Author
|
Topic: free will
|
'topherscompy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2248
|
posted 22 November 2003 06:34 AM
this stems from my post in the thread philosophical question what is free will? how sure are we that this condition exists? perhaps it is more of an optimism than a surety - that the physical laws that govern the universe are less than deterministic, or even probabalistic when applied to the structures of humanity. but is that arrogance? are we really free to decide anything? i mean is the sub-quantum fluctuation that started the big bang and ended eternity, for at least the span of time anyway, and is the root cause of everything, of every electron's movement, of every supernova, is it possible that the firing of synapses in our brains, the electrical current that twitches our muscles, is already determined the moment the universe started expanding? the stars don't do random things. can we? i guess since we don't, and probably can't, know what happens below the planck scale we will never know if the universe is really as ordered as it appears, or if random truly exists. we think we can approximate random, but again, only to the extent governed by physical laws - which are not random. so maybe 'random' is as much arrogance as 'free will'. or maybe the fundamental orderedness of the universe is what itself bestows upon us free will. because we can, and do, understand the physical laws that govern the whole of everything, we can exploit the lack of randomness underlying existence, and act of our own free will, in effect creating randomness out of thin air, as it were. the notion of freedom - political, personal, etc. - depends on the existence of free will, and we take it for granted so often, yet at the same time we romanticize fatalism (ie look around hollywood, any religious organization you want) as if free will were some kind of burden to be thrown off our backs for the safety of knowing it's not our fault, it's part of some master plan. feel free to disagree, of course.
From: gone | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Bubbles
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3787
|
posted 22 November 2003 11:18 PM
"Free will" ??You are free as long as you have no will. If you have a will, then you are not free. That is the limit of your choise about 'free will'
From: somewhere | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jacob Two-Two
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2092
|
posted 23 November 2003 05:49 PM
The point is not that you don't make choices, it's wondering where the choices come from. Are you actually acting "freely", in the sense that even an omniscient observer (God, for lack of a better word) could not predict your actions, or are all your choices the result of dizzyingly complex conjunction of forces beyond your control, meaning that our god-guy could tell you exactly when you'll stop stitching and why? Regardless of your apparent certainty in this matter, the fact is you don't know. If a ball could think, it would no doubt believe that it is choosing how to bounce, yet we maintain that its behaviour is rigidly determined by physical laws that no one can alter. The only difference with us is that our behaviour is so ridiculously complex that nobody has ever created a model to explain it (or ever will, in my opinion). One thing I feel sure of (though, once again, I can't prove it): If there is real volition, it applies to all creation, not just to human beings. If we can choose, then on some unfathomable level, so can the ball.
From: There is but one Gord and Moolah is his profit | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|