Free Will vs Determinism in Humans: what's your view?

Originally posted by FinalAccount2008
...
When I walk into an airport, I observe each individual at once from a distance to see what direction they are all looking, and how it relates to whatever It is I'm at the airport for. Family, career, leisure travel of a rich family...Asian person, angry person, person scared of having their luggage stolen...To me personally, the holy spirit is the driving mechanism that forces most of us to see each other as one big human family, rather than vigilantes that write the law as they go and do whatever they want, feeling no attachment to random "strangers".

The rebellious spirit inside me used to seek thrills, doing whatever I could to convince myself I was different and special and unique and somehow more important than everybody else and their stupid families. That led to a pretty terrible version of me that looked like a monster in a mirror, and now when I look through people's windows (eyes and body language are windows to me, as they are the free open part of people that enjoys to be seen, not talking house windows) I look for the part of them that is joyous. I believe in hell as a construct of the human imagination, and pessimism is one way to start believing in it until you are there.

edit on 25-2-2012 by FinalAccount2008 because: To fix the window part which looked funny without the parenthesis

Thanks. I don't what to get the thread off-topic, but those are interesting ideas.

Originally posted by cloudyday

Originally posted by FinalAccount2008
...
When I walk into an airport, I observe each individual at once from a distance to see what direction they are all looking, and how it relates to whatever It is I'm at the airport for. Family, career, leisure travel of a rich family...Asian person, angry person, person scared of having their luggage stolen...To me personally, the holy spirit is the driving mechanism that forces most of us to see each other as one big human family, rather than vigilantes that write the law as they go and do whatever they want, feeling no attachment to random "strangers".

The rebellious spirit inside me used to seek thrills, doing whatever I could to convince myself I was different and special and unique and somehow more important than everybody else and their stupid families. That led to a pretty terrible version of me that looked like a monster in a mirror, and now when I look through people's windows (eyes and body language are windows to me, as they are the free open part of people that enjoys to be seen, not talking house windows) I look for the part of them that is joyous. I believe in hell as a construct of the human imagination, and pessimism is one way to start believing in it until you are there.

edit on 25-2-2012 by FinalAccount2008 because: To fix the window part which looked funny without the parenthesis

Thanks. I don't what to get the thread off-topic, but those are interesting ideas.

In your personal expansion of epistemology, do you believe in a balance of free will and hard determinist fate? What's interesting to me is the big picture of how each of Plato's "forms" fit into the larger picture of contributions we make subjectively into the cosmos. Like the influence each person has on their onlookers, when they see us behaving in certain ways. Tobacco in public, hard drugs in private, bragging of our exploits and kung fu tomfoolery. It's just crazy when you really think about it, ya know?

I don't wanna get the thread off-topic either, just interested in the ideas of free will and determinism. So interested that I once took an online class at UniversalClass called Metaphysics 101, alongside kinseics: body language 101. The real education I'm about to get in an accredited college institution (community college for the first two years) Will probably be incredibly difficult, but I'm glad that my previous papers on quantum metaphysics and body language were all derived from things I had to go observe in the real world before I transcribed or whatever. I can read body language pretty well too, all the little tics people have.

But yeah that holy spirit ish I was saying was kinda irrelevant to this convo I guess. Especially since my beliefs may not reflect yours and yours may not reject mine. So what part of our will is free? I know we can do whatever we want, and I know there are consequences, but it just seems like my grandchildren would have blood on their hands too, If I was in a war for oil. So I haven't enlisted. But I try not to think think that way about those who did join, and believed they were doing the best they could in the most extreme scenarios for all of humanity. It probably made sense to them. Ya know?

The physics of the material locale are parameters that while they can be influenced...on the whole, they operate according to thier own set of 'rules'.
The 'physics' of the material body are, more or less, beholden to these 'rules'...and therefore, for instance, not everyone can bend thier body into three...
If this is ever used to illustrate the doubt over FREE WILL (or anything similar...like flying) one has not understood the dual nature of our esse.

A metal bar has no 'choice' to bend in two, to mutate to a liquid...its material parameter is essentially 'predetermined'...which is why it can be moulded by humans...because its properties and rules and parameters are known...
The same cannot be said about humans...indeed the OP's question is not just a philosophical one.

