Are you in control of your own thoughts, actions and decisions?

[EdwardKiy]

I just can't quite see why these questions are so urgent, especially since there's no way we're ever going to answer them. Speculatively diverting from time to time, yes. Urgent? I don't get it

I'm not saying this to diss any of the excellent discussion on this thread, just wondering if anyone else has this problem

this has also been discussed here. The short answer is: whichever definitive answer can be found will inevitably and drastically shift our existential paradigm. This, in turn, will change all aspects of our life.

[avasopht]

I just can't quite see why these questions are so urgent, especially since there's no way we're ever going to answer them. Speculatively diverting from time to time, yes. Urgent? I don't get it

I'm not saying this to diss any of the excellent discussion on this thread, just wondering if anyone else has this problem

You are dismissing the discipline using technology that wouldn't exist without it.

Nobody can really anticipate the practical applications of solutions, thought experiments, hypotheses, theorems to a philosophical or theoretical question.

But there is the appearance of a persistent paradox that results from things that were understand to be both equally true.

That means we have a massive gap somewhere in either our understanding, perspective, thinking, or theories.

Resolving this could be there missing link to the next generation of breakthroughs in computer science, biology, or even the the areas of philosophy you're interested.

Just remember how pure maths was just considered to be useless mental masturbation. Now we know better and do not dismiss areas of math that don't seem to have any practical application because we more know it's not that simple.

All the technology you see today exists because people persisted to answer questions that seemed unimportant at the time because, just like this, "we already know our experiences are real, so there's no point in answering this abstract question that explains things I already know are true through my experiences".

Quite timely that this has just come out a few hours ago:

[dvdrtldg]

Yes but all this talk of practical applications, technological development etc applies to science, not philosophy. Scientific progress is real, philosophical progress is more contestable. Scientific questions (sometimes) get answered, philosophical questions (usually) just find new ways of being framed. We've been fretting over free will & the nature of consciousness since the ancient Greeks, I'm pretty confident there's never going to be a "breakthrough", especially as the writing appears to be on the wall for advanced human civilization

I think philosophy is closer to literature than science in its relationship to truth. Continental philosophers know this, analytical ones resist it

[EdwardKiy]

Yes but all this talk of practical applications, technological development etc applies to science, not philosophy. Scientific progress is real, philosophical progress is more contestable.

whether your actions are you own, among other things, is a biological question and a country's philosophical progress can be measured in too many ways to count, GDP being one of them.

Scientific questions (sometimes) get answered, philosophical questions (usually) just find new ways of being framed. We've been fretting over free will & the nature of consciousness since the ancient Greeks, I'm pretty confident there's never going to be a "breakthrough", especially as the writing appears to be on the wall for advanced human civilization

I think philosophy is closer to literature than science in its relationship to truth. Continental philosophers know this, analytical ones resist it

FIRST came philosophy and OUT OF IT came science. It was a matter of asking "...but what if it isn't?". Based on a supposition that the nature does not operate on god power or magic, but within a set of rather stable parameters, which were then observed, calculated and made sense of and then, finally, applied - EUREKA!

Philosophy is a closed system within which we can educate ourselves on practical applications of the fragments of perceived chaos that we pick up from the open systems around us. Think of it as of a laboratory where you bring a sample and try to make sense of it using the tools available in that lab. It took us literally thousands of years to explain through open systems like biology (psychiatry-neurology) what we already knew about ourselves, as documented in aesop's fables, ancient chinese proverbs, hagakure or the bible.

As to your confidence that there's "never going to be a breakthrough", here's a short list of a few that had already happened in almost no particular order:

going from tribes to agricultural communities
to trading communities
to artisanship
to trade alliances
to countries
to slavery
to science
to republic
to democracy

How about the German school of philosophy or Japanese school of philosophy?

To make it crystal clear, let's compare Japan and Somalia, for instance, or Germany to Kenya or something like that.

Japan is ~378 000km2 roughly half the size of Somalia, NO FOSSIL RESOURCES, while Somalia is resource-rich beyond any comparison. It has over 20% of world's uranium for a start, oil, gas etc etc, was never nuked and never in a war with anyone else other than itself. And yet Japan is #3 economy of the world, 5.7% of ALL economies on the planet while Somalia is not even on the list. What do you think is the detrimental factor to their difference? Is it the radioactive sediment from Hiroshima that was so stimulating to the Japanese economy? Or is it the fact that Somalia couldn't get out of civil wars, unable to do something as simple as to redirect intraspecific aggression outwards, to unite against a common, even imaginary enemy? And how do you think this can be achieved or facilitated?

