/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.12713582]

Are there any actual arguments for free will that don't amount to "My most immediate subjective experience is that I feel like I have Free Will" or the cop-out of Compatibilism, where the goalposts have been shifted entirely?

[Anonymous No.12713589]

>>12713582
Are there any arguments against free will that don't amount to a complete misunderstanding of physics/biology or extremely basic fallacies?

[Anonymous No.12713594]

>>12713582
Those who believe in determinists are hypocrites.
If everything is written, there is no responsibility.
There is no good and evil, since no one is free to choose.

[Anonymous No.12713616]

>>12713594
What if responsibility is written ?

And even without determinism, how can one be free to choose ? If his choice is informed, it is determined, and if it's random, then it's not his own choice.

[Anonymous No.12713697]

>>12713616
>determined
Still determined by himself, in other words a choice.

[Anonymous No.12713699]

Quantum mechanics proves that God endowed free will at even the subatomic level

[Anonymous No.12713809]

>>12713697
A choice, but not a free one.

[Anonymous No.12714062]

>>12713616
Tyler is a fucking alpha

[Anonymous No.12714073]

>>12713582
>the cop-out of Compatibilism, where the goalposts have been shifted entirely?

What were the goalposts initially? The problem is 'Free will' has never been rigorously defined. Clearly it has never meant you can do anything you dream of at anytime. Nobody claims the fact you cannot teleport across the planet as disproving free will.

Compatibilism is the best because it encapsulates the fact that even if the universe is deterministic, we still have choices to make and those choices matter.

[Anonymous No.12714077]

>>12713699
randomness does not imply free will

[Anonymous No.12714081]

>>12713616
>There is no God
>So I will become Him

[Anonymous No.12714094]

>>12714077
What if your spirit is capable of influencing the wavefunctions of electrons within your nervous system resulting in your actions being both within the mathematical bounds of QM but non-random?

I believe randomness is just a cope humans created to deal with their own ignorance of reality.

[Anonymous No.12714101]

>>12714094
You didn't choose how the electrons were set up the first moment you existed, and you didn't choose the laws of physics that they follow. What exactly DO you ever freely choose?

[Anonymous No.12714103]

>>12714073
define free will as the capability of an organism to act independent of its biological structure and any environmental influence.
Really it’s not that hard?

[Anonymous No.12714105]

>>12714094
>What if your spirit is capable of influencing
it isn’t, so your whataboutism has no meaning.

[Anonymous No.12714119]

>>12714103
>Define free will as the ability to ignore gravity (environmental influence)

Sure, if you define it to not exist, then it doesn't exist. The problem is, nobody has ever argued for your definition because it is retarded.

Also I would cite you meditation as being pretty close to what you describe.

[Anonymous No.12714127]

>>12713582
The best evidence I've ever seen for free will is watching a self-admitted determinist look both ways before crossing the street.

[Anonymous No.12714128]

>>12714101
>What exactly DO you ever freely choose?

How you respond to the situations the universe throws at you. Most people do not exercise their free will. These are people who are easily trolled.

Really a lot of this conversation comes down to the silliness of the phrase, 'free will.' Let's simply talk about, 'Will'. There is no free will, there is only Will. It is not free, you must earn it. Think of monks who can willingly put themselves through intense situations because they have trained their will. This is a demonstration of an animal going against instinct and environment all in the pursuit of a sharper Will.

[Anonymous No.12714148]

>>12714127
huh

[Anonymous No.12714168]

>>12714119
then change take actions to make decision? Ffs stop being autisticly pedantic.

Memories are caused by outside influences, and you will never be able to remove those as well as any sensory input even with meditation. Do you believe that 2 brains in exactly the same state would make different decisions? By the way, we can ignore quantum effects since decoherence time is about 30 orders of magnitude lower than it takes signals to travel from one neuron to another. To answer yes, you would have to propose some agent that is outside the physical realm, so it intrinsically can not be part of it and especially not influence it, or it wouldn’t be an outside agent.

[Anonymous No.12714186]

Only with God or cerebral soup allowing you to have free will, can free will exist. There is no such thing as free will if there is no creator. It's all predetermined - even the "randomness".

[Anonymous No.12714217]

>>12714186
God won't save the freewillfags. If he knows everything, he knows your next choice. It's just as predetermined as in the real world.

[Anonymous No.12714234]

>>12714217
God knows the rules, he does not know everything. God did not know that Abraham was loyal until he was tested with sacrificing Isaac

[Anonymous No.12714248]

If you claim that there is definitely no free will, you should define that free will first.

