Does free will exist?

[honestdiscussioner]

Absolutely not. Here are my reasons:

 

[BiscuitTrouser]

Please read my extra posts. I actually study chemistry computer science, biology and maths for A level. So far im going quad A on my grades. Im not an idiot. I understand what im talking about, i know nothing magic happens, thats my point. Surely if it is not randomised at all it is predictable no? I also understand the pseudo random numbers computers generate are actually made from a seed and a complex algorithm, ive written a few in python actually. I understand the process behind conduction in nerves both mylinated and not, and i understand how the ion gradiant makes message transfer predictable and physics based. Thus determinalism.

Message transfer, not message content.

So why are you here?

In this thread? To show that unless you want to deny contempery physics determinalism must be true. The choice is simple. Its difficult but i think that more understand couldnt hurt anyone. I think of it like this. I came to the realisation i have no free will. Did anything change? No. It was the exact same as when i thought i did plus one extra thought. I might as well go on living as if i do have free will for all the difference it makes. The points faily moot to be honest. Its not really worth worrying about, i just enjoy scientific discussion.

Sounds more like nihilism or fatalism to me. Nothing you do matters, blah blah blah. You can say to me "But science says so!" and I can say to you, without a doubt in my mind, that science has been and will be proven wrong. Every time. What we believed about science 100 years ago isn't the same as it is now, and 100 years from now things will be different. Because we as beings never will understand the truth of existence, no matter how many machines we create to "see" things we couldn't before, no matter how many times you "prove" it with math.
Do I believe science is all hocus pocus bullcrap? No. I know it serves a purpose and all, but people who believe science is 100% correct are just as bad as the scientists predating them who thought they were right too. Our species collective knowledge of the real universe is a drop in the friggin ocean. We know little, understand little but pride ourselves on "getting it all". Overinflated gas bag egos.
You say "but I go to college for this, I know it all". No, you know what they tell you. So of course you have no free will, you accept what you are told like a good sheep. Baa baa baa.

Ah but you miss the true beauty of science. Testing! I can use my physics to determine how fast an object will fall, and then i can test it! I have dont this. My predictions were right in a random experiement. So it shows the science is correct! If i can test and test and get the same results of course the science is right, you cant prove that my calculations were not 19 seconds or the ball didnt take 19 seconds to hit the ground. I have studied cells, i have span them in a centrifuge, i have added the enzymes i have recorded the results, i accept what i see like a perfect scientist! I have tested and questioned and denied everything i was told until i was shown it. I asked the tricky questions, i got the answers even if it meant forcing my teacher to take out the labs locusts and show me actual biology happening in front of me.

If you think teaching, our most valuable skill, is just training sheep i weep for you.
For you are more nihilistic than me. I love life. Of course it matters, does it matter that we dont have free will, not at all. Might be hard to get your head around, but its my view, so who cares?

If you believe being taught makes you a sheep, you are either the worlds greatest researcher or horrible ignorant. Either way you have to believe somethings you are told because they are observably true. The earth DOES go around the sun. Yes we are wrong at times, often, but at some points we get a few more things right, eternally correct. Rinse repeat and we iron out the flaws and find the truth.

 

[oktalist]

Free will and the illusion of free will are indistinguishable from each other. They are functionally equivalent. Yes and no are both correct answers to this question.

Alternatively, due to the many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics (which is likewise functionally eqiuvalent to any other interpretation), for every choice you make, there is another "you" who makes the opposite choice, and it's just chance which "you" you are. Generally not a simple 50/50 chance, but chance nonetheless.

 

[kazeryu]

Of course there is something as free will. There's nothing that pushed my mouse towrds or away from this poll exept my very own hand

 

[Use_Imagination_here]

I find it difficult to understand why this is even a question. Free will is the ability to choose. If it's anything other than that it doesn't exist but it isn't.

What's your take on this? Do we have free will at all or just the illusion of choice?

Nope. There's no such thing as free will. Everything, every of our choices if determined by our configuration and surroundings.

I don't see how that negates free will. I answered this because I chose to. I chose to because I'm human. I don't see how step number two negates step number one.