The difference between Frau Merkel and a shaman with a bone in his nose is in the common underlying philosophy to which their respective social groups adhere (tribe/nation), which becomes their social driving force, which, in turn, highlights the NEED for science and arts, and allocates resources and A DIRECTION for them to go into. Frau Merkel's livelihood is the result of her culture's insatiable thirst for questions and answers multiplied by centuries of collective effort, while the shaman is "pretty confident that there will be no breakthroughs", that everything is known and observable as is and no further inquiry is warranted.

[EdwardKiy]

Here's a loophole proposed by Shakespeare: humans have free will to terminate both themselves and the system within which our perceived reality is set. A single human can do both, and either makes the concept of will or lack thereof obsolete as there will no longer be a subject of experience. To be or not to be is a genuine choice.

The question "But is it your free will or causality that had you make that choice of terminating yourself or the system?" will no longer be applicable, because there is nobody to ask, experience or answer. It ends causality.

Causality is a pattern, and the opposite of pattern is chaos, (which is at the roots of any religion). What is the force behind going from a state of chaos to pattern and vice versa? Will.

[avasopht]

Well, I think it's easy to miss the big elephant in the room.

A decision is an act that transitions your mind from state A to state B.

But that decision is carried out by state A, which itself is produced by the most recent external stimuli.

Ergo, for your decision to not be deterministic, your internal state must then be non deterministic.

But if your internal state is not deterministic, it is fickle, inconsistent, and subject to a factor of randomness that is not it's own will or awareness.

A non deterministic decision, however, is not a decision. It is a dice roll.

Given the same inputs from external stimuli, to make a different decision from the same state means your internal state is not responsible for its own decision.

The fact you thoughts of 47 before 93 involved a sequence of subconscious processes, each of which, of not deterministic, are random. But for that to be random, and to influence which number you think of next, is to pass control or influencer to an external chaotic source.

I think reasoning about these matters by means of language can quickly lead you astray, and is the very reason for the use of maths and statistics in science.

[EdwardKiy]

Well, I think it's easy to miss the big elephant in the room.

A decision is an act that transitions your mind from state A to state B.

But that decision is carried out by state A, which itself is produced by the most recent external stimuli.

Ergo, for your decision to not be deterministic, your internal state must then be non deterministic.

But if your internal state is not deterministic, it is fickle, inconsistent, and subject to a factor of randomness that is not it's own will or awareness.

A non deterministic decision, however, is not a decision. It is a dice roll.

Given the same inputs from external stimuli, to make a different decision from the same state means your internal state is not responsible for its own decision.

The fact you thoughts of 47 before 93 involved a sequence of subconscious processes, each of which, of not deterministic, are random. But for that to be random, and to influence which number you think of next, is to pass control or influencer to an external chaotic source.

I think reasoning about these matters by means of language can quickly lead you astray, and is the very reason for the use of maths and statistics in science.

For something to qualify as "happening" requires an observer of either process or effect. We know that decisions can be fed to your conscious self by the unconscious unilaterally, without a feedback loop. That is still you, like the bacteria in our guts, the fungi on our tongues and the mites in our sinuses and skin - structurally detrimental, integral. But your conscious self has no way of observing the process of such a decision, and if the effect is the termination of the system, then you can't observe that either, which makes it neither deterministic nor random.

Also, by chaos I mean true absence of any pattern, not the Devaney definition which is slapped on any continuous complex form subject to causality, which is a pattern.

As to your last sentence, the opportunity of failure doesn't bother me in the slightest. Language is a closed system, just like mathematics, where mistakes are made as easily. I feel like we've done a tiny bit of progress with this. Thank you for the answers and bearing with me.

[dvdrtldg]

To make it crystal clear, let's compare Japan and Somalia, for instance, or Germany to Kenya or something like that.

Japan is ~378 000km2 roughly half the size of Somalia, NO FOSSIL RESOURCES, while Somalia is resource-rich beyond any comparison. It has over 20% of world's uranium for a start, oil, gas etc etc, was never nuked and never in a war with anyone else other than itself. And yet Japan is #3 economy of the world, 5.7% of ALL economies on the planet while Somalia is not even on the list. What do you think is the detrimental factor to their difference? Is it the radioactive sediment from Hiroshima that was so stimulating to the Japanese economy? Or is it the fact that Somalia couldn't get out of civil wars, unable to do something as simple as to redirect intraspecific aggression outwards, to unite against a common, even imaginary enemy? And how do you think this can be achieved or facilitated?