[Anonymous No.12714263]

>>12714234
>God did not know that Abraham was loyal until he was tested with sacrificing Isaac
Yes he did. He was just being a dick.

[Anonymous No.12714269]

>>12714234
Congrats for having a definition of God that doesn't immediately fall apart against paradoxes. Knowing everything is completely impossible.

[Anonymous No.12714283]

>>12713589
>amount to a complete misunderstanding of physics/biology or extremely basic fallacies?
Every choice and decision you make is based off everything else that has happened in your life. How do you know how to read? How do you know how to write? How do you know how to type?

Look up genie the wild child, a human without external input is just a feral monkey. Everything you are in life is down to what you've consumed and what you've been taught.

Without all of your prior knowledge, you are nothing. Maybe your genetics make you naturally curious or some shit like that. And thats all cause and effect too, after all if your dad would have cummed into your mom any other time, well, you wouldn't have born. In fact you never even chose to be born, your parents did.

There isn't a single choice in this world that you have ever made that was truly your own and you have zero proof or legitimate arguments otherwise.

[Anonymous No.12714293]

>>12714168
>Memories are caused by outside influences, and you will never be able to remove those as well as any sensory input even with meditation.

Again, do you really believe free will is about making decisions without any sensory input or influence from your memory? It's about how you transform those pieces of data into action. Meditation allows you to disconnect from your environment and process so you can develop an understanding and plan of action and essentially be more in-tune with your will. Think of sensory deprivation tanks and the like. Even psychedelic drug use. Choices you can make that will influence your perception and future choices. You are the autistic one that thinks free will means freedom from causality.

>2 brains in exactly the same state

More physically impossible than hidden variables like a spirit influencing sub-atomic interactions in your body. Time scales here don't matter, this 'spirit' influence can alter timelines.

[Anonymous No.12714306]

>>12714234
>God did not know that Abraham was loyal until he was tested with sacrificing Isaac
Lemme rephrase that for you. God did not know if his influence on the simulation had led Abraham to a loyal state. And so he had to test him in order to measure loyalty.
You really think abraham would have done any of that shit if god didn't tell him to do it? How exactly is someone else telling you to do something free will?

[Anonymous No.12714311]

>>12714306
>And so he had to test him in order to measure loyalty.

What if it wasn't about God not knowing whether Abraham was loyal, but about the impact it had on Abraham's future psyche?

[Anonymous No.12714317]

>>12714293
>It's about how you transform those pieces of data into action.
What criteria do you use to make your data transformations? Did you know straight out of the womb what right and wrong were? Let alone right and left?

We make decisions of known information. Calculating averages and running simulations isn't free will. Neither is the underlying motive for anything you do.

[Anonymous No.12714325]

>>12714073
>Nobody claims the fact you cannot teleport across the planet as disproving free will.
The same rules that stop you from teleporting across the planet are the ones that imply there's no free will.

[Anonymous No.12714327]

>>12714311
An omnipotent God could make that change happen without pointlessly tormenting his creations. In fact, he could have everyone experience infinite enjoyment for eternity. That is, if he existed.

[Anonymous No.12714341]

>>12714317
>isn't free will

Again, you define free will as impossible from the start. You make a definition of free will that is outside of causality then ignore the non-causal parts of QM.

> Did you know straight out of the womb what right and wrong were?

I certainly did not learn it from other people, if I did I would not act the way I do. I gain a much better understanding from right and wrong from reading ancient texts and meditation than from modern society.

What motivated me to pick up those books? What motivated me to read them repeatedly? What motivated me to spend time meditating everyday? I can't really put it down to anything in my environment, because I'm the only person I know that has done those things. I can put it down to a feeling of being drawn to these things, as if it was something unique to myself.

I've had many experiences like this.

[Anonymous No.12714345]

>>12714325
>The same rules that stop you from teleporting across the planet are the ones that imply there's no free will.

I disagree. I think if there were no rules to reality then there could be no free will, because there would be no arbitration stopping me from blinking you out of existence.

[Anonymous No.12714365]

>>12714283
You don't know what free will is. It's not the ability to act irrespective of your environment. That's retarded. Of course people are going to want to go inside if it is cold. That does not mean they do not have free will. It's the ability to make your own choices without some guiding hand forcing you to do it. Imagine a rock on a hill. It has no will of its own to stop itself from tumbling. Determinists (i.e. coping edgelords) believe that humans are just fancy rock-tumbling mechanisms and can't do anything of their own volition.

