Free Will

[Tempest]

I’ve been very philosophical lately and I’ve spent a great deal thinking about one of the most terrifying propositions for me to stomach: do we truly have free will?

Most people like to believe that they have free will. It’s far more comforting to think that way, and to be in control of your own life, then to be an agent in something or someone else’s game.

Society needs the concept of free will though. The entire justice system is reliant on it. Capitalism is reliant on it. Democracy is reliant on it. In these systems, you are free to choose. If we were deterministic, then why punish someone for murder? It wasn’t there doing. If we weren’t free willed, then how could we blaze our own path to achieve our goals? If we under the control of outside forces, then how could we vote for who we think is best?

Of course, if we are at something else’s will; we are deterministic and not free willed, then this entire discussions is moot. These institutions could be just a facade. In fact, our very existence is moot. It raises the stake of why are we here to new heights. If we are determined by outside forces, then what is our purpose?

During our entire lives, we constantly strive to find an identity and find a cause, and we waste time doing this. So if we are without free will, then why bother with this whole charade?

Science is at odds with the concept of free will: In science all things have a cause. In relativity, if you know the starting conditions, you could construct the entirety of the time line of the universe. All things have a cause, no?

Physcology also points to us being deterministic. We are slave to our biological processes and neurotransmitters. Peering into the brain reveals nothing but the flow of chemicals. Certain genes even dictate a more likely reaction from someone, and can influence the way we feel. Free will or not, you personality is at least partially inherited.

Now, switch gears with me here. We know very little about the human brain. It is quite likely the most complicated thing in the universe: there are over 100 trillion connections in a space no larger than two fists put together. However, perhaps the most enigmatic part of our existence is consciousness. What drives consciousness is a major mystery to neuroscience, and classically it seems at odds with science.

There is a theory called quantum mind that states that our consciousness derives from the inherent randomness of quantum mechanics. According to our current theories, the only random thing in the universe is quantum mechanics: whether or not a nucleus will decay, etc. This randomness means that science, which is meant to find a cause and source of everything -- it strives to be deterministic -- can never predict quantum mechanical interactions with a hundred percent accuracy.

If our consciousness is indeed based upon the randomness of the small, then perhaps it transcends the deterministic of the world around us, and affords us true free will, and allows us to act without cause.

There is famous experiment in quantum mechanics called the double slit experiment, where a particle acts as a wave, until an outside observer forces it to act as a particle and pick a slit to go through. It is this observation of a conscious individual that forces the wave to break down into a particle. In fact, in the grandest theories of the role of consciousness in quantum mechanics, it is consciousness that causes all waveforms to break down. In layman's terms, it is a conscious mind that causes matter to manifest itself from energy. It forces the universe to “pick” what it looks like.

If the conscious mind it that significant, then we have tremendous power. Perhaps we were destined to be created by the universe to influence it and change its structure. We’re unsure of what beings have conscious and unsure of what beings or entities can force a wave function collapse. But if we truly are the only things that can force matter to manifest itself, and it’s our conscious that makes us a step apart; it’s our self-awareness that allows us to dictate the universe. Does this mean we really have free will?

The universe may have just created us to break down the wave function. That may be our purpose, and we are deterministic at the will of the universe to change it. We will never know.

In the end, free will will always be debated. Every aspect can be argued. It can never be proven. It had been, and will continue to be debated for centuries.

I believe we do. The conscious mind, with it’s sheer might, borne from the randomness of quantum mechanics, affords us our free will and allows us to blaze our own path…. Or maybe it’s just more comforting to be independent and not to be a slave to others or even the physics and chemistry that drives the neurotransmitters in my brain.

Perhaps ignorance is just bliss. The less you think about it, the better off you are.

[Hexagoen]

Well I shall be quick and concise with this answer. Forgive if i might seem illogical.

If a society had true free will, would it still be considered a society? If there were such a thing as free will, we would have the freedom to whatever, whenever, at wherever. I guarantee If we suddenly have true free will, anarchy would be among us.

