Do we have free will?

[schwarzkopf]

Watch the first half of this video at least (second half is questions).... then tell me, do you think we have free will - and if so how do you counter the science that shows we don't ?

[Deleted]

It's either yes or both, meaning we make all decisions we can possibly make whether we like it or not, is that free will? You tell me.

The reason for it is that you can't predict the future because of quantum uncertainty. You can never measure everything precisely and even if you could, you would change the result just by measuring it. Or if the multiverse theory is true, we make all decisions anyway but are only aware of a single path through that matrix. I that free will or not? I don't know.

[schwarzkopf]

It's either yes or both, meaning we make all decisions we can possibly make whether we like it or not, is that free will? You tell me.

Free will involves us having a conscious say over what we decided, science and multiple experiments have shown that our so called 'free' decisions are made unconsciously up to 7 seconds before we consciously 'make the decision'.

What did you think of the video btw ?

[Deleted]

Free will involves us having a conscious say over what we decided, science and multiple experiments have shown that our so called 'free' decisions are made unconsciously up to 7 seconds before we consciously 'make the decision'.

What did you think of the video btw ?

Well its 1 and half hours long but I think I've seen either it or the subject discussed in another video before.

Subconscious is still "us", it's the way the brain works. You can still change your mind consciously after the "decision" comes unless it's one of those life and death situations where you have to react very fast. Besides, real decision making doesn't really work that way.. it doesn't take only 7 seconds or less because sometimes you have to weight and consider your decision for days and even go against the one that feels right or keep getting second thoughts because there doesn't seem to be a good solution to the problem one way or another.

I still think we have free will but I also think that conscious is an illusion and goes a lot deeper than that small voice in your head you use to talk to yourself.

[Dezerte]

Probably not.

- - - Updated - - -

And oh, this sums up my feelings on it:

Hume adds that the Compatibilist's free will should not be understood as some kind of ability to have actually chosen differently in an identical situation. The Compatibilist believes that a person always makes the only truly possible decision that they could have

[apepi]

The real question is does it matter either way?

[diddle]

Scientifically no, from a practical standpoint yes. The concept of personal responsibility for one's actions absolutely needs to exist.

[The Kao]

Before having watched the vid, will do so later.

The question is more on what level our will or decisions are free. Surely we can decide a lot more than people living in third world countries, and those are probably more free than zoo animals, but at the same time we're bound by restriction set up through law, society, body conditions etc. which might or might not restrict the other above mentioned groups. I'd say we are at the same free and not free, always depending on what exactly is concerned and how that interacts with the very rules of the place, society or mental state we live in. Part of that comes from the thing that generally the human mind is more at peace the more rules there are which grant us (false?) feelings of stability and security.

[schwarzkopf]

Scientifically no, from a practical standpoint yes. The concept of personal responsibility for one's actions absolutely needs to exist.

Just because something is perceived to need to exist, doesn't mean it does.

In the video they did a very interesting experiment which demonstrated live that a particular audience member did not have free will. Was pretty amazing (wasn't proof - that was elsewhere).

[Deleted]

Yes, in what way would we not?

[Mayhem]

are we now at no, i remember it being about 10% or so

i´m ok with either, in the end it doesn´t effect me anyway

[Gheld]

science

Nihilism is a religion, not a brand of science. Next topic.

If there is no free will, there's no point in participating in a discussion forum because we don't truly have opinions, nor will we truly be influenced by the apparent opinions of each other.

[schwarzkopf]

The real question is does it matter either way?

That question is also discussed in the video ... and it does. In relation to how we treat criminals, and how we treat victims.

- - - Updated - - -

Nihilism is a religion, not a brand of science.

Nihilism isn't what I'm referring to here... talking about basic provable science.

[diddle]

Just because something is perceived to need to exist, doesn't mean it does.

In the video they did a very interesting experiment which demonstrated live that a particular audience member did not have free will. Was pretty amazing (wasn't proof - that was elsewhere).

It doesn't exist, what I'm trying to say is that even though it doesn't exist it has be perceived as it does for society to function. Otherwise the concept of personal responsibility would be moot.

[Gheld]

That question is also discussed in the video ... and it does. In relation to how we treat criminals, and how we treat victims.

Exactly. There is no free will, so if somebody goes on a shooting rampage we should give them extra ammo. Because it is their destiny. Forget the fact that your statement is self contradicting in that we don't have any choice of how we treat criminals, or how we treat victims.

[Yunru]

Thats so easy to test:

You need a chocolate. Place it somewhere where anyone can see it and put on a sign *dont eat me*. The next day it will be gone.
See... free will. Not free will would have to resist the chocolate.

[Granyala]

Watch the first half of this video at least (second half is questions).... then tell me, do you think we have free will - and if so how do you counter the science that shows we don't ?

I honestly believe free will and choice are illusions.


Given to us by the Matrix to keeep us docile of course. (sorry could not resist <- see, no free will either!)

[diddle]

Thats so easy to test:

You need a chocolate. Place it somewhere where anyone can see it and put on a sign *dont eat me*. The next day it will be gone.
See... free will. Not free will would have to resist the chocolate.

That's not quite how it works. It really depends on your opinion of determinism. I personally believe it, other's don't. In the end it's really not something to get hung up over, doesn't matter regardless.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Determinism

[Dezerte]

Nihilism is a religion, not a brand of science. Next topic.

If there is no free will, there's no point in participating in a discussion forum because we don't truly have opinions, nor will we truly be influenced by the apparent opinions of each other.

I see nothing unique about free will that makes those two examples reliant on it.

Opinions are formed through experiences in life, and similarly these opinions continue to be influenced from other people's opinions as well.

[Gheld]

basic provable science.

That's not how science works.

Science is about testing falsifiable ideas (by attempting to disprove them).

So any time somebody comes up with a logical paradox that invalidates the hypothesis (in this case that there is no free will) you must be able to explain away each and every single one of those paradoxes. "proven" isn't just some fucking magical pedestal that you can park a popular idea on top of and leave it for eternity.