The Unanswered Questions Thread

[Scott Taylor]

In philosophy, free will gets linked to choice. The two ends of the spectrum, of choice, are free will and determinism respectively. In reality, we live within a state of being that is a mixture of both concepts. We as people are composed from partly a result of our heredity and partly a result of our environment, which are both mostly out of our control. But its possible to have no choice whatsoever in our circumstances and genetics and still have at least a portion of free will - in how we think, what we say, etc. The exercise of free will does not require a change in either circumstances or genetics in order to be free will. The real question is whether we can prove it or not. Who is to say that a decision I just made is me, my genetics or my environment?

Philosophically I think every person is unique and they represent that third option, in addition to genetics and environment. Its a belief of mine. The concept of a unique "I" existing is consistent with other aspects of life.

The constitution, for instance, contains the line "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" as unalienable rights. Does a paraplegic have those rights, too, even though they can't move? Does a blind person have them even though they can't see? They can't make certain choices, like walking or seeing, but I'd argue that they still have those rights and can still exercise free will. It just happens to be a restricted form of free will, same as everybody else in the whole world has for one reason or the other.

[Catlady in training]

Does free will really exist?
We’re all subject to emotional reactions to outside events. Those emotions and how we act regarding them are determined through learned behavior based on feedback from similar experiences and genetic predilections inherited from our parents. On some occasions we have the presence of mind to halt those emotional knee-jerk behaviors and act with planning and forethought but I’d argue that even those instances are subject to a degree of emotional interference.

Of course it exists, you can not always choose the situations you find yourself in, but you can always choose how you react to them.
To quote Buffy: "You have a choice. You don't have a good choice, but you have a choice."

[Kirby101]

Of course it exists, you can not always choose the situations you find yourself in, but you can always choose how you react to them.
To quote Buffy: "You have a choice. You don't have a good choice, but you have a choice."

What choice did the Jews in the concentration camps have. The slaves in the South, a victim of a mass shooter? You do not "always have a choice". We also have biological processes that affect many of our decisions. There are times we make choices, but the idea that all our actions are due to Fee Will is just not supported.

[Catlady in training]

What choice did the Jews in the concentration camps have. The slaves in the South, a victim of a mass shooter? You do not "always have a choice". We also have biological processes that affect many of our decisions. There are times we make choices, but the idea that all our actions are due to Fee Will is just not supported.

But that's not what free will is about. It doesn't mean that everything that happens to people is a result of their choices (as I said in my previous post). A person being killed is not a result of their free will (but arguably of somebody else's), a person getting cancer is a result of nobody's will.

Still, unless a person is imprisoned, immobile and/or mentally unable to make decisions, they have some autonomy. Even imprisoned people can try to escape in some circumstances - yes, hard to do and often unfair, but I'm not arguing that the world is in any way fair.

The idea that our free will is limited is an easy way to become cynical, even nihilistic. I could for example say that I am giving up on any form of recycling, trying to protect the environment, etc. because at this point the climate collapse is inevitable and too many politicians and corporations just don't care. I may as well stop doing the minimum I'm doing, stop voting, etc. and just not give a **** anymore. Is it not my free will even if the results will probably be the same either way?

[Kirby101]

We must agree what free will is. And I think it depends if we look at it through philosophy, religion or biochemistry.
I think we can agree we don't have total free will in all that we do. I still maintain you don't always have a choice.

[Tuck]

But that's not what free will is about. It doesn't mean that everything that happens to people is a result of their choices (as I said in my previous post). A person being killed is not a result of their free will (but arguably of somebody else's), a person getting cancer is a result of nobody's will.

Determinism argues that all events in the universe are the result of an ongoing chain reaction set in motion by the Big Bang. That everything is a physical process caused by previous conditions, which were caused by previous conditions. This includes the physical matter that makes up human brains and the electrical impulses that run through them.

Determinism says your own rejection of determinism, and your actions "as if" you had free will, are the inevitable result of all the physical interactions that preceded your existence and your own development.

Sam Harris seems pretty invested in this idea.

[Kirby101]

Free Will is just too complex in terms of psychology and biology to say if it exists. Except to say he don't have total Free Will. But I initially reacted to the theological idea of Free Will as an excuse for a Good and Loving God. It is said that Free Will is the reason Evil exists. That God allows us to choose between Good and Evil. I say a loving God would not allow the Free Will of a few Germans to brutally murder 6 million Jews. Or the Free Will of a mass shooter to kill up to a hundred people. Has God decided the Free Will of those that do Evil acts is more important than the Free Will of the victims? Surely they did not choose to die in such a way.
If God is Good, why does he allow Evil acts on innocent people? I find the excuse for this God less than convince and Free Will is just a poor argument.

