Edward

Then Ivy, perhaps your definition of free will is a little over broad or at least insufficient to properly differentiate free will from say: a fish going one way instead of going another way?

Haahahaha. That is such a brilliant image Reg!

By the way that quote is also dubiously attributed to Einstein. It seems nobody can source that quote and the best one can do is a quote a friend of his made after his death which was worded quite differently. Feynman said something rather similar but at the same time he also said:

“If I could explain it to the average person, I wouldn’t have been…

[Read more]

If you understand something, you should be able to explain it to a person with average intelligence.

I am not going to have an exchange explaining dozens of concepts over 50 posts. Do your own bloody homework. Stop being so god damn intellectually lazy and pick up a fucking book and read. You cannot hide behind that misapplied quote as an excuse…[Read more]

Its ideas have to be viewed in ones own mind and challenged there too in order to be understood. It is worth investing the time in doing so.

Indeed. Let’s reread Freedom Evolves over the holidays or say, some time in the next three months. It’s been some years and it’s certainly an extremely dense work. For anyone complaining that it may be too…[Read more]

Neither of them can be reduced to a simply conversation in a discussion group. I’d recommend investing some time in reading either of these books:

“Freedom Evolves” by Daniel Dennet

“I am a strange loop” by Douglas Hofstadter

No unseen, clearly you haven’t been properly educating yourself on the topic because you are ignorant of theories which are taken seriously by neurosciences and philosophers. They are not fringe theories. Your fear of picking up a book and reading it keeps you from educating yourself on it. It baffles me why you are fearful of this but there must…[Read more]

Unseen I have reached my limit of patience with you mischaracterising me as a free will believer. I cannot count the amount of times I have specifically and clearly stated that I do not claim that free will exists. If you continue to do that I will permanently cease all further discussions with you about free will. Please stop it.

Instead of…[Read more]

I’vy that definition is so broad that even cats have free will. Do you think cats have free will?

I never said quantum effects explain free will. I like how you keep trying to frame my position as though I stand by free will existing or not. I don’t. You…actually…are the only person who has taken a hard position on the topic. And the sum of your argument is: I just don’t see how it’s possible (that and a propensity for visiting sites and…[Read more]

I guess I just laugh because I think y’all are way over complicating this LOL…

So what’s your definition of free will Ivy?

What are you talking about unseen. If it cannot even be predicted when a radioactive element will decay then how could you possible predict a coin toss 1000 years in the future even if you know the current state of every particle?

A youtube video yet again. And with Tyson discussing something outside of his field of expertise. Great.

Yeah Pope there have been quite a few that are worthwhile. The only one I think that is reducible to something easily discussed without delving rather deeply into it is:

free will infers conditions in which an agent is morally responsible for their decisions

I still have not seen a satisfactory definition of free will

Yeah but you have to actually read works on free will (beyond something of encyclopedic, youtube or magazine article nature to get to a working definition). Plenty of philosophers have given more than reasonable definitions.

In any event there is no evidence for “thoughts” without matter and energy so our will…will always be bounded.

Indeed this is quite similar to what Reg is saying. We are bound by the choices available and the structures that allow certain choices and only those choices (whether we actually get a say in that choice or not). Our choice is bound…[Read more]

Daniel Dennet has argued over the methodology of the experiment, especially over the methods use to determine when an agent is aware of a decision which was based on several assumptions

Raymond Tallis (a neuro surgeon) with the overly broad application of the results of the experiment (reducing a decision down to one single moment with one…[Read more]

That is a grossly broad interpretation of a set of experiments which have been highly critiqued by neuroscientists.

Unseen is right (though only with the added caveat of MAY) in that there may never be a solution and perhaps correct in that the solution is free will simply IS an illusion…they are both possibilities. Simon is correct in that the solution may come by finding the right conceptual framework. As Raymond Tallis (a noted neuroscience and…[Read more]