Wherever there is 'choice', there is FREE WILL...otherwise neither exist...and the ramifications of this notion are insane, in the extreme.

Humans have memory, or more to the point, have the capacity to forget choices made. Once a choice is forgotten, it is a simple assumption to make that 'fault' does not lie with you. It is an assumption based on lack of memory which leads us to believe or speculate that choice does not exist, and therefore that 'predeterminism' is the order of the day.

Negating choice and embracing the notion that 'I had to do it', or, 'Someone/something else made me do it' is a common phrase used by certain individuals in courts of law to absolve themselves of hideous crimes they were...'involved' in...it is a psychological trick one plays on oneself to remove oneself from the need to claim RESPONSIBILITY. It belongs in child psychology...

On a larger scale (more grown up) we can debate the 'determinism/FREE WILL'...till the cows come home...
...other posters have pipped me, asking, who 'forced-compelled-determined' anyone to come up/answer/debate anything?

Reduced to its simplest question (and I'm not a reductionist, by nature)...
Who...is reading, questioning, answering, debating the OP's question? Who...are you?

...and for those who will continue to argue the...'we are a bunch of chemical reactions' tripe...
...do chemical reactions...'think'?...are chemical reactions able to wonder what they are?

Akushla

Free will and diffusion of responsibility are two things I often find at a crossroads with each other. Why can't I seem to astral project? Why Do I love flying on the airplane so much? Why do a airplanes have to end up on the t yroad?

All legitimate questions asked by legitimate people on legitimate stages throughout the movie of life.

reply to post by akushla99


the problem in ur perspective is what u keep meaning anything in terms of object existence and refuse to deal with things in terms of values abstractions, existence is to what is definitive value in all ways and realities absolutely
and that is why even when u mean free will u r becoming absurd, as if free will could b a thought of choice in physical terms
free will by definition is the will to be enjoy being positive only u regardless what is before u or in front of u so without any obligations to existence facts, as if it is managed totally right so awareness in physical existence could keep enjoying being in positive environement without having to realize anything

while it could invent things that has nothing to do with what is there, when it is about inventions it stays in freedom dimension as objectively nothing but freedom reality

the opposite term to freedom is conditions not determination

that is how what i said in earlier post is right, determinism is free, what u choose objectively is freely related to others shares of same choice as well as the opportunities of that choice

but the problem is what noone intellectually seem to mean free will, but keep meaning to get smthg and never the sense of being free out of everything as positive thing in its facts

reply to post by FinalAccount2008


enjoying things life is not to freedom, any animal enjoy even more some stuffs existence experienced

Originally posted by FinalAccount2008
...
In your personal expansion of epistemology, do you believe in a balance of free will and hard determinist fate? What's interesting to me is the big picture of how each of Plato's "forms" fit into the larger picture of contributions we make subjectively into the cosmos. Like the influence each person has on their onlookers, when they see us behaving in certain ways. Tobacco in public, hard drugs in private, bragging of our exploits and kung fu tomfoolery. It's just crazy when you really think about it, ya know?

Unfortunately philosophy isn't an area that I know much about. So I'll try to answer your questions even though I don't have the background to understand them entirely.

Uncertainty and randomness are fundamental to quantum mechanics. What does random really mean? It means we can't predict any particular outcome but we do expect a series of outcomes to conform to a probability distribution. Everything in the universe is made of particles and this randomness is everywhere.

So hard determinism is not scientific. It's based on the 1800s clockwork universe which we now know is only an approximation.

Our brains are made of particles with randomness from quantum mechanics. If I choose chocolate ice cream instead of vanilla ice cream, it was probably caused by a probability wave collapsing somewhere in my brain. That is free will.

Defined in this way everything has free will. A collection of humans such as ATS has a consciousness that exercises some free will. An ant has some free will. A dice rolling in Las Vegas might even have free will.

This brings up the issue of karma. If I go to Las Vegas and guess the right number at roulette over and over again it would be necessary for me to guess wrong later to bring the probability distribution back to normal. That seems a little like karma.

