Free will doesn't exist

Free will doesn't exist

I choose to believe it does :^)

and what are the implications of your findings

He can't be held accountable for being a dumb frogposter

REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

I can't help but believe in it

prove that it does

depends how small you wanna get

I think it's a bit of both. Free will exists like little balls bouncing around inside a circle with set parameters. they can bounce around inside these circles which ever what way but can't bounce out

it ultimately depends on whether or not one submits to a Bayesian understanding of probability or not

if the world is causally determined (it seems to be that way),
then the future is defined, just as much as the past is

the events that will happen in the future are certain, even if we do not know what they are to be. one can say that a certain future event is "possible", but that tells us more about the beliefs of the person and what predictive knowledge they have than about the event itself

this applies equally to events involving humans or deer or rocks.

that being said, we do not know the future, so things are are still possible, that is unactualized.

do not kill yourself (for that reason)

Free will exists.

...

>(it seems to be that way)
Not really. Citation?

fucking compatibilists don't under stand that concepts are human-relative; we don't even know what it would mean to have free will if free will requires total ontological independence from things like causation

Acknowledging that changes nothing.

>if free will requires total ontological independence from things like causation
Why would it though?

it doesn't! it couldn't!

Anyone else notice that weird alien vessel flying around observing shit at 0:08?

Conspiracy theorist's call them rods, sometimes they are 20 feet long. I hope they aren't malignant.

Are you implying compatibilists claim it does? They don't...

Compatibilism is just determinism.

do you mean incompatibilists?

yeah man i see it

no.

It is literally impossible to determine that whether the universe is causal or whether we are just rationalising it ex post facto.

If you observe an event that is TRULY random and unpredictable, you would simply ascribe the seeming unpredictability to a lack of knowledge on the factors determining its state.

So one may as well live as if free will does exist.

Only through God

if free will doesn't exist then you don't have the free will necessary to make the conclusion that free will doesn't exist. Your argument has already invalidated itself. Next

nice bait

If free will doesn't exist, why do we need religion or governance?

Evidence required to believe in free will (limited by ignorance, ability, consequence, etc., obviously): none.
Evidence required to disprove it: endless idiotic ontological bullshit.
I'll stick with Occam's Razor, thanks.

my post was in support of compatibilism; compatibilists say that free will doesn't require ontological independence--I'm saying that, further, we don't even know what ontologically independent free will would look like

Fucking hate these threads. Sage.

wow rekt

But the balls dont controll any of the factors which determine their trajectory. Just like humans are unable to choose their enviroment and biology, which will define their ability to select the options they're presented with.

What would an "existing free will" actually look like to begin with?

No, its a branch of determinism

>X does or doesn't exist
Hi, 18th century.

>Evidence required to believe in free will (limited by ignorance, ability, consequence, etc., obviously): none.
It literally requires you to disbelieve the causal relationships you observe everyday to be true. You've no doubt as to what happens you flip a light switch, there's nothing to suggest you're brain is somehow fundamentally different.

no it isn't, you guys have no idea what you're talking about, it's a conditional thesis that doesn't require the truth of determinism to be true

"Determinism is compatible with free will" doesn't entail or imply that determinism is true

It's not just that it doesn't exist- and one could easily define "free will" to refer to something that does- but that the concept that is groped at with it is meaningless, worthless, and non-existent.

he can, because he did those actions, even if they weren't freely chosen, they are a symptom of his character

do you punish people for exhibiting symptoms?

yes it does you untermenchzlichztz

>freely chosen
If Free Will doesn't exist, then what is this refering to?
Yes we do, and we have for thousands of years, and our notion of justice has been founded on the idea that some symptoms are worthy of punishment and others are not.

This was a prescriptive and not a descriptive question; do you think we should punish people for exhibiting systems?

Our notions of justice, personal responsibility, and even personhood are predicated on the existence of free will.

This is how thin the concept is; no ontological independence is required. All we mean when we say "he acted out of his own free will" is that, had he chosen to do otherwise, he would have done otherwise--that he could not have chosen to do otherwise is neither here nor there.

Why should I care about whether free will exists or not?

instead of quibbling over whether or not it exists—an irrelevant metaphysical debate—we should understand that the existence of the contradiction within metaphysics is itself symptomatic.