[Catlady in training]

Determinism argues that all events in the universe are the result of an ongoing chain reaction set in motion by the Big Bang. That everything is a physical process caused by previous conditions, which were caused by previous conditions. This includes the physical matter that makes up human brains and the electrical impulses that run through them.

Determinism says your own rejection of determinism, and your actions "as if" you had free will, are the inevitable result of all the physical interactions that preceded your existence and your own development.

Sam Harris seems pretty invested in this idea.

I understand that this is something that some people believe in, I just don't share that believe. In general, I try my best to not be bothered by what others believe in, no matter how illogical I personally find it. As long as their beliefs don't have negative effects on me and in this case, they sort of do. I have seen many people using arguments like this to justify why they don't bother voting or caring about any political issues. "Everyone will steal either way ...", "Even politicians that seem honest now will inevitably end up corrupt, it is how it works ...", "We have gotten on somehow, we will go on somehow, ...", etc. Yes, everyone is entitled to have that opinion and to vote/not vote, care/not care as they wish. But as long as people are open to discuss these topics, we can try to appeal to others to not be so defeatist.

Free Will is just too complex in terms of psychology and biology to say if it exists. Except to say he don't have total Free Will. But I initially reacted to the theological idea of Free Will as an excuse for a Good and Loving God. It is said that Free Will is the reason Evil exists. That God allows us to choose between Good and Evil. I say a loving God would not allow the Free Will of a few Germans to brutally murder 6 million Jews. Or the Free Will of a mass shooter to kill up to a hundred people. Has God decided the Free Will of those that do Evil acts is more important than the Free Will of the victims? Surely they did not choose to die in such a way.
If God is Good, why does he allow Evil acts on innocent people? I find the excuse for this God less than convince and Free Will is just a poor argument.

I agree that in that context, the argument doesn't make sense to me. (Then again, no offense to religious people, but most religious arguments make no sense to me anyway. And I don't expect them to, because usually they start at what conclusion they want to reach and twist the argument to fit that.)

[DrNewGod]

Does free will really exist?
We’re all subject to emotional reactions to outside events. Those emotions and how we act regarding them are determined through learned behavior based on feedback from similar experiences and genetic predilections inherited from our parents. On some occasions we have the presence of mind to halt those emotional knee-jerk behaviors and act with planning and forethought but I’d argue that even those instances are subject to a degree of emotional interference.

The evolution of AI is going to seriously complicate the argument.

[Tuck]

I have seen many people using arguments like this to justify why they don't bother voting or caring about any political issues. "Everyone will steal either way ...", "Even politicians that seem honest now will inevitably end up corrupt, it is how it works ...", "We have gotten on somehow, we will go on somehow, ...", etc. Yes, everyone is entitled to have that opinion and to vote/not vote, care/not care as they wish. But as long as people are open to discuss these topics, we can try to appeal to others to not be so defeatist.

That's really more fatalism. For many, determinism can make them more compassionate, ironically, since they don't assign the responsibility for people's bad circumstances to them.

Personally, I think the question of free will, while worthwhile, is unanswerable. But, with that, it is better to live as though it does exist.

[Catlady in training]

That's really more fatalism. For many, determinism can make them more compassionate, ironically, since they don't assign the responsibility for people's bad circumstances to them.

Personally, I think the question of free will, while worthwhile, is unanswerable. But, with that, it is better to live as though it does exist.

Fair enough, we may even end up with similar results, just getting there via different viewpoints.
I agree with the bolded. And at the risk of sounding corny, I'll use another quote, this time from Angel: "If nothing that we do matters, then all that matters is what we do."

[Jack Dracula]

The evolution of AI is going to seriously complicate the argument.

AI will seriously complicate a lot of arguments.

[achilles]

How do Godzilla and the other monsters constantly get buried under billions of tons of rock and dirt or ice in such a way as to look as if they'd been there for millions of year despite it only being something like last week when they were last seen?

[The Darknight Detective]

How do Godzilla and the other monsters constantly get buried under billions of tons of rock and dirt or ice in such a way as to look as if they'd been there for millions of year despite it only being something like last week when they were last seen?

They're always falling asleep in heavily-trafficked landfills?

[Jack Dracula]

What should be the end goal for humanity?