Some psychiatrists have shown that a belief in free will is important to social responsibility. I believe humans are machines with randomness built into them. However free will comes from outside this universe. If I exercise free will then I must be outside this universe such as a spirit or God.

You seem to know more of the technical aspects than I do. My feeling is that we somewhat have free will and there is something steering along a path that has only one direction. If we stray from the path we are jerked back into it and it sometimes hurts. That's about all I got for you right now, something is steering me to the can. I think it's the Chili that's controling me right now.

Originally posted by absolutely
reply to post by akushla99

 

the problem in ur perspective is what u keep meaning anything in terms of object existence and refuse to deal with things in terms of values abstractions, existence is to what is definitive value in all ways and realities absolutely
and that is why even when u mean free will u r becoming absurd, as if free will could b a thought of choice in physical terms
free will by definition is the will to be enjoy being positive only u regardless what is before u or in front of u so without any obligations to existence facts, as if it is managed totally right so awareness in physical existence could keep enjoying being in positive environement without having to realize anything

while it could invent things that has nothing to do with what is there, when it is about inventions it stays in freedom dimension as objectively nothing but freedom reality

the opposite term to freedom is conditions not determination

that is how what i said in earlier post is right, determinism is free, what u choose objectively is freely related to others shares of same choice as well as the opportunities of that choice

but the problem is what noone intellectually seem to mean free will, but keep meaning to get smthg and never the sense of being free out of everything as positive thing in its facts

There is no problem in what I am saying...
The core of what I maintain, which is demonstrable in every case, is that, FREE WILL...the freedom to think, feel and do whatever you like (which as I understand it, is what you are saying)...comes with the 'condition' of RESPONSIBILITY....
In maintaing a, non-FREE WILL, deterministic view...you absolutely NEGATE responsibility for those thoughts, feelings and actions...which is how a 'defence' of impaired responsibility comes about...and if you maintain this stance...the question MUST be asked...who is responsible for those thoughts, feelings and actions?

If you maintain that you are not...then, who is?

Accidental consequences aside, at some point, the notion of personal RESPONSIBILITY comes into play, on an individual level, and on a group level.

I have been skirting around the, 'spiritual' aspect of these notions, for a reason...and my maintained stance still makes sense in that domain.

Absolutely...as much as I understand what you write, I feel we are more in agreement, than not. The vagaries of short, opinionated replies on a random forum board are completely inadequate to the cause...aver this...

Akushla

Originally posted by FinalAccount2008
Free will and diffusion of responsibility are two things I often find at a crossroads with each other. Why can't I seem to astral project? Why Do I love flying on the airplane so much? Why do a airplanes have to end up on the t yroad?

All legitimate questions asked by legitimate people on legitimate stages throughout the movie of life.

Indeed...why can't you play the violin? Why can't you race a formula one, racing car? Why can't you be the person that you want?

Practice, practice, practice...
The notion of practice requires you to...OF YOUR OWN VOLITION (WILL), take the steps towards it happening.
'Stuff', just doesn't happen! (with regards the effect people have on people), a decision/choice is made, which sets in motion (unless that motion is amended/modified/changed) the commensurate effects of that/those choices/decisions...

Follow this argument...
If you are of the opinion that you have no control over what happens to you...what happens to you comes from outside of yourself...you are neither (according to this line of thinking) responsible for what you think/say/do...and cannot therefore be held responsible...if you maintain this line, 'all bets [should] be OFF'...no-one is RESPONSIBLE for the way they think, feel or act...which, in turn, means that the predicament you are in is NOT of your making, in any way, shape or form...

If you reverse the above notion...it answers your direct questions.

Akushla

reply to post by cloudyday


"Our brains are made of particles with randomness from quantum mechanics. If I choose chocolate ice cream instead of vanilla ice cream, it was probably caused by a probability wave collapsing somewhere in my brain. That is free will."

BRILLIANT

This is how it works! 100% of the time...

At the nexus we call NOW...all probabilities and possibilities exist...the moment you, of your own FREE WILL, or one of 6 billion other individuals, make a choice/decision...the outcomes commensurate with the choices/decisions which have NOT been made virtually COLLAPSE (at that point of NOW)...which doesn't mean that 5 minutes hence, you could not again decide to murder that person in front of you...just that, at the nexus of NOW...all of those probabilities and possibilities exist in potential form...yet, no two circumstances are the same (as similar as they look) the second nexus of NOW (and the 3rd & 4th) present similar potential outcomes. Make the same decision/choice, and the result will more than likely...be the same...CHOOSE, differently and watch it change!

