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

[avasopht]

[jappe]

Interesting video.

Perhaps the question of free will or not could also be asked about our subconscious, if we look at the subconscious mind as a separate entity.

http://www.nature.com/news/2008/080411/ ... 8.751.html

Or is it the opposite, that the subconscious mind is like a deterministic machine, providing information for us to use when making non-deterministic decisions.

The wizardry thread also touches this interesting topic a little bit:


viewtopic.php?f=11&t=7502240&start=25

[sublunar]

Maybe I haven't been properly introduced to the concept of "free will".

Because the way I have experienced life thus far, while I acknowledge certain tendencies inherent to my status in this world at this present time, I also believe I have nearly full control over my thoughts and actions. I will never claim full control, but majority control at least. And majority control is good enough for me.

What I do have a problem with is some random person with whom I've never interacted telling me that what they believe about my control of my own life is truer than what I believe about my control over my own life.

I have read a fair amount of esoteric and philosophic writings and I believe much of it is pure garbage. Still I am intrigued by certain aspects. The subconscious mind, for example is of particular interest. It's hard to get very far into philosophy as a whole, however, without being extremely annoyed at the self indulgence/importance of many of the authors. I've invested most of my time reading Carl Jung and have an extreme distaste for Freud, among others. It's a topic I'm simultaneously interested in and repulsed by.

This particular guy had a very JP Sears vibe going. lol

[avasopht]

This particular guy had a very JP Sears vibe going. lol

The neurology is very far from JP Sears. Basically the studies show that many decisions are made long before a person is consciously aware of the decision.

Various split-brain experiments prove that the brain is highly capable of fooling itself into believing it has made a decision about an action it took when it in fact had no involvement whatsoever with the action. The brain, it seems is quick to backwards rationalise its actions, which also suggests it can even backwards rationalise its thoughts and feelings.

Mind you, the field is far more expansive than this video.

Another brilliant study shows that the brain unconsciously forms biases quickly in response to biased input. If a person is given a rigged game of heads or tales, the brain will unconsciously alter its strategy to match the game's bias without the conscious mind being aware the game is rigged, or that it is betting more on heads than tales.

It's studies like this that really challenge what we understand about how decisions are really made.

Some people, particularly those on the autistic or psychopathic spectrum are less susceptible to certain biases. Autistics, because they process emotion differently, and psychopaths because their brain lacks some of the emotional circuitry most have (they do still have emotions).

The funny thing about emotions is that they override logic, and because of the backwards rationalisation machinery it's very difficult to know whether your reasoning is motivated or filtered by emotional drivers if you do have them. The range of possible biases is fairly extensive, from filtering of information (so you don't even see some truths and ideas as an option, or so that you perceive an idea that was fabricated in your mind) to presenting you with a rigged ordering of ideas so that you process a restricted set of ideas before you have time to consider those that don't fit your emotion (attention bias).

It's hugely complex and colorful.

[C4M]

Hey hi,

I think it is not so difficult...

As you mature you'll learn from your mistakes. Impulsive actions are less frequent as you grow older and so I'd like to think I do control my own thoughts, actions and decisions. And it is for sure impossible to control somebody elses thoughts, actions and decisions unless you are a religious leader, minister or whatever sinister job in that field of work.

As an ordained minister from the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster I am sure his devine Noodleness rather has, I don't try to control other individuals. However, there is an interesting book called "Science and Sanity" by Alfred Korzybski, I think it was published in1933 and it was a very interesting read about General semantics but he's touched this subject too. How effective is the use of language when talking about abstract things like control? What you think when reading the word control, is most likely a lot different as to what I think is control. Tons of other interesting things in that book.

With kind regards and do please keep having fun making music. I surely am enjoying the latest Reason release a lot!

[avasopht]

Or is it the opposite, that the subconscious mind is like a deterministic machine, providing information for us to use when making non-deterministic decisions.

