982]

Who fucking cares

[Astrolomous !86ZqrHsqpc No.12484249]

>>12481804
Imagine a more dubious, superfluous question than asking about the nature of the permissibility of the relation of the deep forces which animate you, and are you; and your conscious mind.

Consciousness is not a priorii or a thing unto itself, it is a composite of a many marvelous perfected forces in union. You are Alive, that's something very special, use it responsibly.

[Anonymous No.12484324]

rare (genetic) ability to rationally navigate this storm of automatic or even irrational behavior from real or imagined influences is more rare than genius IQ
However, even though it is a dark art and unwise to reveal your perceptiveness (or to teach in any significant numbers), it is a learnable skill (unlike the theory of 'g' intelligence). It's basically a 'trade' (trade, skill, craft, etc...).

[Anonymous No.12484446]

No. Nothing does. That's why I wrote this after I decided not to.

[Anonymous No.12484566]

>>12481804
>Do humans have free will?
What are you refering to ?
The fact that you can chose between 2 or more options ?
You would still chose even if the best option would be to die ?
What if your actual power is not to chose but to chose to not chose ? or more precisely refuse ?

[Anonymous No.12484689]

>>12481804

Does a computer have free will? Saying the human brain does is equally absurd.

[Anonymous No.12484724]

>>12481804
Ultimately? I don't know, I suspect not. In a limited sense? Yes. That's what the fall from Eden was about. Adam and Eve, golems crafted by the Creator, were tempted by the Serpent. When they ate the fruit and came to know, they could see God, and therefore they were no longer slaves to God's plan. They were expelled from God's clockwork paradise, where everything is a perfect verse, everything has a purpose, everything follows the script, and they were left to forge their own way in a more hostile environment. This is "Free will" in the sense that there is no central structure which has engineered your composition and deliberately acts to clamp your behavior toa certain range, with the dissolution of such a structure, you are left subject only to Natural Law, the logic of mother nature and the universe itself. It's a great metaphor.

[Anonymous No.12484731]

>>12481804
Define free will. Then we can talk about it.

[Anonymous No.12484736]

>>12484324
What?

[Anonymous No.12484756]

>>12481804
IDK?
I make choices based on either what makes sense or my gut.
Perhaps my choices are completely influenced by the way my brain is put together.
However, the outcomes of this are impossible to accurately predict.
I guess we have a basis to take a certain path, but the outcomes and the things along the way complicate that path.
Therefore we might as well have freewill in this idea

[Anonymous No.12484842]

>>12484731
The ability to make choices.

[Anonymous No.12484858]

>>12481804
Yes, reality is indeterministic, we have qualia and operate above Turing machines.

[Anonymous No.12484866]

>>12481804
Depends on a definition but in the strictest sense no.

[Anonymous No.12484950]

>>12481804
In short, probably yes... at least partially. For more on that, watch this for a simplified explanation: https://youtu.be/RY7hjt5Gi-E

[Anonymous No.12485193]

>>12483890
Yup. This one as well. The next one too.

[Anonymous No.12485436]

>>12481804
where is this gif from, and why did you use it for this thread?

[Anonymous No.12485480]

>>12485436
Stannis Baratheon from Game of Thrones

[Anonymous No.12485503]

>>12485480
ok, thanks

[Anonymous No.12486396]

>>12485193
(x) doubt

[Anonymous No.12489253]

>>12481815
No you don’t

[Anonymous No.12489260]

>>12489253
Cope. Not everyone is a NPC like you.

[Anonymous No.12490505]

>>12489253
Funny thing only degenerates or failures get hung up on declaring free will not to not exist.

[Anonymous No.12490520]

>>12481857
who made the physical laws?

if there is no free will, there is no science.

[Anonymous No.12490523]

>>12481804
Not /sci/

[Anonymous No.12491145]

If the multiverse exists, then every possible choice is made making everything predetermined, we would be just one universe in a sea of universes.

[Anonymous No.12491653]

>>12481804
Fuck Dumb & Dumber for screwing over the Mannis. Fucking kikes.