Akushla

Originally posted by Neo_Serf
Did any of you 'choose' to respond to this thread? Can anyone youre responding to 'choose' to change their mind based on your 'choice' to try and persuade them?

I don't know if I chose to respond to this thread, but I do know the possibility of not responding to this thread was equally real before I chose to respond. The awareness of this is freedom of will according to these laws of physics.

Here's some more great quotes, Descartes being the more notable version:

In rejecting everything that we can in any way doubt, even pretending to think it false, we can easily suppose that there’s no God and no heaven, that there are no bodies—so that we don’t have bodies, hands and feet and so on. But we can’t suppose that we, who are having such thoughts, are nothing! ‘At a time when I am thinking, I don’t exist’—that’s self-contradictory. So this item of knowledge—I’m thinking, so I exist—is the first and most certain thing to occur to anyone who philosophizes in an orderly way.

And Jesus (there are so many wonderful quotes concerning this principle in Scripture that you must forgive me if I appear to be rambling):

“Very truly I tell you,” Jesus answered, “before Abraham was born, I am!”

The kingdom of God cometh not with observation: Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you.

God said to Moses, “I AM WHO I AM."

reply to post by akushla99


u prove willing to deny what another say for ur own means, so u r proving being for superiority pretense and not free will
that is why u r meaning to use responsability needs as well as all what exist included the concept of freedom only to justify ur positive sense in meaning being superior right

who said that conscious is to become responsable ones, who are u to assume it being objective truth for all conscious
u clearly r also using the concept of god and scripture for ur own purpose, ur right to enjoy being in superiority pretenses

no if i say we disagree then it is true we disagree fundamentally
u cannot use me for urself means nor use anything and anyone else

responsability if it really matters to u then act responsable as u want by meaning and using only urself not generalizing any theories on everything pointed being negative

freedom is true reference of existence facts, when u dont mean absolute freedom then u cant mean anything existence and surely not urself

objective existence so relative perspectives cant be unless existence is true, it is a fact

now who are not positive fact in being free should not look like existing

it is obvious that existence is abused by evil living free wills from outside of it, since it is known being a fact abstractly but not real from what evil is by definition never real

freedom is all to truth positive superiority which is never to anyone and surely never about responsability or conscious obligations this is to smthg else the dimension of what u objectively are in doing constantly
but freedom is to absolute subjective dimension which is never known nor seen but as being absolutely positive true, so existing proof but never seen nor to justify, when existence is the concept of absolute positive justified

the will to possess objective justifications is the proof that u r wrong, anything i might say about everything is by definition never about me nor concerning me, it is a relative fact of reality reactions to all but everyone know being always his own existence fact only

so when u mean everything u should stay subjectively neutral as nonexisting and not mean to agree with another this is crazy

I know I have free will, but I also believe in multiple timelines. Nonduality maybe? I used to believe in duality and think there was mind and matter, now I think it's all just part of the same system,,,,the greater universe.

I guess I'm not determined enough, to the point it becomes a detriment. That's fine, but I still contend with my own brain over everything, and I still think there's a system that weaves all of us together. I'll say that system is a spirit, and call it the holy ghost. I believe in eternal life for all energy, which is us. I hope the bible can help me with that, and I hope that through love I will become more like jesus and buddha and less like the jerk I often am.

Call it wishful thinking, but I see signs everywhere I go, and I try to pay attention to them. Think of praying as reaching out to the higher frequencies and it all starts to make sense. To me. Though most people I hang out with and most people in my family think that belief in a deity is insane. Oh well...

reply to post by absolutely


I will repeat it...Absolutely...

The core of what I have said is demonstrable in every case...including Yours, since you are demonstrating exactly what I have written!

You are using your FREE WILL to exercise your disagreement (why...I have no idea...save to say, that, you have the FREE WILL to do so)...

