Freewill debate.

by **Willy** » Oct 5th, '12, 13:24

What did he say? And I hope we do!

by **CrashBand** » Oct 6th, '12, 01:19

Revolutionary wrote:He said we wouldn't have freewill if there was a god.

He was saying if god is omniscient (like the religious gods are) then it would be free will would be incoherent.

- Omniscience means all-knowing
- an entity that is omniscient has foreknowledge (i.e. knows the future)
- therefore we don't have free will as god already knows the future.

Free will is an incoherent idea anyway that people can't really rap their head around (including me) because it seems like we make our choices and decisions.

One might say "I choose a hamburger". But you don't control of your intentions. You don't have the authorship of your decision.

Why didn't you choose a salmon fillet? It didn't occur to you. Does someone really have the ability to make a true, free decision to that which doesn't occur to us.

The same way we can't control what doesn't occur to us, we can't control what occurs to us.

by **Willy** » Oct 6th, '12, 01:30

It's like, you chose the burger because you are genetically predisposed and environmentally conditioned to like burgers. You could have had the Salmon fillet, but it costs a little more. Plus, people usually don't order salmon at this restaurant, and you don't want the waitress to think you're weird...Deep down it has already been decided the cost isn't worth the difference in taste, isn't worth feeling slightly uncomfortable over, but your brain tricks you into believing you are making a decision, pondering between the two, when in reality your consciousness is just catching up to a decision that has already been made.

Atleast (at least?) that's how I understand it. When I have some more free time I would like to see if there are any experts in brain science shit that believe we have free will (freewill?).. If anyone has any links, help a nigga out!

by **CrashBand** » Oct 6th, '12, 04:28

^ The main argument is Dennet's argument of compatibility.

by **classthe_king** » Oct 6th, '12, 07:29

Omg your arguments against fee will are so dumb

by **CrashBand** » Oct 6th, '12, 11:42

Lol. We don't have it class.

It is an illusion.

by **classthe_king** » Oct 6th, '12, 16:00

It's not an illusion. We have the cognitive ability to think about things and make choices.

by **Willy** » Oct 6th, '12, 20:25

To be fair my most recent example doesn't do the argument against free will justice. Check this out and tell me what you think. It's pretty short. If this sparks your interest there are many more videos that will go into detail and explain things more thoroughly.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ufkrJkVq ... ults_video

by **CrashBand** » Oct 7th, '12, 05:27

classthe_king wrote:It's not an illusion. We have the cognitive ability to think about things and make choices.

You can't control what you think about though.

That would require thinking before thinking.

You have no control whatsoever over your train of thought.

by **classthe_king** » Oct 7th, '12, 06:55

CrashBand wrote:
classthe_king wrote:It's not an illusion. We have the cognitive ability to think about things and make choices.

You can't control what you think about though.

That would require thinking before thinking.

You have no control whatsoever over your train of thought.

That's stupid and meaningless though. I can control my train of thought, by thinking.

by **CrashBand** » Oct 7th, '12, 06:56

that's not controlling it.

A computer has as much control as us lol. As much free will as us.

by **CrashBand** » Oct 7th, '12, 07:00

It's not meaningless.

We can't control what we think. What occurs to us. Why certain things make us think about certain things.

Why we choose X over Y.

You can't control why you don't want to kill someone. You can't control why you chose the university you did.

by **classthe_king** » Oct 7th, '12, 07:08

CrashBand wrote:It's not meaningless.

We can't control what we think. What occurs to us. Why certain things make us think about certain things.

Why we choose X over Y.

You can't control why you don't want to kill someone. You can't control why you chose the university you did.

Yes I can though, that's the thing. You're just arguing things to such a basic level that it's only to the point of a bunch of semantics and "well technically's." I went and got food because I was hungry but I still chose to go eat food on my own. Saying, "oh well you ate food cause you were hungry but you can't help the fact that you were hungry therefore you weren't actually controlling wanting to get food," is stupid and pointless.

by **CrashBand** » Oct 7th, '12, 07:15

It's not semantics lol. We literally have no control over what we think about.

There's the outside factors that we have no control of, that you mentioned. Being hungry, being tired etc.

Then there's making decisions where we have no conscious control of either. eg. 'Peanut Butter over Jam' or 'not to eat for another 5 minutes'. (although it seems like we do).

You don't have any conscious control of the decision not to eat. What made you think 'not to eat for another 5 minutes'. Why not 10 minutes. Why not Honey.

It's an incoherent idea, lmao.

by **CrashBand** » Oct 7th, '12, 07:15

I'm not arguing semantics. We literally have no conscious control or influence for our decisions.

Freewill debate.

Re: Freewill debate.

Re: Freewill debate.

Re: Freewill debate.

Re: Freewill debate.

Re: Freewill debate.

Re: Freewill debate.

Re: Freewill debate.

Re: Freewill debate.

Re: Freewill debate.

Re: Freewill debate.

Re: Freewill debate.

Re: Freewill debate.

Re: Freewill debate.

Re: Freewill debate.

Re: Freewill debate.

Who is online