Not necessarily. If determinism exists AND the future is unpredictable and thus not PRE-determined, that situation is indistinguishable to the outside observer from Free Will. So even if it could be proven that Free Will doesn't exist (which is currently impossible and very well may be the case forever) reality would be indistinguishable from Free Will, so the issue evaporates into either Free Will or identical to Free Will.Papus79 wrote: ↑April 3rd, 2020, 3:16 pmAnd I'm okay with that possibility, ie. quantum indeterminism, I haven't really heard the explanation or math unpacked as to how we know that quantum foam would not yield perfect replication across time, it's a point I could be persuaded on but I don't have anything solid to tack it to.
That flows back to the objection though that randomness in the universe wouldn't relate back to free will, it would just mean different skips, bumps, etc. in the structure.
Does last thursdayism annhilate free will?
- LuckyR
- Moderator
- Posts: 7935
- Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am
Re: Does last thursdayism annhilate free will?
- Papus79
- Posts: 1798
- Joined: February 19th, 2017, 6:59 pm
Re: Does last thursdayism annhilate free will?
I'd think the clearest hypothetical model against that would be the Everett solution to the double-slit experiment. It seems incredibly counter-intuitive (blows the raspberry at parsimony, maybe even gives it a mud hat) but suffice to say it offers no break in dependence that activity in the present has on antecedent causes. The very notion that all of one's actions are based on a repository of antecedent causes means that the present moment's activity is a culmination of those antecedent causes. I can't call that free will.LuckyR wrote: ↑April 3rd, 2020, 3:50 pm Not necessarily. If determinism exists AND the future is unpredictable and thus not PRE-determined, that situation is indistinguishable to the outside observer from Free Will. So even if it could be proven that Free Will doesn't exist (which is currently impossible and very well may be the case forever) reality would be indistinguishable from Free Will, so the issue evaporates into either Free Will or identical to Free Will.
- LuckyR
- Moderator
- Posts: 7935
- Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am
Re: Does last thursdayism annhilate free will?
Some suppose that human decision making is ALL made up of "antecedent causes", though no one has ever shown that to be true and all observations of human decision making is consistent with SOME or perhaps MOST being made up of antecedent causes, as you call them.Papus79 wrote: ↑April 3rd, 2020, 4:05 pmI'd think the clearest hypothetical model against that would be the Everett solution to the double-slit experiment. It seems incredibly counter-intuitive (blows the raspberry at parsimony, maybe even gives it a mud hat) but suffice to say it offers no break in dependence that activity in the present has on antecedent causes. The very notion that all of one's actions are based on a repository of antecedent causes means that the present moment's activity is a culmination of those antecedent causes. I can't call that free will.LuckyR wrote: ↑April 3rd, 2020, 3:50 pm Not necessarily. If determinism exists AND the future is unpredictable and thus not PRE-determined, that situation is indistinguishable to the outside observer from Free Will. So even if it could be proven that Free Will doesn't exist (which is currently impossible and very well may be the case forever) reality would be indistinguishable from Free Will, so the issue evaporates into either Free Will or identical to Free Will.
- Papus79
- Posts: 1798
- Joined: February 19th, 2017, 6:59 pm
Re: Does last thursdayism annhilate free will?
I have to than ask two questions:LuckyR wrote: ↑April 3rd, 2020, 5:15 pm Some suppose that human decision making is ALL made up of "antecedent causes", though no one has ever shown that to be true and all observations of human decision making is consistent with SOME or perhaps MOST being made up of antecedent causes, as you call them.
1) Is there a model for what free will could be in a one-way flow of time?
2) If there's no model are there any black swans that would indicate that there should be one but that we just aren't far enough along yet in either science or philosophy to come up with a model yet?
I don't see a yes for either of those, if you do and think you can explain it I might learn something.
-
- Posts: 1172
- Joined: November 22nd, 2019, 10:39 pm
Re: Does last thursdayism annhilate free will?
Just to clear things up; the behavior of particles being unpredictable is only to human beings, which does not at all mean that the behavior of particles is not predetermined.LuckyR wrote: ↑April 3rd, 2020, 3:09 pmWell, if you mean Newtonian mechanics then yes, but Quantum mechanics is completely compatible with the behavior of particles being unpredictable (and thus not predetermined).Papus79 wrote: ↑April 3rd, 2020, 10:50 am So it's probably obvious that I'm advocating b). I'd advocate b) because... well... physics. I'd think of choices occurring on a gradient plane where different axes are considered in sequence (something maybe a bit like Maslow's hierarchy of needs but held and modified by deeper considerations as well that we don't understand the priorities of human consciousness extensively enough to be fully predictive).
If there's any sort of rating scale of that sort which two, five, or ten possible choices hit then one is going to be the winner.