[Anonymous No.12714368]

>>12714306
>You really think abraham would have done any of that shit if god didn't tell him to do it?
I don't see how that is relevant. Of course he wouldn't have.

>How exactly is someone else telling you to do something free will?
Abraham could have ignored God's request, that's how

[Anonymous No.12714424]

>>12714341
>then ignore the non-causal parts of QM.
Wanna riddle me what those non-causal parts of your unfinished theory are? Afaik QM isn't non-causal in any aspect and you're just misinterpreting/making shit up
>I can't really put it down to anything in my environment, because I'm the only person I know that has done those things.
Being a special snowflake isn't proof of free will. Just because you can't remember why your younger self made the choices, doesn't mean you had any sort of free will/made those decisions without any other external influence. What made you choose to ignore people? Probably something you parents said or did. Either way, if you were genie the wild child, you would not have an inherent intrinsic interest in those books nor would you ever choose to read them.

Im actually bewildered that you tried to use quantum mechanics to describe the lack of free will. Do you even double pendulum bro?
>>12714365
>>12714365
>You don't know what free will is
then tell me what it is, you've only said what it isn't.

>>12714368
So by your argument would you define free will as choices one could make but doesn't? If so how would that invalidate determinism? We could make any choice at any time but we don't because we are slaves to determinism.

Also yeah abraham could have ignored it, but that nigga hardly ever fucking questioned it. For all we know he was a literal bot and placed by god... Or maybe we can argue about real choices in real life and not just those from a story in a really old book.

[Anonymous No.12714486]

>>12714424
>Wanna riddle me what those non-causal parts of your unfinished theory are?

Copenhagen interpretation (still the most prevalent) says wave-function collapse is a non-causal element of the theory. Which eigenstate the function collapses into cannot be predicted beforehand in any interpretation.

>tried to use quantum mechanics to describe the lack of free will

I think you have poor reading comprehension, I'm arguing in favor of free will (or, Will, rather. As I said before, you must earn it.)


>Do you even double pendulum bro?

Deterministic chaos doesn't really imply free will, just the inability to predict systems long-term.

I actually remember quite well how it happened. I was first made aware of such books in a class. Then over years my mind kept coming back to some of the tidbits I heard. There is a lot to creativity and spontaneity that people who argue against free will fail to recognize.

[Anonymous No.12714549]

>>12713582
It's a moot point - in the limit of complexity going to infinity, complex determinacy becomes functionally indistinguishable from free will.

[Anonymous No.12714662]

>>12714486
Copenhagen interpretation is on its way out. Whats been happening lately in new school QM is a shift away from the more intense causal aspects of the interpretation. See, just because we can't measure a particle without destroying it, doesn't mean everything doesn't exist without wavefunction collapse. The math doesn't suggest any of this, just the interpretation.

And just so you know, the double slit experiment itself is 100% causal. Afterall you don't see the change in photon behavior until you put polarizers in the slits.... The existence of probabilities and chance have nothing to do cause and effect. You can perform Schrodinger's cat, and while you can't know if the cat will live or die, we know for a fact you will be pulling a cat (in some form...) out of that box at the end of the experiment or by the fact of the matter is that you put the cat and the poison in the box because someone else told you about it.

I guess we could debate if the radioisotope made the choice to kill the cat or not. But still leaving something up to someone elses choice is not free will.

[Anonymous No.12714862]

>>12713582
Listen, fuckwit: you have TWO choices here:
1. Go around and around and around AD INFINITUM in your own head about """do I really have FREE WILL or not???""", and have a SHIT life where you do NOTHING and are UNHAPPY the whole time
*** OR ***
2. JUST FUCKING FORGET ABOUT IT AND LIVE YOUR LIFE

There is NOTHING to discuss here.
Choose either way but be sure to FUCK OFF.

[Anonymous No.12714908]

>>12714424
>So by your argument would you define free will as choices one could make but doesn't?
No, I define it as the ability to make choices.

>We could make any choice at any time but we don't because we are slaves to determinism.
We can and do make choices all the time, because we have free will. I know this won't convince you, but it has just as much merit and is just as provable as your argument.

