Big Think

Denys Artasevych on April 9, 2008, 1:23 AM

It is likley that free will does not exist. I am heitant to profess anything as the objective truth. But as far a physics goes free will is an impossibility. Most neurosientists do not belive in free will. Because the brain is made up of billions of particles (an infinite ammount if you consider infinite divisibility) and its the interaction of these particles in incrediblly complex patters tha leads to what we call conciosness. But it remains that its the particle interaction, which is fundamentally a cause and effect chain is what makes us act. So that means billions of tiny causes and effects lead to the exact position of all the particles in the brain when you make a decision.

In order to have free will something has to interupt or alter this chain of cause and effect, something then is completlly prime not the direct effect of anything else. Science has not found anything that fits this description. But some people think of this as a soul.

If you are interested check out my idea “Does the concept of free will dietize us?”

David Gallo on April 9, 2008, 12:28 PM

Skeptic,

I get what you are saying, and there is a good chance that you are right. You say “interaction of these particles in incrediblly complex patters tha leads to what we call conciosness”, is this the actual conciousness or merely the physical realization of what our mind tells our bodies to do? are we merely a synaptic firing walking piece of meat or is there some disconnect of our internal thought process from the bodies we find ourselves in. now you will probably tell me that they are one and the same, that at the very moment we think our brain fires in a reaction to causes prior. now i dare not say that we are not engrained in an eternal chain of cause and effect, but my question to you is why does action have to be prime in order for one to be making their own choice?

as we know something can’t come from nothing, and to me the very idea of something prime and original out of the order of cause and effect is impossible, but that is not to say that i don’t have a choice to make in my every day life. i choose! and sometimes those decisions are hard. i refuse to accept that that choice has already been made for me. now on the other hand, i may have already made that choice and I don’t yet recall what decision i will have made, but it is not to say that my entirety can be defined in the sole terms of cause and effect. i can’t deny that i am a result of my parents meeting and the life experiences that i have based my decisions on are only that of those made made before me, but i can’t believe that i can’t alter my own future. hey i might get hit by a bus tomorrow and i had no choice in the matter, but it doesn’t mean that i didn’t choose to get out of bed that day.

Musycks on April 15, 2008, 1:39 AM

DGallo,
‘something can’t come out of nothing?’ the quantum phys guys are telling us now it can?
free will as much as we understand the term, cannot exist in favoured mainstream religious model of omnipotent/omniscient.
It connotes something outside the control of the omni/omni one, and therefore cannot be.
free will as in..‘which breakfast cereal shall I buy’ is limited by the choices the supplier/seller deigns to give you.
We need to eat, so we will make a choice guided by such inputting factors.
Why we need god is beyond my wit and wisdom.

David Gallo on April 15, 2008, 12:11 PM

so if these quantum guys are saying, then they are also saying that our universe is still expanding….into what? although this is a total different question, it stems from the fact that these people start off the argument with the big bang…an infinitly dense point (which doesn’t make sense) exploded and made our universe, sending out all of the elements we find today… now i’m not saying the big bang couldn’t of happened, but then you need to accept the prime mover concept….and there for something came from nothing…does it make sense not sure. but my question to you is that all of these actions set in motion at some point in time have resulted in the current conditions and happenstance that we find ourselves in today. now while, i can’t tell you my future and I do leave it up to fate, does this mean that I can’t control it AT ALL???? i do understand that most is out of my control and that i only have the options presented before me to choose from, but i DO have a choice. i can make myself the man i want to be. are FATE AND FREEWILL MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE? does the very concept of fate prevent me from individual action? can fate be that i have already made my decision and haven’t yet realized it in actuality? am i just recalling a decision that has already ben made (by me) (by someone else) has time already come and gone. Could the universe have come and gone in the time it took to have the big bang? Big band. flash. its over. when sitting back from the timescale of infinity, our insignificant life become very possible to “have already happened”. i connect all of this, i.e. dejavu. i’ve been here before. and sometimes i even know that i am where i am supposed to be…but i still make the dicisions affecting my life everyday….

Timothy Johnston on April 16, 2008, 7:01 PM

It’s moments like these when I wish I didn’t know that I exist.