The edge case you mentioned above, ie. a situation where there's what's close enough to being an absolute tie for first place, I don't think it's literally possible for there to be a tie because we're really thinking non-integer here and if the choices are 10^65 similar that's virtually identical but not identical. But lets consider now that we have something else that's a double-edged sword in some senses but which helps us out of that, and it's something akin to cognitive disonnance but there's probably a better word for it (someone else might be able to fill in the blank on that) - it's our ability to hold differing and even completely contradictory beliefs, ideas, and inclinations in one brain or body. On one level that helps us not discard ideas that aren't properly disproven yet but rather leave them provisionally on the back burner until they either get a stake through the heart or get elevated by some new circumstance to replace our current models of a particular domain of things or activity. That seems to be part of the mechanism where if we sit down to write something and a demon disguised as a friend says 'Do you want to write with a blue pen or a red pen?' that we don't either sit paralyzed in front of the two pens until we starve or simply walk away because we have no means to make that choice, ie. multiplicity and complexity of what's in us - including contradictory ideas and the emotions that well up between them - help shake us out of that potential rut.
Here I'm really arguing, and I'm going to argue this even if some extremely complex Gnostic or Hermetic view of reality, or Seth Speaks, or whatever other crazy cosmology someone might entertain were to be true - that's added complexity but complexity in the cosmos, much like complexity in the brain, doesn't yield free will - ie. one choice rises to the surface and is taken because it's optimized to certain internal conditions and future considerations - even what other people might see as self-injurious choices like an alcoholic or fenanyl addict caving to their addiction or the guy or girl going back to an abusive partner because their internal math really is that skewered.
And besides that; the behavior of particles is not unpredictable anyway.
-
- Posts: 1172
- Joined: November 22nd, 2019, 10:39 pm
Re: Does last thursdayism annhilate free will?
Free will remains the same, in ALL ways. Having the ability to choose is, to me, just 'free will'.Papus79 wrote: ↑April 3rd, 2020, 5:20 pmI have to than ask two questions:LuckyR wrote: ↑April 3rd, 2020, 5:15 pm Some suppose that human decision making is ALL made up of "antecedent causes", though no one has ever shown that to be true and all observations of human decision making is consistent with SOME or perhaps MOST being made up of antecedent causes, as you call them.
1) Is there a model for what free will could be in a one-way flow of time?
Are you able to make a decision?
If yes, then that is free will.
No model needed.
But, if you are not able to choose, then so be it.
- Terrapin Station
- Posts: 6227
- Joined: August 23rd, 2016, 3:00 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Bertrand Russell and WVO Quine
- Location: NYC Man
Re: Does last thursdayism annhilate free will?
Even if that were the case, how does it tell us anything about freedom versus determinism? Ontological facts don't hinge on our fantasies.Papus79 wrote: ↑April 3rd, 2020, 3:19 pmThe idea that a five minute interval could be replayed ad infinitum as a perfect carbon copy of itself relies on determinism,Terrapin Station wrote: ↑April 3rd, 2020, 2:00 pm Right, so on your view there's never really more than one option.
On my view physics can't tell us this. It can't tell us that the world is strongly, thoroughgoingly deterministic.
- Papus79
- Posts: 1798
- Joined: February 19th, 2017, 6:59 pm
Re: Does last thursdayism annhilate free will?
The full sentnece:Terrapin Station wrote: ↑April 4th, 2020, 8:40 am Even if that were the case, how does it tell us anything about freedom versus determinism? Ontological facts don't hinge on our fantasies.
I was illustrating how the flow of time and the relationship of information (and choices) that we have available to us and which one is most optimal is not the slightest bit under control. Some might argue it's still free will because it feels like free will to make the most optimal choice - then the 'free will' debate is probably something that we should just let go on until the end of time because the very point is to either never define free will or perpetually redefine its requirements.
- Terrapin Station
- Posts: 6227
- Joined: August 23rd, 2016, 3:00 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Bertrand Russell and WVO Quine
- Location: NYC Man
Re: Does last thursdayism annhilate free will?
You can't illustrate that with a fantasy about some time slice repeating though.Papus79 wrote: ↑April 4th, 2020, 9:19 am I was illustrating how the flow of time and the relationship of information (and choices) that we have available to us and which one is most optimal is not the slightest bit under control. Some might argue it's still free will because it feels like free will to make the most optimal choice - then the 'free will' debate is probably something that we should just let go on until the end of time because the very point is to either never define free will or perpetually redefine its requirements.
Also, thinking about "optimal" choices is adding something that confuses the issue.
I already introduced this, but I'll introduce it again: think simply about choosing between two apparently identical things. There's no "optimal" choice in that situation--the items in question are apparently identical.
- Papus79
- Posts: 1798
- Joined: February 19th, 2017, 6:59 pm
Re: Does last thursdayism annhilate free will?
My earlier reponses which I'd still stand by - there's no such thing as exactly identical and to the degree that we're composite beings with conflicting pieces that ends up being the tie-breaker.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑April 4th, 2020, 9:46 am I already introduced this, but I'll introduce it again: think simply about choosing between two apparently identical things. There's no "optimal" choice in that situation--the items in question are apparently identical.