If you feel I am being Absolutist...so be it...your 'absolute' denail of what I have written, is your prerogative...nevertheless, i will not deny you the FREE WILL, nor myself, to illuminate the random virtual pages of a forum site...I make no determinations on what I think you mean...to do so would be presumptive, in the extreme...and would certainly lead to false impressions...n'est pas?...but I grant you the freedom to do and determine as you WILL, and form whatever distorted image you desire...there really are none so blind as those that cannot see...
Clearsight is a bummer sometimes...

Akushla

Originally posted by akushla99
reply to post by absolutely

 

I will repeat it...Absolutely...

The core of what I have said is demonstrable in every case...including Yours, since you are demonstrating exactly what I have written!

sweet reaction akushla but objectivity is never subjective sorry
so i proceed

from a true objective perspective the demonstration was all about absolute freedom from all and any existence object, and not that conscious might be the free will
i proved how a conscious can negate everything it sees and any reality it is supposed to mean being through from inventing arguments absolutely free so from its own freedom being smthg totally and definitely and always else

no matter how intelligent u may sound in pointing objective perspectives reality, it wont be real for what any object reality is only and exclusively of its freedom true, so the reason of the plus that make it constant positive existing
that is how anytime u mean to explain negative realities reason u r always wrong, whatever genius u may sound in logics pretenses of being true

while u still insist to use another expressions for ur means, confusing free wills with conscious conditions moves

yes conscious could b conditionned like brains possessions of logics ends but that is also the reason that confirm evil wills being the only source of self intelligent expressions in words, turning intelligence to a concept of evil in any shape of its use, which confirm the evil when truth realizations are first and last exclusively intelligence life free, so no way in anyway intelligence could be related to untrue
which i prove easily how evil is always first and last stupid but from its own will

freedom by definition is what has nothing to do with anything and everything already existing even when existence is also relative freedom

being real is the freedom out of it that is present not the reality it is being, it is the freedom witnessing reality that is constant same so present
conscious is also the freedom out of conscious objective moves that is present as constant absolute fact of conscious on objective constancies, the conscious moves dont do anything to objective while the freedom constancy which is in absolute term could add smthg but not from wills, if it is more constant fact to it objectively true

intelligence truth is true intelligence superiority of absolute freedom, proving that there is truth always first as definitive absolute values rights that is why any sense that has nothing to do with everything nor anything is positive source

so conscious is useless but to attack whta deny freedom values and conscious can do this only through at the same time supporting anything freedom and the concept of everything being free

Every conscious entity IS...FREE to interpret thier own subjective experience according to thier own FREE WILL.
Objectivity requires a viewpoint outside of the constraints of the...I AM...and any and all viewpoints, viewed from within the constraints of a sense of...I AM...are subjective, by definition...including yours! This one sentence indicates that...consciousness, FREE WILL and subjectivity go together. This is the condition we are in. Because you are conscious, and have FREE WILL...your arrangement of the objective universe around and inside you will assemble in such a way that you, as an...I AM (and experiencing subjectively) will assemble the parts and pieces of the objective universe in accordance with what is necessary for you to navigate the duality of...HERE...

No two consciousnesses can occupy the same temporal locale...not at least as we understand it...so all and every experience that the I AM, has, is by its very nature...subjective...

We can glimpse objectivity, like we can glimpse eternity...but, to remain in this 'frame of mind' requires a viewpoint outside of the I AM, experience...this sustained viewpoint is unattainable in our current state...

FREE WILL has nought to do with subjectivity or objectivity, except as part of a process every soul goes through, countless numbers of times...it is a parameter...installed to ensure total freedom in a process...this total freedom (FREE WILL - volition) is a necessary parameter which achieves 2 opposing reactions at the same time (clever huh?!)...an individual (subjective) reaction, that, propels the I AM to at once, consider the ramifications for itself, and for the ramifications of other I AM's within the framework of a locale that is like a staging ground (some like to call it matrix) where the results of combined, subjectively experienced FREE WILL is played out...

The deterministic part of all this is the parameters which are installed, like rules (or more like conventions, or, protocols...whichever takes your fancy)...