>This was a prescriptive and not a descriptive question; do you think we should punish people for exhibiting systems?
Sure; I find it pleasing since that's what's been practiced in the culture I was raised in.
>Our notions of justice, personal responsibility, and even personhood are predicated on the existence of free will.
How curious then that those arose in the ages when a person's will was recognized to be caused by the gods and stars.
To the contrary, I say that free will (at least in the modern sense) is the incoherent invention of Abrahamic theology and devised post hoc to justify already extant beliefs and practices viz. by putting God-the-judge in the same position of disinvolvement from the criminal as a human judge.
>All we mean when we say "he acted out of his own free will" is that, had he chosen to do otherwise, he would have done otherwise--that he could not have chosen to do otherwise is neither here nor there.
Yes, but that requires that there's some kind of meangingful "reality" to him acting otherwise. Which there isn't.
"What could have been" is just a hypothetical about our knowledge, viz. "at some time we did not know what in fact was". None of these alternative realities contemplated is the true one.

God and free will are mutually exclusive

read paradise lost

You shouldn't. Your life is and will be the exact same either way.

>the contradiction within metaphysics is itself symptomatic.

Which contradiction? And symptomatic of what?

Cutsie mystery is meaningless if nobody knows what the fuck you're talking about.

SHOTS FIRED

“What is this life? A frenzy, an illusion,
A shadow, a delirium, a fiction.
The greatest good's but little, and this life
Is but a dream, and dreams are only dreams.”

IT DOESN'T EXIST

ADMIT IT

By this reasoning, "free walking" doesn't exist because you can't walk vertically without stairs.
Of course the perfection of free will doesn't exist but this has more to do with perfection not existing in this fallen world than with you not being responsible for your actions.

It's not a perfect circle and both the circle and the balls are shaped by your experiences and environment

You can calculate how the balls will bounce if you know the exact way each of them and the circle itself are shaped.

Their bouncing is determined.

>physicists claim free will is a myth because classical physics is deterministic
>quantum level of things discovered where fundamental particles are only representable as probabilities and they behave in erratic, unpredictable ways.
>physicists who are smarter than anyone on this board collectively agree that free will exists because the physical world that we see is an emergent property of the quantum world.

Free will exists.

That's like saying a dice roll is truly random because your lack of knowledge prevents you from knowing the outcome.

Idiot.

hidden variable theory is a meme

It's more like a dog on a leash tethered to a cart

"Free will" doesn't mean there is no such thing as influence or cause and effect. It means that within reasonable parameters and abilities, people make conscious decisions. Our brains are, to point out the fucking obvious, a bit more complex than light switches. And even with light switches, you do NOT know what's going to happen when you flick the switch: you're just betting on the odds. Or have you never flipped a switch and watched a bulb pop, or had nothing happen?

Or had nothing happen and begin to levitate, as you realize you're dreaming?

this is a merely verbal dispute

Free from precisely what?

The brain is like an enormous network of switches, still working on the binary framework of ON/OFF. Neurons either activate or not, it's just that there are billions of them.

See
What exactly do you suggest that "will" is free from?

Citation needed

>Clinical Neuroscience
>Dennis R. Mosier, in Neurology Secrets (Fifth Edition), 2010.

>NERVE CONDUCTION

>What is an action potential?

>The action potential, as classically defined, is an all-or-nothing, regenerative, directionally propagated, depolarizing nerve impulse. In axons, the rising (depolarizing) phase of the action potential is mediated by Na+ currents, which depolarize the membrane. Repolarization of the membrane is influenced by two processes: (1) inactivation of Na+ currents and (2) activation of K+ currents, which hyperpolarizes the membrane. When Na+ currents are inactivated, a new action potential cannot be initiated (absolute refractory period).

Key term there is "all-or-nothing."

A current theory in computational neuroscience is that consciousness doesnt even really exist and its sort of just a momentary picture of all the signals currently in transit

All that needs to happen for an organism to function is that the neuron transfer functions work, there is literally nothing happening at all in someones brain other than neurons putting together signals and producing more, of course you dont have conscious control over that procedure because that procedure makes your 'consciousness' in the first place

Reductive materialism is false, senpai.

t. Walter J. Freeman

It's a fly u friggin' retard.