 

[The-Epicly-Named-Man]

It's fairly apparent that everyone's on a different page here. It'd be nice if the OP was a little more descriptive in what he means by free will. I assumed it was a scientific question, while others clearly thought it was a philosophical one. Until this is cleared up, this thread's worth very little.

 

[Imperioratorex Caprae]

*snip*

No, I think that accepting what you're taught as gospel truth is just as bad as the person who believes 100% in Christianity. Your view is narrow. The underlying fact (and only fact I'm ever concerned with) about science is that for every 1 answer, 30 more questions pop up. Nothing gets solved, and we end up with a new set of mysteries for every one we figure out. And even then a good chunk of those solutions are disproven later on, thus making science an inexact thing.
At any given point what we know changes. So given the fact that we're not even living in a whole percent of the known galaxy, and we have no clue what really is in that galaxy, we know little about where we live, how it works and what governs it.
Science, while useful, doesn't have answers for everything, including "why..."

 

[ckam]

Our DNA and Spiral Energy controls us to do things such as answering questions like this or evolving past the minute that we were before. Is that such a bad thing?

 

[LilithSlave]

Well, that depends on your definition of "free will".

By the standard definition, no, that would be completely impossible and utterly illogical. We are a part of a sequence of events like everything else in the universe. Humans are not special. And human minds are not exempt from the laws of the universe. The human is a physical piece of matter, including the brain. And you do not have a consciousness without the brain. So considering that the brain is a physical part of the universe, no, you do not have free will.

You have a will, but it is not free of the laws of physics. You are a product.

 

[Blind Sight]

I find it difficult to understand why this is even a question. Free will is the ability to choose. If it's anything other than that it doesn't exist but it isn't.

What's your take on this? Do we have free will at all or just the illusion of choice?

Nope. There's no such thing as free will. Everything, every of our choices if determined by our configuration and surroundings.

I don't see how that negates free will. I answered this because I chose to. I chose to because I'm human. I don't see how step number two negates step number one.

The basic argument for that is because configuration and surroundings affect our decision, our choice is somewhat predictable and thus does not equal free will. In short, because reality has finite rules there is no notion of free will due to their influence. I argue the opposite above, that reality lays a basic foundation of knowledge and experience which allows us to make choices based on these influences (i.e. they contextualize our choices, if you're feeling dramatic, they give them 'meaning'), but they are still inherently choices.

Big problem in this thread is that most are arguing for completely different notions of free will, I wish the OP had been more specific.

 

[Chefodeath]

Short answer: No

Long answer: Maybe kind of by the technicality of randomness in quantum physics, but all that means is that the forces which drive us are random instead of orderly.

 

[oktalist]

I have tested and questioned and denied everything i was told until i was shown it. I asked the tricky questions, i got the answers even if it meant forcing my teacher to take out the labs locusts and show me actual biology happening in front of me.

I am amused at the thought of a science teacher who, when presented with a particularly stubborn pupil, simply releases a swarm of locusts into the class.

"Where's your precious science now?! Muahahaha!"

"Ahhhrrrrrggghhhhh they're eating my eyes!"

 

[Use_Imagination_here]

I find it difficult to understand why this is even a question. Free will is the ability to choose. If it's anything other than that it doesn't exist but it isn't.

What's your take on this? Do we have free will at all or just the illusion of choice?

Nope. There's no such thing as free will. Everything, every of our choices if determined by our configuration and surroundings.

I don't see how that negates free will. I answered this because I chose to. I chose to because I'm human. I don't see how step number two negates step number one.

The basic argument for that is because configuration and surroundings affect our decision, our choice is somewhat predictable and thus does not equal free will. In short, because reality has finite rules there is no notion of free will due to their influence. I argue the opposite above, that reality lays a basic foundation of knowledge and experience which allows us to make choices based on these influences (i.e. they contextualize our choices, if you're feeling dramatic, they give them 'meaning'), but they are still inherently choices.

Big problem in this thread is that most are arguing for completely different notions of free will, I wish the OP had been more specific.

Hey look, someone agrees with me on something philosophical! That's new. Imagine what a cookie tastes like.