I don't think determinism means there is not free will. In fact I think determinism is a requirement of free will, since non-determinism would mean that your decision was made by an outside force.

Our will involves decisions carried out by our brain to determine the best action to take based on the little information it has. If the only information you have is that you hold 2 playing cards in your hand at a table of 5 people, the game is texas holdem poker and the consequence for losing is another day of hunger, you will make your best choice based solely on that.

What consciousness is and where this phenomena sits within the mechanical mind is still very much an enigma. Is the ideal of consciousness the illusion of permanence that is attached to the asset of self? or the emotional states that make us us?

Some would say that the i, the sense of self is a combination of all things in the mind, but I think that the task of defining consciousness is challenging enough in itself.

[AttenuationHz]

Whatever all I know is square curls are not a product of any environment. WTF is up with that?

[Ostermilk]

Why do birds take flight when they hear a gun go off? If they've heard the gun they are already safe.

These types of things keep me awake at night and I then have no chance of excercising my will to sleep, nor get any closer to solving such riddles.

[avasopht]

Why do birds take flight when they hear a gun go off? If they've heard the gun they are already safe.

Because more shots could follow.

Now you may sleep well

[jappe]

Why do birds take flight when they hear a gun go off? If they've heard the gun they are already safe.

These types of things keep me awake at night and I then have no chance of excercising my will to sleep, nor get any closer to solving such riddles.

Just ask your subconscious to solve the riddles before you go to sleep


Perhaps animals who's brains have less of conscious decision capacity are more likely to survive in some environments than the smarter ones who takes time to contemplate whether the sudden massive sensory input is mapped to any threat or not.

I wonder if the Galapagos birds would be less scared of gunshots than others?
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-n ... 142946069/

[gak]

TMI

[CaliforniaBurrito]

The problem with this is that people who oppose this train of thought will be written off as egotistical which actually plays into conforming to this. I won't bother going into my own examples of how I exercise free will to defy societal standards every day and they can be written off as little variables by for all I care.

[platzangst]

If one accepts that physics is immutable - that is, the rules of how things interact do not change without cause - then determinism is strongly indicated. The matter of the universe, given the conditions it was in at such-and-such a time, was always going to result in the formation of planet Earth, upon which life appeared in such a fashion, to multiply and die off and multiply in just such a way as to bring everyone to this exact moment in this exact fashion.

If you accept that we are purely biological beings*, with no true evidence of any "spirit" or "soul" or other consciousness existing apart from the body, then everything we do is the result of electro-chemical reactions inside the brain that are very complex, while at the same time being finite in possibility and fully subject to the laws of physics. Given the various inputs one's brain receives, each of us was always going to do what each of us has just done because the things that prompted us to do those things likewise were always going to happen. Thus, determinism. What each of us does right after reading this is pre-ordained by our chemistries. We feel as if we are making a choice, and we are, but that choice is the only one we were ever going to make under those specific conditions at that specific time.

*If you don't accept that, the whole issue is moot. However, from a purely scientific standpoint some serious evidence is required to proceed further.

[avasopht]

The problem with this is that people who oppose this train of thought will be written off as egotistical which actually plays into conforming to this. I won't bother going into my own examples of how I exercise free will to defy societal standards every day and they can be written off as little variables by for all I care.

It's not a matter of being egotistical, and the subject isn't about whether you comform to societal standards, it's simply that our conscious mind isn't half as in control as it thinks it is most of the time.

I do think free will exists by the way. Having unconscious biases doesn't mean we don't have it, just that it doesn't operate how we might think it does most of the time.

There's a certain aspect of not knowing what it is you don't know (and the clickbaity articles circling the net don't help).

Truth is, when people are put to the test they show overwhelming unconscious biases on all spectrums of intelligence and non-conformity. Those less susceptible to biases (like those on the autism spectrum) tend to have difficulties functioning in society, or with socialising.