>Also yeah abraham could have ignored it, but that nigga hardly ever fucking questioned it.
This just shows a fundamental lack of understanding of the story, it doesn't even warrant a response desu

[Anonymous No.12714995]

The universe is deterministic but we still look both ways before crossing the road. We make choices yes, but that's not what free will is at heart. We have some illusion of conciousness, a set of mirrors we use to trick ourselves into thinking our narrative flow decided what we do. But we can scan people's brains and see we decide before we are conciously aware. It's a complicated tumble that all of reality is going down. Just as the river chooses to flow a certain way so to do we choose to do a certain way. These ways are constrained by physics and our own biology. So you say, "we have the ability to choose" but we do what we feel we must because of our situation. Whatever justification we use is still just the application of some internal calculus on a set of information to generate the actions we take. So either every single iota of our being down to the individual atom has the ability to choose or nothing does. That doesn't take away the inherent meaning for reality that we have constructed or the rules we have put in place. Unless you are just paralyzed by the universe, which I guess is the fate of some. Just as some will not be able to accept a deterministic universe as it would fundamentally undermine the internal calculus by which they run their lives.

We do what we do. That is the truth and a good one. We do what we do, and I look both ways before crossing the road.

[Autolycus No.12715075]

>>12714128
>Really a lot of this conversation comes down to the silliness of the phrase, 'free will.
This.
>>12714168
>Memories are caused by outside influences
And we can choose which memories we're prehending and co-creating.
>Do you believe that 2 brains in exactly the same state would make different decisions?
Do you believe that two photons in exactly the same state could make different decisions?
>you would have to propose some agent that is outside the physical realm
Neither the physical or mental are primary, change is. Relations are not secondary to what a thing is, they are what it is.
>>12714283
Every choice and decision we make is causally influenced by prior occasions of experience, and causally influences future occasions of experience.
>>12714317
Even atoms have free will - a degree of self-determination and novelty. We make decisions of diverse experiences, feelings, intuitions. We are interdependent entities of a single organism.

>>12714325
That conception of free will is based upon a nonsensical notion.
>“The misconception which has haunted philosophic literature throughout the centuries is the notion of 'independent existence.' There is no such mode of existence; every entity is to be understood in terms of the way it is interwoven with the rest of the universe.” -Whitehead

>>12714327
God is not omnipotent~
>>12714424
>without any other external influence
Stopped reading there.
>then tell me what it is
I lied.
>When the indeterminism is limited to the early stage of a mental decision, the later decision itself can be described as adequately determined. This is called the two-stage model, first the “free” generation of ideas, then an adequately determinism evaluation and selection process we call “will."
Free? Got it. Will? Got it. Free will? Literally.
>because someone else told you
Of their own free will, adding an aspect of co-creation to our future occasions of experience.

[Autolycus No.12715105]

>>12714995
>we can scan people's brains and see we decide before we are conciously aware.
Because we are neither the body nor the mental state, but actual entities which have a body and mental state. We are becoming aware.
>These ways are constrained by physics
Physics isn't physical. The former is abstracted from the ladder, which is concrete.
>So either every single iota of our being down to the individual atom has the ability to choose or nothing does.
Yes. Motes of dust in far-off space have free will.
>The other side of creativity/freedom as the absolute principle is that every entity is constrained by the social structure of existence (i.e., its relations – each actual entity must conform to the settled conditions of the world around it.) Freedom always exists within limits. But an entity's uniqueness and individuality arise from its own self-determination as to just how it will take account of the world within the limits that have been set for it.

[Anonymous No.12715117]

>>12713582
>the cop-out of Compatibilism
lolno, it is the only non-schizo answer

[Anonymous No.12715119]

>>12713616
It is no coincidence that things seen as moral are also good traits for being a parent. This links moral actions to reproducing in a quite natural way.

Getting along in society also increases the chance of your offspring and close kin surviving.

https://youtu.be/7XtvWkRRxKQ?t=1m40s

[Anonymous No.12715127]

>>12713589
What are the physics/biology metrics that measure/quantify free will?

[Anonymous No.12715134]

>>12713594
There is no good or evil because there are too many frames of references and perspectives with irregularly overlapping non congruent moral modalities.

[Anonymous No.12715137]

>>12713699
Don't forget about subatomic particles, they do that to, but with a few extra steps.

[Anonymous No.12715150]

>>12714101
You can freely choose whether or not certain arrangements of electrons exit your anus when you need to fart in most cases.

[Anonymous No.12715151]

>>12714103
Its impossible to act independently of your biology and its form since those things shape everything you can possibly do.

[Anonymous No.12715156]

>>12713582
>Are there any actual arguments for the holocaust that don't amount to "The jews most immediate subjective experience is that they feel like the holocaust happened to them"?

[Anonymous No.12715172]

>>12714217
The God of Yin and Yang can.