 

[BiscuitTrouser]

*snip*

No, I think that accepting what you're taught as gospel truth is just as bad as the person who believes 100% in Christianity. Your view is narrow. The underlying fact (and only fact I'm ever concerned with) about science is that for every 1 answer, 30 more questions pop up. Nothing gets solved, and we end up with a new set of mysteries for every one we figure out. And even then a good chunk of those solutions are disproven later on, thus making science an inexact thing.
At any given point what we know changes. So given the fact that we're not even living in a whole percent of the known galaxy, and we have no clue what really is in that galaxy, we know little about where we live, how it works and what governs it.
Science, while useful, doesn't have answers for everything, including "why..."

Who is doing that? Im not, i question a lot of things, i questioned the science behind the "faster than light" neutrino, and i was right, that test was faulty. Thats the BEST thing about science. Theres always more to answer! My view is the widest i would say, i accept we know nothing, and endevour twice as hard to find out, even if my fumbling attempts are wrong it will one day push a scientist to correct me and better our knowlegde. That isnt the ONLY fact you are concerned about. Science cures disease and has tripled your lifespan, so be gorram greatfull we have such "sheep trainers" if the doctors DIDNT accept teachings as gospel truth in modern institutions we might have leeches still. Its done a million things for us, and the implication we are always wrong is just false. The steps forward in medicine are obvious and usefull, facts you care about since i can assume you care about not having smallpox.

Aye it does not. Perhaps one day it will in the far far far future. We can only dream eh?

 

[The Rogue Wolf]

I'm constantly amused by the people who say "I could build a computer that could predict your every move, thought and impulse". That would require building a computer that could accurately track and predict the precise movement of every last quantum particle in the universe from the moment of the Big Bang until now. Good luck with that, kid.

The question of free will is pointless. Even if I was predestined to find this thread and reply to it, it's still a surprise to me- like watching a movie for the first time. And the people who cling to predetermination as a justification for nihilism always seem to lose sight of the big picture (i.e. everything beyond themselves).

"You can't punish me for shooting those people! It's not my fault- I was predestined to do it from the moment the universe began!"
"Then I guess I was predestined to lock your ass up in prison for a hundred years afterwards. Don't get mad, it's not my fault."

 

[BiscuitTrouser]

I have tested and questioned and denied everything i was told until i was shown it. I asked the tricky questions, i got the answers even if it meant forcing my teacher to take out the labs locusts and show me actual biology happening in front of me.

I am amused at the thought of a science teacher who, when presented with a particularly stubborn pupil, simply releases a swarm of locusts into the class.

"Where's your precious science now?! Muahahaha!"

"Ahhhrrrrrggghhhhh they're eating my eyes!"

Hilariously a few did escape. He needs them to feed his pet iguana though so we had to gather them again. God those buggers can jump. Was a fun conversation.

"BUT HOW DO WE KNOW!"
"Right thats it, im getting the locusts"

Actual conversation. Made me chuckle.

 

[Hawgh]

Well, that all depends on whether the universe is deterministic or not.

 

[Spectral Dragon]

Snipetisnip.

Your example is flawed. You can choose to not eat if you want to, it's not as though your body suddenly takes control and you're no longer in control.

Similarily, I find it odd that you attribute cravings to your body and not your own person (and learned experience). And even if you crave a certain food, you're not required to eat that food either.

That's true, but free will would mean there are no specific things affecting your choices. It's not free will if you want something but can't have it, for example. We crave things, but what makes us choose not to act upon that instinct? Is it still a completely free choice, or have we been affected?

Does it matter, since there still has to be logical steps? You learn something and can act from that knowledge, but without that, you're limited and therefore have at best possibility of choice. WHY do we act?

If you didn't know there was a certain type of food, that you wanted to eat, you wouldn't be able to choose that, therefore lacking completely free will. We can act against our body, but most lack the willpower, which isn't a choice either.

 

[cdstephens]

Physics and chemistry say no. Our decisions are the results of biochemical reactions throughout our entire body, which are deterministic as the processes are not small enough for scientists to account for quantum effects, as things are only probabilistic on the atomic scale. If you go higher than that then things are deterministic as the probabilities for strange occurrences go to zero.

 

[Pinkamena]

Nope, I don't think true free will exist (physics and chemistry and all that. Everything is following rules that cannot be broken), rather the illusion of free will.