The difference between Frau Merkel and a shaman with a bone in his nose is in the common underlying philosophy to which their respective social groups adhere (tribe/nation), which becomes their social driving force, which, in turn, highlights the NEED for science and arts, and allocates resources and A DIRECTION for them to go into. Frau Merkel's livelihood is the result of her culture's insatiable thirst for questions and answers multiplied by centuries of collective effort, while the shaman is "pretty confident that there will be no breakthroughs", that everything is known and observable as is and no further inquiry is warranted.

Well, you're completely ignoring (or possibly ignorant of) the existence of African philosophy and the history of Western colonialism

But it's probably not worth arguing with you, as you sound like a massive racist. A "shaman with a bone through his nose"? Somalia's miseries the result of an inability to channel aggression? Seriously? Jesus fucking christ dude

[littlejam]

hello,

what if i just jump in front of a train
like in ny, a subway train, like the a train
doesn't that take away all your verbose conversation about this stuff
i go buy a gun and shooot myself
i go charge a bunch of cops with my hand in my pocket

free will is a choice of actions
most of this thread to me is just people wanting to spew forth stuff

i respect the people who comment
yet, it's like come on

when your phone rings
you have a choice
answer it
or don't answer it

have a blessed day,

j

[EdwardKiy]

Well, you're completely ignoring (or possibly ignorant of) the existence of African philosophy and the history of Western colonialism

But it's probably not worth arguing with you, as you sound like a massive racist. A "shaman with a bone through his nose"? Somalia's miseries the result of an inability to channel aggression? Seriously? Jesus fucking christ dude

Your flashes of virtue signaling almost got me blind. I have no idea which part of it you found racist, but feel free to swap out Somalia for Ukraine. Ironically, we gave up our nuclear weapons in the spirit of the Ubuntu philosophy, so now, as a country, we're... far behind. Neither of the sides involved in the Budapest memorandum will uphold it, because there is no leverage to make them. Double irony.

African philosophies (like the Tibetan or Bhutanese) are where they are because of what they are - dysfunctional garbage. Don't take my word for it though, go see it to believe it if you really give a shit.

Here's a picture we took during a humanitarian mission to the Mursi tribe of Ethiopia.

IMG_7875.JPG (496.87 KiB) Viewed 9300 times

[dvdrtldg]

Yep, got it thanks Mr White Supremacist. No need to keep digging

[avasopht]

hello,

what if i just jump in front of a train
like in ny, a subway train, like the a train
doesn't that take away all your verbose conversation about this stuff
i go buy a gun and shooot myself
i go charge a bunch of cops with my hand in my pocket

free will is a choice of actions
most of this thread to me is just people wanting to spew forth stuff

i respect the people who comment


yet, it's like come on

when your phone rings
you have a choice
answer it
or don't answer it

have a blessed day,

j

You seem to have missed many people's points and ideas completely.

Determinism doesn't mean you're not making a choice.

Also, the term "free will" is a very dated concept. It came from a time when we didn't know about the quantum world, nor did we have the theoretical frameworks of discrete decision making that are used in computer science.

What "free will" means (the term used in philosophy) is that your will is independent of the presumably (at the time) deterministic world - almost hinting at a non-physical spirit making decisions from outside of the clockwork universe.

What "free will" does not mean (which is what most people like yourself tend to mean when they say it) is agency (which fits exactly what you've described).

That being said, if the subject is of no interest to you, you don't have to participate.

[avasopht]

To make it crystal clear, let's compare Japan and Somalia, for instance, or Germany to Kenya or something like that.

Japan is ~378 000km2 roughly half the size of Somalia, NO FOSSIL RESOURCES, while Somalia is resource-rich beyond any comparison. It has over 20% of world's uranium for a start, oil, gas etc etc, was never nuked and never in a war with anyone else other than itself. And yet Japan is #3 economy of the world, 5.7% of ALL economies on the planet while Somalia is not even on the list. What do you think is the detrimental factor to their difference? Is it the radioactive sediment from Hiroshima that was so stimulating to the Japanese economy? Or is it the fact that Somalia couldn't get out of civil wars, unable to do something as simple as to redirect intraspecific aggression outwards, to unite against a common, even imaginary enemy? And how do you think this can be achieved or facilitated?

You seem to be missing something quite fundamental here.

Somalia isn't how it is because of African philosophy, but because of the dynamics of power at the present moment in time.

The rape (or massacre) of Nanjing was not that long ago. Nor was the illegal attempted invasion of Vietnam.