[Anonymous No.12491674]

This is from some bodybuilder i like to watch on youtube and facebook.

Q: Is There Free Will?
A: I think this is the 2nd most frequently asked questions I get. sharing a quick tip I find helpful that you can find out yourself. Remember not to solidify experiences or insights you pull from this as "there is no free will". Co-creation is co-participation is eros.
So if you wanna experience what I've been rambling about recently, you have to dissolve agency and doer-ship and totally vanish into the universe. At this point there is no more merging or flowing with the world, since that still presupposes the friction of a very subtle duality... Flow state still presupposes time. Time still presupposes space. In Infinite consciousness there is still space. The next step is to dissolve distance. But you can experience all the phenomena you've dissolved...that's the cheeky part about this work, you get to have your cake and eat it too.
Thoughts, emotions, wind, clouds, farts are happening spontaneously by themselves; are the doing of the universe. But you fap or meditate or do anything, contemplate on how EVEN THE INTENTION of paying attention or directing your awareness is also "not self/nor Self"; happening all by itself; is the doing of the universe. When you decide to turn your doorknob or have a cat fight penetrate your experience with a nano-BBC and notice how the intention of doing anything is already here before you are.

1

[Anonymous No.12491677]

>>12491674
Thoughts, emotions, wind, clouds, farts are happening spontaneously by themselves; are the doing of the universe. But you fap or meditate or do anything, contemplate on how EVEN THE INTENTION of paying attention or directing your awareness is also "not self/nor Self"; happening all by itself; is the doing of the universe. When you decide to turn your doorknob or have a cat fight penetrate your experience with a nano-BBC and notice how the intention of doing anything is already here before you are.
Finite brahs would let go of everything, but still cling on to that tiny spec of sensation of "intention" to be aware as self. The thought that follows: "wow this is amazing! Everything is happening on by itself!" Is also happening by itself; is the doing of the universe. Forgetting to be aware and being stuck in thought is also happening by itself, is the doing of the universe. But since you are inside the universe and the universe is inside you and since both are full and empty, there's enough room for both and no room for neither free will nor determinism.
Awareness is not separated from sensations, world, perception, action, mountains, sky, bodies, minds. Nor are they the same, or different.

2

[Anonymous No.12491681]

>>12491677
Last post my AI rambles about how everything is "happening by itself". So you decide to be aware of thoughts and feelings and desires of watching porn and going to the gym and fantasizing about George Clooney. Thoughts are not me, but wait, the intention of paying attention to THAT, the intention of being aware is also happening by itself (another way to experience Consciousness as not-self/Self). It's easy to come to a conclusion about this or that as being true during your contemplative fitness journey. And you go around convincing people that there's no self, no free will etc. Like Sam Harris likes to do. To engage in hour long debates about X and Y. Why can't you get it ?! Don't you see how you're not in control ? The other person goes, WTF are you talking about bruh, when I lift my fingers it feels like I'm doing it! I made that decision ! Here's the thing, then free will and self exists! Right there and now.
don't know how else to explain it. It's that simple. The 2 sides are co-dependently arising and creating and are the expression of each other. Neither has an inherent existence apart from the the infinite links of conditions that are connected to infinite other webs or conditions of dependent origination, which are also empty and full simultaneously. Any time you're standing on one side of an extreme there's clingy, craving, for the other sides and suffering. And this is true for any type or spiritual insights and Realizations. And lack of symmetry, which can only arise through asymmetry! Swipe to see how to get over contraction one feels from the experience of Oneness or any type of peak experiences. #batmanandrobin #georgeclooneyofficial #weddingdress
What do you think of George Clooney's lips? Not Batman's right ? His nipples are. Michael Keaten has the most Absolute Batman lips, slightly frowning and thin but still alpha, followed by Val Kilmer... more juicy. I always look at their lips as kids. Christian bale meh.

Fin

[Anonymous No.12491987]

>free will must be real because if it wasn't I would feel bad ):
Why are humans like this?

[Anonymous No.12492114]

>>12491987
>free will must be fake because if it were real I would feel bad about my shitty life chouces
Why are humans like this?