An entity which is not 'conscious' has no volition, no will...(because volition, or will, is a conscious process)...automatons...and for this reason cannot be said to be accountable for their actions...like a car rolling down a hill and running a child down...

FREE WILL installs RESPONSIBILTY. Responsibility is necessary on an individual and on a group soul level. Without it, it's 'open slather'!...no consequences, no responsibility, no worries, no repercussions, no blame...just random movement, from one 'cause and effect' to the next...LIKE A MACHINE...

Akushla

reply to post by akushla99


subjective is by definition relative so always nothing to all, then objective is the answer and not anyone

u r relatively right in ur subjective means but in objective facts u r not right

ur conception of right is wrong, while existence and life is exclusively the consequence of rights from alright

u preconise self responsability to justify conscious existence of free wills, this is not right

deja, the idea of willing positive is wrong when positive is objective right

then, u mean an end that kill objective rights by installing a superior instance that would judge subjectively freedom conscious life out of their positive wills, wrong here become evil fact

the answer is objective rights always from the start, which would grow in concept of its true realizations to freedom dimension, any true free sense is objectively real within him so in nothing to all and anything

the answer is objective rights as it is from the start the right end,

the problem is what is very subtle everyone see it as an exception or exceptionnal so go to define normality in different terms

while only superiority is the reason of normality, objective exist bc it is always through plus concept

while everything and everyone witnessed the force of one wills, the subtle reality is much more superior when it is of truth constancy growth so definitive the end, even if not perceived now

for me, it is clear how defending negative rights to exist is obviously of evil life

and all confirm it by certifying that existence cant b but through opposites and glorification of inferiority as the reason of positive moves or still wills

what is fully objective so existing fact free constant has nothing to do with free wills and means

any free will or means get himself answer subjectively stand or from living through others free means standing same ways subjectively

to me what is obvious is the sense to protect objective existence superiority as having nothing to do with freedom at all while free from where nowhere can reach to see or to b, while it is obviously seen and perceived objectively by anyone

existence freedom is what mean individual freedom rights, but existence freedom must b truly free first before being positive freedom source, while existence is surely free so it is a matter of constancy and time

existence is not the earth, every conscious should visualize objective right in abstract free value terms

what is truly objective is only what is above all superiority that can reach beyond its existence to exist

Originally posted by absolutely
reply to post by akushla99

 

subjective is by definition relative so always nothing to all, then objective is the answer and not anyone

u r relatively right in ur subjective means but in objective facts u r not right

ur conception of right is wrong, while existence and life is exclusively the consequence of rights from alright

u preconise self responsability to justify conscious existence of free wills, this is not right

deja, the idea of willing positive is wrong when positive is objective right

then, u mean an end that kill objective rights by installing a superior instance that would judge subjectively freedom conscious life out of their positive wills, wrong here become evil fact

the answer is objective rights always from the start, which would grow in concept of its true realizations to freedom dimension, any true free sense is objectively real within him so in nothing to all and anything

the answer is objective rights as it is from the start the right end,

the problem is what is very subtle everyone see it as an exception or exceptionnal so go to define normality in different terms

while only superiority is the reason of normality, objective exist bc it is always through plus concept

while everything and everyone witnessed the force of one wills, the subtle reality is much more superior when it is of truth constancy growth so definitive the end, even if not perceived now

Yes. I have said no different. Subjective is a relative viewpoint from which we experience an objective reality...we can objectively surmise it, from time to time, by pooling our objective experiences, finding the common ground, and, establishing that, we are in fact experiencing the objective - subjectively...the subjective is our interpretation of the way we experience objectivitity...objectivity is the common, reducible factors that appear to us in common.

We have FREE WILL in both domains, and both require the RESPONSIBILITY aforementioned...otherwise, there is no compulsion to act, think or do, according to any parameters. Part of the dual nature of our condition is to realise this and play the 'part' according to those protocols...think of that childs game where an electrified wire is attached to a board...your mission is to get a loop on a handle from one end to another...touch the wire and a buzzer sounds...if you do not perform the correct series of movements (acquire the correct sense of RESPONSIBILITY) your action (thoughts & actions) will send you back to the beginning, to attempt the game again.

Superiority or inferiority is your subjective label for the way you are navigating this debate...

Akushla