>brains are minds

fuck off

>FUCK OFFF

>Homunculus Problem

Only nerds care

Pascal's Wager, anyone?

All we perceive are ideas, and these are immediately and directly perceived. There is no such thing as light -- as in a physical entity.

So you fell for the Cartesian duality meme, huh?

And what activates them?

Hello m'lady... still believing in Free Will?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

From total influence from an outside force.

>implying physicists aren't blinded by rationality
>implying quantum physics doesn't suggest that the world fundamentally cannot be modeled scientifically
Shit is random. Scientists only try to give useful theories, they'll never get to the bottom of anything.

Reminder that the universe is essentially random, non-rational, unscientific. The idea that we can understand the word through rational methods is a Platonic meme that won't die.

You're determined to believe it exists though so there is a paradox of believing it exists for various reasons even though the determination to believe contradicts the notion of free will.

Reminder that you - the person reading this - possesses a soul, an immaterial nucleus to your own consciousness that renders you immune to the trappings of material determinism.

Electric impulses from sensory receptors, and they activate each other - all in a dynamic interplay of forces, same as everything else.

Outside can't exist without inside, and vice versa. Neither is "free" from the other.

Reminder that the distinction between matter and spirit is a thought process, not reality.

But not from determinism.

You got the sauce on this? God damn. Also, yeah free will isn't all too real.

Its pointless to speculate about things that don't affect you.

t. Dialectical materialist

No; there are no brains because there are no material substances.

t. the good Bishop Berkeley

what a qt

What's wrong with you?

whats wrong with U?

I'm not a fan of the 'Nordic' æsthetic.
But I'd still find her fine except her expression is utterly abhorrent. She looks like a gay muppet.
What you posted is fine; not my style but still good.

BBBBBBBBBRRRRRRRRRRRAAAAAAAAAAAPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP

snnnnniiiiiiffffffffffff...oh yes my dear....sssnnnnnnnnnnnniiiiiiiiffffffff....quite pungent indeed...is that....dare I say....sssssssnniff...eggs I smell?......sniff sniff....hmmm...yes...quite so my darling....sniff....quite pungent eggs yes very much so .....ssssssssssssssnnnnnnnnnnnnnnniiiiiiiffffff....ah yes...and also....a hint of....sniff....cheese.....quite wet my dear....sniff...but of yes...this will do nicely....sniff.....please my dear....another if you please....nice a big now....

BBBBBBRRRRRRRAAAAAAAPPPPPPPFFFFFFFFLLLLLLLLLPPPPPPPPPFFFFFF

Oh yes...very good!....very sloppy and wet my dear....hmmmmm...is that a drop of nugget I see on the rim?...hmmmm.....let me.....let me just have a little taste before the sniff my darling.......hmmmmm....hmm..yes....that is a delicate bit of chocolate my dear....ah yes....let me guess...curry for dinner?....oh quite right I am....aren't I?....ok....time for sniff.....sssssnnnnnnniiiiiiiiffffffff.....hmmm...hhhmmmmm I see...yes....yes indeed as well curry......hmmm....that fragrance is quite noticeable....yes.....onion and garlic chutney I take it my dear?.....hmmmmm....yes quite.....

BBBBBBRRRRRRRRPPPPPPFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFTTTTTTTTTTT

Oh I was not expecting that…that little gust my dear….you caught me off guard…yes…so gentle it was though…hmmmm…let me taste this little one…just one small sniff…..sniff…ah….ssssssnnnnnniiiiiffffffffffff…and yet…so strong…yes…the odor….sniff sniff…hmmm….is that….sniff….hmmm….I can almost taste it my dear…..yes….just…sniff….a little whiff more if you please…..ssssssnnnnnniiiiiffffffffff…ah yes I have it now….yes quite….hhhhmmmm…delectable my dear…..quite exquisite yes…..I dare say…sniff….the most pungent one yet my dear….ssssnnnnniiiifffffffffffffffffffffff….yes….

No it's more like a series of dice rolls. They will converge on an average which is predictable but no tool can accurately predict each one and yet there is every reason to believe forces to subtle to measure were determining the outcome.

Go plow another altar boy, you retarded, rancid hypocrite.

>start understanding free will doesn't exist
>start choosing to be more relaxed with my new found understanding
:^)