[Anonymous No.12715178]

>>12714248
Free Will - That which definitely does not exist.

[Anonymous No.12715180]

>>12714283
Then why can I fart on command.

[Anonymous No.12715184]

>>12714306
God didn't have to test anything, he wanted to foreshadow the sacrifice of his own son in a way that demonstrates why he was willing to sacrifice the part of himself that was his son to save all people over time.

[Anonymous No.12715191]

individual units can act chaotically within or counter to a system whilst that system still has a general direction.

so yea we have free will. but we may be heading to a common future collectively.

[Anonymous No.12715193]

>>12714327
If an omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent God could exist anywhere in any capacity, it must exist everywhere in every capacity.

An omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent God exists in the mind of the Pope, so God must exist everywhere in every capacity.

[Anonymous No.12715215]

>>12714549
That’s... actually a good point.

[Anonymous No.12715333]

>>12715193
>If an omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent
Gherkin could exist anywhere in any ass, it must exist everywhere in every ass.
>An omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent Gherkin exists in the ass of the Pope, so Gherkins must exist everywhere in every ass

[Anonymous No.12715372]

>>12715333
Only if the omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent Gerkin can be demonstrated to exist in a particular ass must it necessarily exist everywhere.

[Anonymous No.12715388]

>>12715372
So you are a Gherkin-in-ass agnostic?

[Anonymous No.12715398]

>>12715388
Your logic simply doesn't follow until you have positively identified at least one single specific example that is immediately apparent to anyone who can do research to validate the claim.

You set up an "If x could, then y must" scenario, but you didn't show that any x that could, so you didn't prove any y must.

[Anonymous No.12715821]

>>12713582
>2021
>he still thinkS some symbols representing faulty system of communication is a good way to determine what exists or is true

[Anonymous No.12715884]

>>12714283
>Every choice and decision you make is based off everything else that has happened in your life
And my decisions are part of what happened to me.
>Look up genie the wild child, a human without external input is just a feral monkey.
Moving the goalposts. Nobody who believes in free will asserts that there's no external influence. Obviously there is. The point is that some of the influence is also on our part (the part that is the free will).
>There isn't a single choice in this world that you have ever made that was truly your own and you have zero proof or legitimate arguments otherwise.
The nature of the free will dialectic prohibits me for ever proving to you that I have free will, as for your NPC brain it's impossible to imagine anyone who's not a NPC and anything I ever say will be interpreted by you as a NPC saying it. So obviously I will never prove to you that I do have free will, I can only prove it to myself (as I have did, in a completely epistemically legitimate way).
So the only possible way to proceed in the dialectic is to try to find arguments against free will. You have none. Your whole post is an emotional diatribe completely devoid of arguments or logic.

[Anonymous No.12715886]

>>12715127
>What are the physics/biology metrics that measure/quantify free will?
There are obviously no experiments for existence of free will as a metaphysical issue. You can use experiments to help your argument in favor of it (as has been done using quantum mechanics) but no one experiment will demonstrate to the skeptic that it definitely exists, as every set of data can be interpreted as coming from a NPC behavior, perhaps just too complex to have been predicted, but still NPC behavior.
As for the more practical sense of free will, there's more you can do.
There are certain experiments you can do to quantify the lack of free will, by trying to predict what a person is going to do before they do it.
You can also quantify the presence of free will by making the participant exercises his execute functions, for example seeing how well they follow up with their concrete goals etc.
>>12715821
>2021
>he still thinks some symbols representing faulty system of communication is a good way to determine what symbols representing systems of communication are a good way to determine what exists or is true.

[Anonymous No.12715900]

>>12714549
This is an awful point. Just because some system is practically unpredictable, doesn't mean it's indistinguishable from free will. We could still potentially have a theoretical description which is deterministic and even though we can't use it to predict large-scale stuff, we know it's right by observing it work in small scale particularly designed systems. Such a description would by a legitimate argument for determinism and hence against free will. And it has been a great argument for determinists at the time of classical physics, when it was reasonable to believe that deterministic physical laws as known in the day govern the whole universe.
Unfortunately, due to the advent of quantum mechanics, this argument no longer works. There is no inference to determinism from physics.
The point stands that you are simply wrong.

[Anonymous No.12715911]

>>12715886
I wasn't asking for a single experiment, I was asking for a single metric that has been developed through numerous experiments and peer review over a long period of time.