Rather than asking if we could have free will, ask: Should we have free will.

(I skimmed through this one so some point s of you post might not be covered. Happy psychological thinking everyone!)

[Ironbound]

I remember this sort of thing being initiated in the old Philly thread, but since that seems buried, lesnaught question it.

Free will is about as illusory as individuality itself, when we take a moment to contemplate our own rather insignificant place in the world. I like drawing parallels between us and insects, for in a way their microcosm is as relative to us as ours is to the universe at large. An ant, for instance, can be said to have no will at all, since it is a minion in a larger set, a cog in a larger machine. It works only for the mutual benefit of the colony and the queen, not for itself. Indeed, one can say that ants do not even have a concept of individuality, they cannot identify as 'I', only as 'we.'

Then again, even though they're the poster boys of Marxism, even the individual is guided by its own instincts: ants are too rudimentary to have intelligence, but they do have urges. The urge to eat or find food, the urge to avoid injury and defeat foes, the urge to mate, and so on. Of course, unlike ants, we humans are (usually) not subject to a hive mind which overrides our own impulses, and are intelligent enough to ponder outside the limits of our own ant-world.

It is true that we know little of the brain and even less of our own mind. It is perhaps here that philosophy can aid us. As far as I believe, the power of the human mind is the greatest natural power on the planet that we know of, and there is such a thing as 'picking' the outcome on the bases of our will. I'll not elaborate more here, since what I'm about to say had already been discussed in the original philosophy thread, but the concept of Shakti can provide a clue here.

Of course, ignorance is indeed bliss when it comes to philosophy, since an ant which does its job is placid and dies content. Some would indeed espouse such abstinence from mental intoxication, stating that it is not man's place to question workings beyond his control, as such worrying is fruitless, and they would be partially correct. However, curiosity is not a sin, and the closer we get to unlocking the secrets of our own mind, the closer we can get to evolution and enlightenment.

Coincidentally, today is my country's 70th Independence Day. Now, if we didn't have a notion of Free Will, what would we be doing? Still toiling under British enslavement?

[Tempest]

Well I shall be quick and concise with this answer. Forgive if i might seem illogical.

If a society had true free will, would it still be considered a society? If there were such a thing as free will, we would have the freedom to whatever, whenever, at wherever. I guarantee If we suddenly have true free will, anarchy would be among us.

Rather than asking if we could have free will, ask: Should we have free will.

(I skimmed through this one so some point s of you post might not be covered. Happy psychological thinking everyone!)

Society functions like we have free will currently, but there are a set of rules governing it, and they are rules you are free to break. The deterministic view of the world is that every thought and every action and every single thing you ever do is predestined and not controlled by you. You cannot decide what you do, what you feel, what you are. There is no concept of you controlling anything even.

[Ironbound]

Indeed. I could copy+paste my postulations from the philosophy thread here, but that's basically the conundrum that the Shakti concept seens to answer or at least attempt to answer.

[Bluewolf]

Should and shouldn't are black and white terms.

If things fall to chaos, they do. If they are orderly, they are. What ever happens is simply a possible product of free will and not something any one person has a say in either way.

Should/n't implies that there is a way something should happen, and what should happen always depends on who you ask. Therefore there is no one answer to that, and no use in asking it.

[Shamitako]

Well, I'm gonna use a scrubby non-scientific copout: I believe that God exists and sets the rules of the universe, and one of the rules he hasn't set is what decisions we make

Although you raise an interesting point about consciousness forcing matter to manifest. I actually hold a belief when it comes to the concept of time that it can actually be manipulated by human perception. It's kind of tough to explain why I think this way or exactly how this works, and I'm tired so I'm not even going to try. But I always find the idea of humans having power over spacetime in some degree to be a very interesting one

[Kyoyoyoyoyoyoyo]

Well, I'm gonna use a scrubby non-scientific copout: I believe that God exists and sets the rules of the universe, and one of the rules he hasn't set is what decisions we make

This pretty much. The way I think about it is if we didn't have free will, there'd be almost no difference between us and angels.

