Free Will is an Illusion

[z3ro]

Free will is an illusion.    yeah?


Our amazingly, wonderfully complex brains is comprised of various cognitive systems cycling amongst themselves and generating our thoughts, consciousness, choices and behaviour. These systems and their effects all result from the mechanical, inorganic laws of physics, over which we have no control.


Consciousness is presented to us as a result of our neurones, our brains, our senses. When we lose these, we lose consciousness. These systems are governed and controlled by neurochemicals, hormones, ionisation, impulses: in short, by biochemistry. Biochemistry is in turn merely a type of chemistry, and when we look at the molecules and atoms that make up our chemistry, they obey the laws of physics. Oh yes they do!


Balls bouncing around a pool table have no free will.  The basic atoms, molecules... that make up our bodies and minds have no free will. Neurones fire when they should fire, according to their electrochemical properties. They don't randomly fire: They fire when they're stimulated to fire by other neurones or by environmental inputs. Stimulation results from a constant biochemical cycle. These natural cycles determine our states of mind and our choices. Through a long and complicated series of cause and effect, our choices are made. As such, all our 'choices' are ultimately the result of impersonal and mechanical forces. There is no "free will force" that causes neurones to fire sometimes and not at others. They fire in accordance with the rules of physics, firmly beyond our control but not beyond our appreciation.


In this world.. nothing is really random.


You actually have no free will... everything you do, from scratching the tip of your nose to writing complex code...or suddenly deciding to eat an apple... nothing is really a choice. 


What you are actually thinking right NOW is also dictated by some pretty complex physics 




~ Free will.. is an illusion ~   or is it?

[jonneburger]

that post gave me headache

[p_2001]

damn it.. I was going to make a post very similar to this one... :X... in a few days..

i've had this theory for years..

Let me state mine.. The first half is what you said..
The second is..

If we have sufficient computing power, we can create a computer and input every single "variable" in the equation. Then our computer can run ahead of time and predict the future...

the next part is that if we have a ridiculous amount of computing, then we can do a "state search" for the world.
This way a large amount of states can be made and new ones reached. Then by comparing input data with real world the correct state for the world can be created.. and simulated.

[Stackprotector]

damn it.. I was going to make a post very similar to this one... :X... in a few days..

i've had this theory for years..

Let me state mine.. The first half is what you said..
The second is..

If we have sufficient computing power, we can create a computer and input every single "variable" in the equation. Then our computer can run ahead of time and predict the future...

the next part is that if we have a ridiculous amount of computing, then we can do a "state search" for the world.
This way a large amount of states can be made and new ones reached. Then by comparing input data with real world the correct state for the world can be created.. and simulated.

When we can simulate a brain we could make it run faster thus predicting the actions of a neuron snapshot without any influences.

Tough, if you think about it and you say "nothing is really a choice." Then you have to redefine choice in story, that being a decision made by a human being in certain brain conditions.

[z3ro]

that post gave me headache

  


@ p_2001 : This theory also gives rise to one thing: Destiny... EVERYTHING.. is pre-destined AND bound to happen.. we like it or not   


Also.. yepp.. it SHOULD be possible to create a mathematical model which, taking all variables into account, would allow us to predict...  the future.   

[Stackprotector]

  


@ p_2001 : This theory also gives rise to one thing: Destiny... EVERYTHING.. is pre-destined AND bound to happen.. we like it or not   


Also.. yepp.. it SHOULD be possible to create a mathematical model which, taking all variables into account, would allow us to predict...  the future.   

This theory does not say anything about that is it bound to happen. But rather sepperates the ideas of free will and that all your choices are based on a process in your brain. And that is a very normal idea for me.

[parad0x]

@ p_2001 : This theory also gives rise to one thing: Destiny... EVERYTHING.. is pre-destined AND bound to happen.. we like it or not   

You can't say everything is pre-defined as for example your exams are coming and if you don't study, you'll surely fail if its written in destiny to being passed and if you are destined to fail but you give your exam by studying for it, you'll not fail.

[p_2001]

When we can simulate a brain we could make it run faster thus predicting the actions of a neuron snapshot without any influences.

Tough, if you think about it and you say "nothing is really a choice." Then you have to redefine choice in story, that being a decision made by a human being in certain brain conditions.

no, the snapshot will need to factor external factors ...
this is possible only if you have the whole system factored...

@factionwars.. I did mean that everything is bound to happen... Because as zero says.. There is no free will ... We are slaves to circumstances..
the choice isn't a choice at all.. Because human brain will "choose" according to inputs.

and the idea that the same can be stimulated by an outside observer for whom the universe is a closed system.
..

in a manner, the whole universe is a closed system... And any system can be simulated, given the power..


@paradox.
the decision of "to study and to not" is again an outcome of external factors..and hence not a choice, but an illusion.

[Stackprotector]

no, the snapshot will need to factor external factors ...
this is possible only if you have the whole system factored...

@factionwars.. I did mean that everything is bound to happen... Because as zero says.. There is no free will ... We are slaves to circumstances..
the choice isn't a choice at all.. Because human brain will "choose" according to inputs.

and the idea that the same can be stimulated by an outside observer for whom the universe is a closed system.
..

in a manner, the whole universe is a closed system... And any system can be simulated, given the power..


@paradox.
the decision of "to study and to not" is again an outcome of external factors..and hence not a choice, but an illusion.

I find it a weak thought. You say free will, free will. But you are not talking about free will. You are talking about some kind of unknown magic of some sort. Because, free will is what we have. We defined free will, and that is what is defined in this closed "circumstance" universum.

