Does free will exist?

[dustinzgirl]

Fated puns?

 

[Chinook]

I can't take anymore of this pun-ishment. I'm going to use my free will and go. Maybe I'll go to the technology heading, and start a thread about having a free Wii.

 

[Ursa major]

Sometimes that is not a matter of free will, Chinook. (And in so many different ways....)

 

[Parson]

I rest my case. Fated puns indeed.

 

[chrispenycate]

Is not a pun will a rotating firework? (thus setting Catherine, whoever she might have been, spunning in her grave.

 

[Devil's Advocate]

I think there seems to be some confusion and mingling of different ideas going on.

Some people mentioned the idea of knowing and realising all of the possible reasons why we do certain things... I don't think that has anything to do with free will. That concept has more to do with the idea of absolute and total 'awareness', which is not the same as free will. (And, in my opinion, an impossibility.)

There was also some philosophical discussion regarding subconscious decisions. Well, that doesn't have to do with free will, either. That's just a question of consciousness, and how the human brain develops to learn and process various stimuli over time to aid it in certain situations, e.g. walking, breathing are just two examples of functions that our brain has learned to perform without any deliberate effort or focus on our conscious mind. In fact, breathing is not learned, it is one of the few acts which we are capable of from birth. Walking, though, is learned. But even though it's something that we have to be 'taught', it's not something we have to think about. Our brains have evolved in a way that these sort of essential activities are handled automatically, allowing us to focus our mental abilities on other, more pressing concerns, such as visiting the Chronicles Network.

Other animals whose brains are less developed than humans [insert joke here] do not have free will; all of their actions are based on instinct. Survival instinct, self-preservation, etc. A predator doesn't sit and look at a prey and wonder, "Gee, should I bother chasing that thing? I'm kind of tired. Plus, Lost is about to start. Maybe I'll just order in..."

Free will, conscious (and even sub-conscious) thought, higher levels of mental processing, self-awareness, communication... all of these are examples of abilities that our brains have developed over thousands of millenia that separate homo sapiens from other species of animal.

That, and boxer-briefs.

Thank [God/Genetics/Chaos Theory/Evolution/Aliens/Random Chance/WhateverYouThinkIsResponsibleForLifeOnEarth] for boxer-briefs.

 

[Ursa major]

The act of walking is probably semi-automatic.

Choosing to be walking is an act of free will**.






** - Even, to take an extreme example, when some guy with a gun is ordering you to walk. It's still your choice. Best to walk, though. But then your legs won't do as they're told. You begin to sweat. Will your life end here...?

 

[Devil's Advocate]

That depends... Since your thug does not have free will, the choice of shooting you or not is not in his hands, and has long since been made by...

 

[Interference]

DA is treading roughly the territory I've been wandering over since last night, about the actual question of the title of this thread.

It doesn't ask "are we capable of independent thought and action" but if we have free will, and in that respect (though the answer is still inconclusive) there are the usual two answers.

Yes: Because we can choose our actions, yadda-yadda-yadda etc,

but more importantly,

No: Because we set ourselves up with a system of beliefs and morals that will ever-after inform our decisions.

I do not have sufficiently free will to make me hurt a cat, for example, or to become a Latin Lover or to play trombone with the LSO or to sit through an entire episode of Lost without saying "Oh, get on with it!" every five seconds.

I've inherited and learned behaviour patterns that deny me the luxury of these things while others around me have learned their own patterns which may permit one or all of them.

Is that their free will, then? No, because their learned behaviours have made it impossible for them NOT to be Latin Lovers or LSO trombonists or cat-de-Sades.

The path, then, as always, is the real mystery of Free Will, not the destination.

 

[Moonbat]

I think that is slightly illogical. I am not a latin lover because I'm not Latino, that isn't a choice thing, that about my parents and geography. I'm not a trombone player with the LSO because I haven't played Trombone to a good enough standard, though (unlike the latin lover example) I could practice Trombone until I was sufficiently good enough to try and get a seat on the LSO.
I have assumed that this discussion was about Free Will being the choice between two equally valid options, we can never say whether the option we chose is due to free will or just due to destiny or fate, a pre-destined future that is playing out without the option of choice. Logic would suggest that we do have a choice, but there is no proof because every choice if made becomes the only choice (its a time thing).

N'est pas?

 

[Ursa major]

As Moonbat has left the cat hurting option - I'll ignore the two different definitions of a latin/Latin lover being deployed as I'd only end up adding a third - I'll pick it up.

* Prepares to be scratched. *


I'm not sure we should confuse free will with either the law or cultural conditioning. (Both are involved here, at least in the UK.) There are plenty of examples of law breakers and cultures do fade away or change (sometimes due to the actions of those within those cultures).

Some people break laws, some people only stay within the law because they fear the consequences of not doing so, some feel that keeping to the law is their civic duty, while others hardly give a thought about it. Which of these is an example of free will not being applicable?

As with the law, so it is with culture. The only differences are the way it's enforced and the way its tenets are inculcated in us.

Your argument might be stronger if you simply said that we often do things out of habit. But even then, we can do otherwise if we so choose.

 

[Interference]

I think that is slightly illogical. I am not a latin lover because I'm not Latino, that isn't a choice thing, that about my parents and geography. I'm not a trombone player with the LSO because I haven't played Trombone to a good enough standard, though (unlike the latin lover example) I could practice Trombone until I was sufficiently good enough to try and get a seat on the LSO.
I have assumed that this discussion was about Free Will being the choice between two equally valid options, we can never say whether the option we chose is due to free will or just due to destiny or fate, a pre-destined future that is playing out without the option of choice. Logic would suggest that we do have a choice, but there is no proof because every choice if made becomes the only choice (its a time thing).

N'est pas?

My point is that a latino with the background that leads him to becoming a Latin Lover has no option but to become a Latin Lover. He can do nothing else. There is no choice in the matter. Whatever else he does (car racing, surgery, astronaut training) he will always end up a Latin Lover.

You will never be in th LSO playing trombone because your path, your learning, your experience and your influences, have had nothing whatever to do with that as an option. Should you one day wish you were, there would be nothing you could do about it. Your will (to play with the LSO) is not free.

And I make the point in response to the presumption we have all thus far been making, in that the definition of "free will" has something to do with cosmic imperatives. It may or may not, but in the end I believe that point to be irrelevant.

We make the choices we make because of who we are, not because of who we might be intended to become.



(It's a slightly tricky concept, perhaps, and as usual I'm not expressing it very well, but hopefully someone who sees what I'm getting at will pick it up and explain it a little better. If I try, as previous experiences have shown me, I might end up confusing the issue even more. My history and background suggest that I may attempt a better clarification, but experience also shows that I'm most probably going to fail in the attempt. My place on my current growth curve leads me to the conclusion that I have now no choice but to say no more on the matter. )

 

[Ursa major]

(It's a slightly tricky concept, perhaps, and as usual I'm not expressing it very well, but hopefully someone who sees what I'm getting at will pick it up and explain it a little better)

They might. They might not.

 

[Interference]

Soz, Urse, I added a bit - post-post, as it were

 

[Ursa major]

Some people will do that (me amongst them ).

 

[Interference]

Really? I doubt anyone's ever noticed you doing that

 

[Parson]

Clearly you have no choice in the matter. You just think you do.

 

[Interference]

There, like I said: Someone wiser with a more concise and easily understood version of what it took me two posts and five paragraphs to say ... I give up

 

[Ursa major]

But you don't have to....

 

[Interference]

Oh, I think I do, I really, really do