I say this because dealing with certain neurological disabilities has had me, I'm sure other people as well, having to run at their absolute fastest and make the best available decisions to stay alive and when you do that for long enough for enough periods of time the sheer physics involved and the number of choices that aren't doom or destruction are that low, you start getting a theory of what's happening under those situations and when you have a tie breaker or at least some highly complex situation where the outcomes are unknowable and there's no possibility of making a truly rational choice you start asking questions like 'which one would I be more okay with in retrospect?' or whatever else can be applied to the situation. What's most important to me is that this follow each other and unfold in a relatively logical order in linear time with constraints.
When we think about it - we don't impute free will to inorganic matter, to plant matter, rarely to animals, I do wonder why we do it with ourselves (especially in the reductive materialist camp - it's confusing to watch!).
- Papus79
- Posts: 1798
- Joined: February 19th, 2017, 6:59 pm
Re: Does last thursdayism annhilate free will?
- Terrapin Station
- Posts: 6227
- Joined: August 23rd, 2016, 3:00 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Bertrand Russell and WVO Quine
- Location: NYC Man
Re: Does last thursdayism annhilate free will?
I definitely agree with that, but that's why I said apparently identical--something where we can discern no difference.
For example, imagine that someone asks you to choose one of these two periods:
. .
They're apparently identical. There's no "optimal" period there.
You might want to argue that you're determined to choose one over the other, but it wouldn't be for reasons of one having advantages that the other doesn't have, it wouldn't be from tallying up a pros and cons sheet, it's not as if you're going to be okay with one and not the other, etc.
On my view, because plants don't have wills, free or not. They don't have minds. Free will requires both the freedom part and the will part.When we think about it - we don't impute free will to inorganic matter, to plant matter,
People who are around animals other than humans a lot tend to think that any with minds also exhibit free will. Chimps, cats, dogs, elephants, dolphins, mice, etc. seem to make choices. Cockroaches, etc. maybe not, but that's because it's not clear that they have sufficiently complex brains to have mental phenomena.rarely to animals,
- Papus79
- Posts: 1798
- Joined: February 19th, 2017, 6:59 pm
Re: Does last thursdayism annhilate free will?
I might have said it too preemptively for it to seem like it was relevant or valuable - it was the friend offering you a blue or red pen to write with and the reason you don't either starve to death looking at the pens or give up and walk away.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑April 4th, 2020, 10:20 am I definitely agree with that, but that's why I said apparently identical--something where we can discern no difference.
For example, imagine that someone asks you to choose one of these two periods:
. .
They're apparently identical. There's no "optimal" period there.
You might want to argue that you're determined to choose one over the other, but it wouldn't be for reasons of one having advantages that the other doesn't have, it wouldn't be from tallying up a pros and cons sheet, it's not as if you're going to be okay with one and not the other, etc.
I think what gets conflated often is the ability to 'do what you want to do' with 'libertarian will' or some overriding law that voids what I might call the collection of categories one would call 'determinism' (which should really include any sequence, with or without randomness, that adheres perfectly to the present moment and choices being rendered through a collection of past states leading to the present state).Terrapin Station wrote: ↑April 4th, 2020, 10:20 amOn my view, because plants don't have wills, free or not. They don't have minds. Free will requires both the freedom part and the will part.
People who are around animals other than humans a lot tend to think that any with minds also exhibit free will. Chimps, cats, dogs, elephants, dolphins, mice, etc. seem to make choices. Cockroaches, etc. maybe not, but that's because it's not clear that they have sufficiently complex brains to have mental phenomena.
- Papus79
- Posts: 1798
- Joined: February 19th, 2017, 6:59 pm
Re: Does last thursdayism annhilate free will?
To that degree I'm sympathetic to the idea that determinism, even if true, isn't something people care about it. Where I think people like Sam Harris and Robert Sapolsky make a really good point though - it really does a number on our idea of criminal justice. If we go with Harris's analogy, that starting with the Charles Whitman example it's 'tumors all the way down' for everyone, it means that criminal justice and law enforcement becomes a practical thing and we try to figure out what's more effective or, if threat of punishment is really a critical component, we figure out what combination of factors decreases the number of criminals, the number of repeat offenders, and enables us to house fewer truly and permanently 'dangerous' people and in much more humane circumstances.
- Terrapin Station
- Posts: 6227
- Joined: August 23rd, 2016, 3:00 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Bertrand Russell and WVO Quine
- Location: NYC Man
Re: Does last thursdayism annhilate free will?
I don't normally read every post in any thread, so I had to go searching for what you're referring to there. I don't think I entirely understood your comments about the pen choice, but re this: "one choice rises to the surface and is taken because it's optimized to certain internal conditions and future considerations"--(1) what would be a reason to believe this? and (2) what internal conditions and future considerations could choosing between two apparently (but not actually) identical periods could there be?
I don't really understand this comment, either.I think what gets conflated often is the ability to 'do what you want to do' with 'libertarian will' or some overriding law that voids what I might call the collection of categories one would call 'determinism' (which should really include any sequence, with or without randomness, that adheres perfectly to the present moment and choices being rendered through a collection of past states leading to the present state).
Again, to me the issue is solely whether it's possible to choose among at least two options, like choosing one of the two periods: . .
or whether something makes it the case that it isn't actually possible (ontologically, at least) to choose one of those periods.
2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month
Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023
Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023