[Cyanna Cyril]

A perspective that I hold on free will is that the life you are currently living is not necessarily the first time through the life. There is an idea that in the brief moment before death, you mind will replay your entire life before your eyes. If this were actually to be true (and I'm not sure it applies to all forms of death), then the perspective of the replay may be as if you're making all the decisions of your life again. So, this raises the question of are we choosing to do things because we feel the need to do so, or is it because we've already done so and are forced to choose the same path again?

[Felicity]

i mean, history is just one damn thing after another. The future is one damn thing that will happen after another. Technically there is one certain future so long as there is a future because of those things. We just don't know what it is yet. Because we don't know we have to make our own choices. It is then those choices and actions, or lack of, that make the future. Ya dig?

[Noir]

i mean, history is just one damn thing after another. The future is one damn thing that will happen after another. Technically there is one certain future so long as there is a future because of those things. We just don't know what it is yet. Because we don't know we have to make our own choices. It is then those choices and actions, or lack of, that make the future.

We don't know what's going to happen, but we know that nothing will change if we don't do something different. It's simple; those who fail to remember the past are condemned to repeat it.

To stick on topic, I personally believe that we are not bound by what decisions we make; simply the fact that every decision we make has an impact or result, and whether or not that result is desirable to oneself will reflect in the future. We are ultimately the sole influence of our own lives and actions.

Edited August 15, 2016 by YagamiNoir4896

[Kamina]

I, too, believe that everything in the world is already predetermined. That being said, humans have the perception of free will and perception is reality for us. We do not know our future and we never will with one hundred percent certainty.

[NickCrash]

Causality increases the possibility of future events, yet the events themselves are still controlled by humans, which means that the randomness in our brains can and will manifest in the real world, creating unforeseen scenarios. Nothing can be predetermined, because there is nothing to determine it.

Social constructs and rules do not oppress your free will. They regulate the actions you are allowed to make in order not to oppress someone else's free will. Where I come from we have a saying: "Your freedom stops when another's begins". If what you wish is anarchy and social chaos, you cannot base your views on the concept of free-will and its liberation, because it's humans that set those rules you follow. So the question appears "From whom?". We need to properly work together, as a pack, because of our urges and our innate ability to understand that this is the most effective way to survive.

Society provides for its members, and they work to sustain it. As education increases in quality and more opportunities become accessible for more people, human rights will be better protected, intellectual capabilities will improve, and you will protect parts of the planet you've leeched on for centuries in order to survive. If a divine power were to manipulate your moves or the society's moves because your individuality is nonconsequential or among the randomness of individual particles that's inconvenient to constantly monitor, they would have taken a politically correct position and reset the whole situation you are in, with better rules and terms, so you can live your life more happily.

If you respect your fellow human beings, there isn't much you can't do. You are born, raised, educated so your general knowledge of the world is sufficient for you t choose an academic direction of your pleasing, you decide to study or occupate yourself with something more technical or agrarian, attend to social events, have hobbies, travel the world and visit different places, interact with billions of unique NPCs (either of your species or others), and make friends, family and descendants. Your lifespan is not infinite, but as the world progresses forward towards a more ideal state, it will be filled with more amazing stuff to do and appreciate.

While we're not at that stage yet, your free will is what makes you decide what to become, what your character will be, whom to befriend and marry, how to educate your child and what kinds of experiences you will get. We've long transcended from the simple colony mentality thousands of years ago, and the social problems of this world exist and are noticed just because we have free will and the ability to judge something as good or bad, despite the fact that it may or may not be natural in terms of how the law of the jungle may dictate, because we're above such laws. Your ego alone attests to your individuality, aka your free will.