[Anonymous No.12715913]

>>12714293
>Again, do you really believe free will is about making decisions without any sensory input or influence from your memory?
yes I do, otherwise it wouldn’t be free will but entirely determined by sensory input and brain structure.
>spirit influence can alter timelines
let’s assume multiverse interpretation is true in the first place, there exists not a single experiment where a person can influence the outcome without physical interaction.

[Anonymous No.12715914]

>>12715117
That's ridiculous. Watch
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dqj32jxOC0Y
If determinism is true, you don't have free will, since everything "you" ever do is a direct consequence of the state of the universe before you were born, none of which you're responsible for unless you go full schizo and assert eternal presence, in which case you might have an argument, but you can no longer call it "the non-schizo answer".
>>12714862
Personality type averse to thought.

[Anonymous No.12715916]

>>12715886
>Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, darüber muß man schweigen

[Anonymous No.12715918]

>>12715916
Now go on and apply the rule to yourself, Witty-san.

[Anonymous No.12715932]

>>12715075
>And we can choose which memories we're prehending and co-creating.
How? When I was born I didn’t chose how my parent treated me, I never chose what my eyes take in and deliver into my brain, I didn’t choose the structure of my brain that processes sensory input.
>Do you believe that two photons in exactly the same state could make different decisions?
Exactly! They would have the same wavefunctions, free will would allow for the same brains to reach different conclusions.
>Neither the physical or mental (realm) are primary, change is. Relations are not secondary to what a thing is, they are what it is.
When you yield that free will is determined by its physical environment, what is “free” about it?

[Anonymous No.12715935]

>>12715151
Ergo, the proposition of a free will is absurd.

[Anonymous No.12715941]

>>12715918
>1 picture
>1000 words

[Anonymous No.12715942]

>>12715914
so jesus then huh
lol, go choke on a holy cracker

[Anonymous No.12715996]

>>12715935
But you can freely choose to change your biology and form over time through diet, surgery, and other means.

[Anonymous No.12716003]

>>12715942
Huh? I'm an atheist.

[Anonymous No.12716013]

If free will existed I wouldn't have shat my pants in public

[Anonymous No.12716018]

>>12715996
no, you have to decide to do so. That decision is determined by sensory input and your current brain structure, neither of which you can influence. Again, you would need some outside agent that cannot be physical.

[Anonymous No.12716023]

>>12716018
>your current brain structure, neither of which you can influence.
You can choose to take a certain drug known to cause changes to brain structure at any time.

[Anonymous No.12716025]

>>12716018
How is deciding different than choosing?

[Anonymous No.12716067]

>>12716018
who's "you"?

[Autolycus No.12716223]

>>12715932
We can choose to prehend memories of parents, or jacking off, or anything novel. We can choose what to look at, and what to focus thoughts upon. Our choices are influenced by prior occasions - their experience, feel, desire, thought - but not made by them. Those choices causally influence future occasions, including brain development throughout those occasions.
>They would have the same wavefunctions, free will would allow for the same brains to reach different conclusions.
Wavefunctions are abstract. Actually, photons are abstract, so a poor analogy on my part. But it does example the significance of our choice in abstractions.
>When you yield that free will is determined by its physical environment, what is “free” about it?
The actual entities which determine(d) that physical environment, both past and present.
>Thus an electron within a living body is different from an electron outside it, by reason of the plan of the body; the electron blindly runs either within or without the body; but it runs within the body in accordance with its character within the body; that is to say, in accordance with the general plan of the body, and this plan includes the mental state. -Alfred North Whitehead

[Anonymous No.12716232]

>>12716023
and the decision to take these drugs is determined

[Anonymous No.12716238]

>>12716025
it isn’t meaningful here. What’s impornant is what I wrote after that.

[Anonymous No.12716660]

>>12715914
>eternal presence
and wtf is that

[Anonymous No.12716784]

>>12714283
>how did you learn to read
Self learnt, same with writing and typing.

Reading is surprisingly easy to learn if there's something you have to gain from learning it.

[Anonymous No.12716867]

>>12716232
and the decision to take these drugs is determined by your free will*
(^:

[Anonymous No.12717866]

>>12716867
then find this agent that is independent of the physical world but can influence it.

[Anonymous No.12717876]

>>12717866
I found it, it's my soul

[Anonymous No.12718341]

well theres freedom of choice
in cognizance of your behavior and habits you are free to choose some arbitrary difference
free to act "randomly"

free will to me seems like you could engineer this reality at god tier level
so perhaps you "unlock" more free will
but if you cant introduce anything fundamentally new then its always just the same stuff playing with itself and will have eventually figured out all combinations