[p_2001]

I find it a weak thought. You say free will, free will. But you are not talking about free will. You are talking about some kind of unknown magic of some sort. Because, free will is what we have. We defined free will, and that is what is defined in this closed "circumstance" universum.

then our understanding of free will different?
Do state what you mean by free will ?

[geXXos]

SO WHAT ??


Free will has long been a fraught concept among philosophers and theologians. Now neuroscience is entering the fray.


For centuries, the idea that we are the authors of our own actions, beliefs, and desires has remained central to our sense of self. We choose whom to love, what thoughts to think, which impulses to resist. Or do we?


Neuroscience suggests something else. We are biochemical puppets, swayed by forces beyond our conscious control. So says Sam Harris, author of the new book, Free Will (Simon & Schuster), a broadside against the notion that we are in control of our own thoughts and actions. Harris's polemic arrives on the heels of Michael S. Gazzaniga's Who's In Charge? Free Will and the Science of the Brain (HarperCollins), and David Eagleman's Incognito: The Secret Lives of the Brain (Pantheon), both provocative forays into a debate that has in recent months spilled out onto op-ed and magazine pages, and countless blogs.


What's at stake? Just about everything: morality, law, religion, our understanding of accountability and personal accomplishment, even what it means to be human. Harris predicts that a declaration by the scientific community that free will is an illusion would set off "a culture war far more belligerent than the one that has been waged on the subject of evolution."


The Chronicle Review brought together some key thinkers to discuss what science can and cannot tell us about free will, and where our conclusions might take us.


i agree with the read.

[s3my0n]

Everything that has a conciousness has free will. Free will is a concious ability of choosing an action from your available decision space. The size of your decision space is governed by the size of your reality.

For example a mouse lives in a very limited reality, therefore its decision space is minuscule, and thus the outcome of its action is very predictable.

Humans on the other hand can grow their reality frame to a large extend, thus having a larger decision space which contributes to their superiour free will.

Free will is not an "illusion", it is an observed ability of a concious being. Any animal is concious, because it receives input, processes it, and bases its reality on the output of this processing. The processing capability of a conciousness is constrained by the physical characteristics of its central nervous precessing unit - the brain. But that is not to say that brain = conciousness. Brain is again, just a physical constraint on the conciousness that gives it a limit of the maximum size of the reality frame the conciousness can build using the capabilities of the brain's input and processing functions.

So with this knowledge, again - the size of the reality frame creates the decision space of conciousness. A conciousness when choosing an action can chose one of the decisions in its decision space. In other words, you can only think of something that basing on what you know.

The logic in OP's post comes from the objective universe viewpoint. If we follow that train of thought further we end up with a conclusion that everything is meaningless, as everything is just subatomic particles following a strict set of rules, and nothing more. But with creation of conciousness, this objective universe theory helps to show the universe for what it really is.

To conciousness what it receives through its senses is just data. The way we interpret this data is based on capabilities of our brain. This can be demonstrated using the famous colour question - do everyone see the same colour? Are colour blind people really colour blind? Do we see the world the same as a mouse? By asking these questions you come to a conclusion that everyone gets the same data from our environment; it's how we interpret this data what really counts.

So is our universe subjective then? Does it exist if there's no conciousness to receive its information? The answer is no, it does not exist. Interested? Go to youtube and search for "calgary virtual reality" .

[p_2001]

Everything that has a conciousness has free will. Free will is a concious ability of choosing an action from your available decision space. The size of your decision space is governed by the size of your reality.

For example a mouse lives in a very limited reality, therefore its decision space is minuscule, and thus the outcome of its action is very predictable.

Humans on the other hand can grow their reality frame to a large extend, thus having a larger decision space which contributes to their superiour free will.

Free will is not an "illusion", it is an observed ability of a concious being. Any animal is concious, because it receives input, processes it, and bases its reality on the output of this processing. The processing capability of a conciousness is constrained by the physical characteristics of its central nervous precessing unit - the brain. But that is not to say that brain = conciousness. Brain is again, just a physical constraint on the conciousness that gives it a limit of the maximum size of the reality frame the conciousness can build using the capabilities of the brain's input and processing functions.

So with this knowledge, again - the size of the reality frame creates the decision space of conciousness. A conciousness when choosing an action can chose one of the decisions in its decision space. In other words, you can only think of something that basing on what you know.

The logic in OP's post comes from the objective universe viewpoint. If we follow that train of thought further we end up with a conclusion that everything is meaningless, as everything is just subatomic particles following a strict set of rules, and nothing more. But with creation of conciousness, this objective universe theory helps to show the universe for what it really is.

To conciousness what it receives through its senses is just data. The way we interpret this data is based on capabilities of our brain. This can be demonstrated using the famous colour question - do everyone see the same colour? Are colour blind people really colour blind? Do we see the world the same as a mouse? By asking these questions you come to a conclusion that everyone gets the same data from our environment; it's how we interpret this data what really counts.

So is our universe subjective then? Does it exist if there's no conciousness to receive its information? The answer is no, it does not exist. Interested? Go to youtube and search for "calgary virtual reality" .

the color we see differently is due to different genetic make up, chemical composition  and environmental factors..
The genetic make up is again pre determined..
The chemical composition is again predictable if every factor is found.
the environmental factors are again predictable.

just imagine the universe as a closed system...
Like a small ecosystem in a jar... No external influence..
And every internal change is an action reaction pair... And you'll agree, everything was pre determined the moment the universe existed. WE just have no way to calculate it yet.

[Xires]

BS.  The Holy Bible says that God gave us free will so that's what happened.  Be careful with your science or you could burn in hell!

[z3ro]

BS.  The Holy Bible says that God gave us free will so that's what happened.  Be careful with your science or you could burn in hell!