We may prefer to ignore the uniqueness of our actions, because it's easier to deflect blame, or we are inexperienced to discern which events and decisions are simply affected by our environment and the choices of the others around us, yet it's still our own choices that define us. The brain is being regulated as you age, and every single sensory information adds to its function and anatomy. The events of our life, if seen as a linear path to our current state, only have a secondary assistant role, not a primary. Therefore people with similar backgrounds and sensory input do not end up the same, and this is also seen with twins, the most prominent example of this case. So if causality is not enough to determine you, then nothing is. Your free will is safe.

[Chase]

To start - I believe that humans are not the greatest possible being in the universe (and I also believe in God) - which would mean I am in the camp that believes humanity doesn't have the capability to directly shape the universe.

This doesn't mean that humanity is without free will.

---

Luis de Molina crafted a concept referred to as "Molinism" after himself, but also sometimes referred to as "middle knowledge."

In the event that God exists, many people believe that by default eliminates the ability of humans to hold free will because God has "predestined" all aspects of the universe. Molina brought about this doctrine to answer such people (referred to as Calvinists or Reformers in church circles) and the popular idea of "theological fatalism" (essentially, God decides who rises and who burns.)

The concept goes as follows:

God's knowledge consists of three logical "moments" that are not chronological and may or may not be dependent on God's will.

1. Natural Knowledge - Essentially, this knowledge is of all necessary and possible truths of the universe. God, being presumably all-knowing, thus knows every possible and needed truth. This knowledge is independent of God's will (because there is no feasible reason for God to act on making truth false.)
2. Middle Knowledge - This is knowledge of what a creation of God's may do in any given circumstance. This is the part where God knows every possible thing man could do, but through the lens of "possibilities" or "branches of fate". The man is able to choose any of the possible branches freely, but may not create his own branch because God knows every possible choose and outcome to be made. Essentially, Man can't do the impossible, but absolutely can do anything possible - and God knows all possible choices. Since this is dealing with what Man "may" do, it's independent of God's will as well.
3. Free Knowledge - This is knowledge of everything that God has made, or essentially, "what is". God, as the creator, would have a dependence on His will here, as he is the one who is responsible for building and structure of the universe.

If this idea of free will holds up, it establishes two points:

• Man DOES have free will, because anything man may do is independent of God's will and man does have say in what he does without being coerced.
• God is still sovereign, because supreme power (in the example being able to create) falls squarely on God despite man's ability to choose for himself.

This draws criticism from Reformers (or Calvinists) -AND- the opposing camp (known as Arminians.)

Calvinists will argue that Molinism cracks God's ability to be truly sovereign because man has the freedom of choosing multiple paths and thus God's will for that individual is not predetermined. Arminians will argue that Molinists claiming that God is sovereign undermines the idea of "free will."

It's important to know this when thinking about this from a logical perspective.

• Even if God is involved, nonsense is still nonsense - if there is no feasible reason for God to do something, chances are He wouldn't need to do it.

---

Hopefully, I stayed on topic. The title of the thread is "free will." - and if it helps, it may be better to understand the Molinists' idea of free will as "personal free choice" - as it pertains to all "possible" outcomes which God already knows about.

[PokeFailure]

Philosophy majors are the reason I don't wanna be able to read minds.

Free will is real and it isn't, it's your choice whether you believe your life is the way it is, by your choices/actions or not. .

I could rant for several paragraphs but eh. We'll never know the answer.

[Eviora]

The whole question is a red herring. If we don't have free will, then the murderer is not at fault for what he does... but the ones who punish him can't help doing that, either. Ironically,disbelief in free will would grant you the perception of ultimate moral freedom. Do whatever you want and it's not really your fault.

However, that answer isn't going to be very satisfying to people since they are frequently faced with choices that seem very important to them. And most of us are concerned about what the consequences of our actions will be. Therefore, just to function on a daily basis, we assume that we have free will. The assumption is necessary to give meaning to anything in our lives, and humans desperately seek purpose.

So my ultimate answer is that you should just behave as though you have free will, and if you're wrong... well, there was nothing you could do about it. =p