Also, Somalia (or any country for that matter) is not a single conscious entity. Wars have been happening for centuries (e.g. World War 1 and 2, the War of Independence, The American Civil War).

Civil wars aren't a sign of failed philosophy, but unresolved power struggles (just like the wars and civil wars that have been happening in Europe).

It's very easy to oversimplify these types of political matters into narratives about cultures, but it rarely ever is.

A reminder:

[EdwardKiy]

You seem to be missing something quite fundamental here.

Somalia isn't how it is because of African philosophy, but because of the dynamics of power at the present moment in time.

The rape (or massacre) of Nanjing was not that long ago. Nor was the illegal attempted invasion of Vietnam.

Also, Somalia (or any country for that matter) is not a single conscious entity. Wars have been happening for centuries (e.g. World War 1 and 2, the War of Independence, The American Civil War).

Civil wars aren't a sign of failed philosophy, but unresolved power struggles (just like the wars and civil wars that have been happening in Europe).

It's very easy to oversimplify these types of political matters into narratives about cultures, but it rarely ever is.

A reminder:

Of course. Of course. Of course. Of course it's multi-faceted, and of course it's complicated. Of course. Of course a "philosophy of a country" is a fictional construct, of course different people within one country will have different belief systems and philosophies they adhere to. Of course.

But.

A philosophy is a framework of mind and a driving force. You cannot discard its' detrimental effect on societies and where they are now. And you cannot just say "the evil white men fucked them over" or whoever, you know. Maybe it's more apt to ask "how did the evil white men (or whoever) get such a massive advantage over them (country X), especially given how ancient and experienced their civilization (country X) was as a collective?".

And how did THIS happen? How did a whole nation qualify as being mentally retarded? Isn't THIS the interesting question?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nations_a ... pia%20(69).

When you lose at chess, you don't blame your opponent. My little cousin became a Candidate Master at chess by the age of 6 and she wiped the floor with me, the little shit. The only way I could occasionally start beating her was to dissect and analyze my losses.

Alas, I'd rather get back on topic because I feel I can learn something there.

[plaamook]

Hej look!
It’s the free will thread!
Great. I don’t have to post my views on it all over again...

[motuscott]

Hi O silver away, Reason Pony!

[Overtherainbow]

https://www.bbc.com/reel/video/p086tg3k ... -free-will

Things to un-pack here. Wee bit later, after work.

[orthodox]

[bxbrkrz]

Now I remember the free will thread I wasn't supposed to remember, by the will of others.

Even Neo had no free will, or do I need to watch the trilogy again?

[orthodox]

Now I remember the free will thread I wasn't supposed to remember, by the will of others.

Even Neo had no free will, or do I need to watch the trilogy again?

Neo was not supposed to have it since it's a fictional character. The authors designed him the way they liked him to be, by their own free will or from their delusions.

[plaamook]

So characters never have free will, right?
Not possible.

[orthodox]

So characters never have free will, right?
Not possible.

They can be said to have a will

[bxbrkrz]

Now I remember the free will thread I wasn't supposed to remember, by the will of others.

Even Neo had no free will, or do I need to watch the trilogy again?

Neo was not supposed to have it since it's a fictional character. The authors designed him the way they liked him to be, by their own free will or from their delusions.

We don't know if the authors had absolute free will while creating Neo.
What we believe to be 'Inspiration' could be the very essence, the root of all false liberties.
'Inspiration' could be the illusion (codes) necessary to justify running the main life.exe as a 'creative' loop, justifying its own purpose (lie).

This is why true A.I. is an impossibility.

{post number 3000. Congrats to me}

[plaamook]

Neo was not supposed to have it since it's a fictional character. The authors designed him the way they liked him to be, by their own free will or from their delusions.

We don't know if the authors had absolute free will while creating Neo.
What we believe to be 'Inspiration' could be the very essence, the root of all false liberties.
'Inspiration' could be the illusion (codes) necessary to justify running the main life.exe as a 'creative' loop, justifying its own purpose (lie).

This is why true A.I. is an impossibility.

This guy knows what’s going down.

[bxbrkrz]

We don't know if the authors had absolute free will while creating Neo.
What we believe to be 'Inspiration' could be the very essence, the root of all false liberties.
'Inspiration' could be the illusion (codes) necessary to justify running the main life.exe as a 'creative' loop, justifying its own purpose (lie).

This is why true A.I. is an impossibility.

This guy knows what’s going down.

No one is really allowed to know what's going down.
The illusion to believe it? That's allowed in the code.
The closer you get to the 'wall', the faster you fold back to the start of your journey, a journey 'inspired' by a question.
It's a loop.