[Anonymous No.12492148]

>>12492114
More like
>free will relies on the supernatural existing, and throughout the entire history of humanity there is zero evidence of the supernatural existing
Even if souls are real, that's not necessarily evidence for free will. Only that another layer of variables exists.

[Anonymous No.12492248]

>>12481804
Not nearly to the degree we think.

[Anonymous No.12492288]

No. They don't even have qualia, lol.

The material world is Yaldaboath's prison.

[Anonymous No.12492368]

>>12481804
yeah, it's not like they have a choice

[Anonymous No.12492744]

>>12481842
i know it's a dumb meme but whatever

[Anonymous No.12493095]

>>12481804
first humans as an agent of will are part of this universe. you have to account first for the deterministic vs probabilistic up to the fully random chaotic end of the spectrum nature of the universe to have a better grasp of the problem.
let's take the special cases first.
The universe is fully deterministic. if the humans have free will, then it means that the source of the free will lies outside of the universe and is channeled through our brains, and thus has an effect on the universe that do not arise from determinism, thus break determinism at least at our local scale. Hence the universe would not be fully deterministic. But then if this will lies outside our universe, we have merely displaced the problem of free will to another realm. it does not advances us a lot.
cont...

[Anonymous No.12493247]

>>12493095
Now even without going into our assumptions on the universe with the small scale quantum and probabilistic nature of the universe as per the current understanding and the macro level, somewhat more deterministic, maybe we should look at what will is.
on the most basic level, you need change. if we define the start of volition, if you will, mathematically, as a choice of a subset of elements in a set, then we have the initial set, and the resulting set. two sequential states. let's examine the two extremes. not choosing anything and returning the empty set, or returning the set as it is.
in the first case the restriction is absolute. we are still in volition stage, not deeds. that would mean that from a set of possibles, our mind is vacant and empty. it was presented with the set and then nothing. then the other extreme is returning the set as it is. But then one may ask, how can will have more than one choice at a time ? it needs a sequence of one thought moment to the next, each scrutinizing one element. Here comes one interesting fact. for a choice, there will always have to be a sequence in perception from the first sense impression to the next. So in a way, maybe our wills are already biased from the order in which elements present to the mind..
cont...

[Anonymous No.12493294]

>>12493247
to simplify even more and go into more detail, let's restrict to the case of a set {a,b}
your subconscious processes wil present to awareness one element first, usually. unless on potent psychedelics, I can hardly relate to thinking of two things at the same time. so maybe when presented the set the perception got locked, your eyes, to element a at first, then b, and then two neural networks competing with each other race to be the first to present a or b to the conscious mind, (awareness) with element "a" having a slight time advantage.
cont.

[Anonymous No.12493434]

>>12492148
>Zero evidence of supernatural existing
>Zero evidence of supernatural not existing
You played yourself

[Anonymous No.12493560]

>>12481804
Only if the Universe is uncountable or if it has an input from an uncountable universe.

[Anonymous No.12493661]

>>12493294
So two options are presented to awareness. There is a saying that says that the first idea is always the best.
so your subconsciouss processes may have that simple protocol to present you the options in their order of preference.
Without further consideration you could go with that, and choose a.
but what if you are not satisfied with that in the awareness stage ? The there is doubt.
What makes the issue more complex is that the emergent process of awareness is not restricted in the present. What constitutes awareness is the result of the last 10 to 15 seconds of quanta of awareness. Maybe the last emergent stage of awareness is non physical, in the mind realm and not governed by the intricacies of neural networks. Brain would be then a preprocessor, producing a trace callback as an anlalogy to computers, and mind would simply be aware of that resultant waveform/vibration over the last 10 to 15 seconds. I always wondered how a massive parallel machine like the brain could provide a sequential output to awareness. And also how thoughts based on the spatial domain (different neurons in different areas of the brain) could produce an awareness that is non local. the only locality of thinking we get is from our senses : eyes, nose and ears close to the brain, but the experience of awareness is non local. I personally do not "feel" my brain thinking at a certain place. Esoteric teachings seem to hint that the seat of mind is the amygdala / pineal gland, the third eye.
Maybe it is the famed "mind door" of Buddhism, the interface between mind and matter. Then mind, would either have no locus (being outisde of spacetime completely) or have some space element in its essence.
It was believed in ancient times that mind was in the heart/solar plexus. It could well still be if it has space correspondence but no matter correspondence.
but i digress...
cont...