David Gallo on April 17, 2008, 6:38 PM

and here in lies the problem, we know that we are here, and that’s about it. we know that we are here know, that we had a past and have a future, but none of us can even guarentee that the sun’s going to rise tomorrow. let alone what happens after we die. is being here now evidence that we had to come from somewhere? does it mean we have somewhere to go afterwards? doesn’t look like we have much of a choice no matter what the answer

HerbieP on April 23, 2008, 5:18 AM

The arguments have conflated two things: causality and free will.

On the subjected of causality in modern physics particles are not infinitely divisible and quantum mechanical effects effectively introduce random chance into causal chains. Whilst macroscopic systems are largely predictable (if they are simple enough) the underlying fundamentals can never be. Even in a purely Newtonian world of hard particles the information within any system cannot all be contained within the system itself in such a way that the system can be fully internally predictable.

On the subject of freewill we first have to determine who the I that might make decisions is. Is the I that decides to go on a low calorie diet the same I that decides to eat a cream cake later on? Who is in conflict with whom? How is it possible to be disappointed with oneself? When we act other than how we would hope to what is going on? The human personality is a complex structure there is no single I that can have a will otherwise we could never be conflicted with ourselves.

If, as I suspect, there is a religious element creeping in to this discussion. The old chestnut of how an omniscient and omnipotent god could create a being with free will applies.

David Gallo on April 23, 2008, 7:21 PM

herbie,

whilst you are obviously an educated man, I found your explination rather off putting. So, I think you were SIMPLY denying causality in that are random ocurances possible that we can’t possibly take into account. Agreed. Doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen thought. IF __________ THEN_______ still goes on. The idea of cause and effect cannot be denied in my opinion due to the linear structure of time. Before During and after. I don’t care what mordern physics breaks things down into to create a falicy in this argument, Cause and effect exists. It may be byond our scope to fully understand the interconnectedness of all things and the ripple or butterfly effect if you will, but I CAN say IF I hurt myself i WILL feel pain. Provability to that extent is impossible until the later effect does in fact happen. I.e. we can’t say for sure the sun will rise tomorrow. But once it happens tomorrow we have the beauty of being able to say “I told you so”.

As for the “I” that is making the decisions based on cause and effect. We should talk to freud about that. Id ego super ego etc. But the totality of the “voices” inside of my head I consider to be MYSELF. I have a past self and current and fleeting self as well as a future self. Now while bringing god into the argument instantly taints the excersise, I find not talking about god in a discussion about predetermination vs freewill would be irresponsible. This is not to say im sure god exsists, but in order to discuss the inner works of our mind in the comparison of time and happenstance, you need to ask the question, How did we get here?

But as i think ive said ealier in this message board. We are THROWN into life. UNABLE to determine when, where or by who, it’s luck of the draw. We are then expected to confront and react to the experiences put forth. We can react to anyone’s situation but our own and in that regard I consider myself unable to change my situation and start to lean towards the side of predetermination and fate. everything may or maynot happen for a reason. but i also know that i have the choice (me, me and me) to do as i please only restricted by the laws of nature and in society by the laws of man (which doesn’t necessarily stop people from doing anything). which leads me to think that i have some kind of choice. freewill? i am free to act in my body to the circumstances that i find myself in and eventually “put” myself in. but did i “put” myself there??? i know I disn’t put myself on earth. But does my situational finitude prevent my ability to choose? i hope not.

but i don’t know how you actually stand. there is no causality, and I am only making choices within myself with no external reprcussions?

does that mean that you believe in predtermination without the presence of god?

Josh Friedman on May 5, 2008, 4:36 PM

I’ve seen nothing to make me believe that some being has a set plan for each person, so I reject determinism in that form. But as far as causality, things get a bit more murky

Think about it this way. Let’s stop time at any given moment and look at the human brain. The brain is structure of neurons connected in a certain pattern. At any given time, the brain receives inputs from senses and from memory, and based on it’s current configuration, it produces outputs and then reconfigures itself accordingly (learning and feedback).

If you look at it this way, then your thoughts and actions at any time are determined by your brain’s configuration at that time combined with the inputs it receives at that time. It would seem then that our actions are predetermined because there is only one possible outcome based on a given brain configuration and a set of inputs.

But here’s the kicker. We cannot stop time to see how the brain will react to given set of inputs, so to us, our future actions are unknown, which gives the appearance of free will. Also, since each human brain is unique and dynamic, we all act differently to different inputs at different times. This gives the appearance of choice. So in the end, the real question is – does it really matter if we have true free will if we cannot know otherwise? I say no. Whether true choice is an illusion or not, I don’t think it should affect the way I live.