[Anonymous No.12494092]

>>12481842
1. Causal chain: you end up distilling the choice you actually made, instead of the one you thought you made.
2. Atoms: ignores the prevalence of emergent properties in complex systems.
3. Randomness: people actually say this shit?
4. Biological machines: the 'free will' arises in system surpluses. Acceptable start point, illogical conclusion.
5. Media: holy hell this is just #3 again. You actually respond to this garbage?
6. Predictive experiments: post hoc ergo propter hoc, a questionable cause fallacy
7. Oh look it's #4 again. Colour me surprised at repetition in their rhetoric.
8. This is just definitional retreat.

Overall, it's all misattributions, misconceptions, and fallacies. Interesting that you bother to remember all of them.

[Anonymous No.12494104]

>>12481804
Yes. See: Quantum Indeterminancy.

[Anonymous No.12494171]

>>12481871
>It's like saying "none of the atoms in this glass of water has a temperature (which is true), therefore the water doesn't have a temperature".
You're missing the definition of temperature completely.
Temperature is the internal energy of a body - the sum of energies of all particles.
Temperature is just an abstract concept, but each particle moves at certain speed and it is real.
So basically your argument is dumb, because you don't understand the definition.

>>12481842
Time is linear and the laws of physics seem to be quite deterministic.
Your "choice" is just the path the electric current flowing through your brain have chosen.
Try not to feel pain when I spill acid on your smug face.

>>12481873
Emergence can't break the laws of physics.

>>12494092
>2. Atoms: ignores the prevalence of emergent properties in complex systems.
Emergence can't break the laws of physics. The laws of physics determine how an emergent system behaves, not you.
The brain function is determined by the function of neural networks, which is determined by the function of neurons, neurons are simple machines built out of particles.
Learning, remembering and decision making are all determined by particle interactions and laws of physics. You don't control shit.

>>12494104
>Yes. See: Quantum Indeterminancy.
Quants made the decision, not you.

[Anonymous No.12494189]

>>12494171
Temp: not sum kinetic energy, average. You have misread the point.

Regarding emergence, the laws of physics are the details regarding such. Again, missing the point.

[Anonymous No.12494190]

>>12494171
>Quants made the decision, not you.
Do you even understand this concept or are you a 15 year old wanna-be philosopher?

It's completely random. We live in a world of madness where anything can happen, at any time, and you can take any insane decision for some batshit quantum movement.

[Anonymous No.12494226]

>>12494190
>It's completely random. We live in a world of madness where anything can happen, at any time, and you can take any insane decision for some batshit quantum movement.
And how is the randomness giving you the choice? What you've just said implies that random events influence your choices. How is this giving you a choice?
How are random events different from not random events if they both influence your decisions?

>>12494189
>Temp: not sum kinetic energy, average. You have misread the point.
Not a physicist. Anyway, temperature is an abstract term made by humans, it isn't real. The movement of particles is real.
Temperature is defined as it is mostly because our sensing organs are limited.

[Anonymous No.12494246]

>>12494226
Temperature is the average kinetic energy possessed by the individual particles of a mass. A lone particle would have velocity, as it would not be constrained. If you don't know something, ask.
Oh, and temperature would be an example of an emergent property. Neat that we're straight back to that, isn't it?

[Anonymous No.12494703]

>>12484842
A computer program can make a choice. The choice being decided by analyzing information relevant to the question asked. This does not mean the program has freewill.

Unlike a *simple computer program, Humans are constantly choosing from many complex options available to them and learning the consequences of the choices they make.

Your freewill is your knowledge of these choices and the consequences that will likely come to pass if you decide follow through on them.

If a computer program was ever as complex as the human mind then it too could be said to have free will.

[Anonymous No.12494710]

>>12491145
*If