How your brain can fool itself with backwards rationalisation:

How gut bacteria affects sexual attraction:

[CaliforniaBurrito]

It's not a matter of being egotistical, and the subject isn't about whether you comform to societal standards, it's simply that our conscious mind isn't half as in control as it thinks it is most of the time.

You're blurring the line between conscious and subconscious! Of course I get an erection when I'm sexually aroused and chewing tobacco makes me salivate more but to say biology has taken conscious free will is absolutely ridiculous IMHO. Clothes and breakfast foods are not biological or subconscious matters. I wear black t-shirts everyday and I know lobbyists made breakfast the most important meal of the day.

[jonheal]

My bowel tells me I need to poop right now, but I'm not going to just out of spite for biology telling me what to do. How does that fit into the mix?

[CaliforniaBurrito]

My bowel tells me I need to poop right now, but I'm not going to just out of spite for biology telling me what to do. How does that fit into the mix?

Power to the people! Just be wary of hemorrhoids.

[avasopht]

You're blurring the line between conscious and subconscious! Of course I get an erection when I'm sexually aroused and chewing tobacco makes me salivate more but to say biology has taken conscious free will is absolutely ridiculous IMHO. Clothes and breakfast foods are not biological or subconscious matters. I wear black t-shirts everyday and I know lobbyists made breakfast the most important meal of the day.

I've not said that biology has taken conscious free will. In fact I clearly said I do believe free will exists

I'm confused, ...

[avasopht]

My bowel tells me I need to poop right now, but I'm not going to just out of spite for biology telling me what to do. How does that fit into the mix?

Well the subject isn't, your body tells you you want to eat therefore biology has taken away your free will for sure.

This is an uber huge subject, but for the most part we know that the conscious mind is a lot less aware of how its decisions can be determined outside of its awareness, and that what it thinks are its thoughts are sometimes just backward rationalisations.

I think Bill Nye said it best. Whether you have free will depends on how you choose to define it.

See the video above about the split brain experiment.

[CaliforniaBurrito]

I'm confused

Ohhhh so am I!

...the subject isn't about whether you comform to societal standards...

OP Video Description: 'SOCIETAL CONDITIONING' might sound like either a grim Orwellian brainwashing technique or a fancy new way to wash your hair, depending on how warped your sense of humor is. But your surroundings—from the breakfast cereal you eat to the very design of the streets you live on—might have much more influence on how you think than most have ever given it credit for.

You are blurring the line between societal conditioning vs biology or conscious vs subconscious. It's absurd that we're talking about societal conditioning and gut bacteria in the same thread!

Wikipedia: SOCIAL CONDITIONING Manifestations of social conditioning are vast, but they are generally categorized as social patterns and social structures including nationalism, education, employment, entertainment, popular culture, religion, spirituality and family life. The social structure in which an individual finds him or herself influences and can determine their social actions and responses.

I think Bill Nye said it best. Whether you have free will depends on how you choose to define it.

Ok I'll meet you there.

[CaliforniaBurrito]

HOW TO RISE ABOVE SOCIAL CONDITIONING AND LIVE AN AMAZING LIFE

[platzangst]

My bowel tells me I need to poop right now, but I'm not going to just out of spite for biology telling me what to do. How does that fit into the mix?

Spite, like all other emotions, is a chemical process of the brain. And, as such, is dependent upon physics. Both your biology and your rebellion against biology are biological. You can't not be a biological creature.

Suppose you are a bit hungry, and a bit sleepy. You could go to the kitchen and get a snack. Or you could relax in an easy chair and take a nap. Or you might ignore both impulses and do something else entirely, like watch a few YouTube videos. Whichever course you ultimately decide to take depends on the conditions in and around your brain, from the input of your senses to the overall chemical balance of your body. But those conditions were never going to be any different than they were at the moment you chose what to do, and so there was in reality only one choice you were ever going to make, even if it seemed like there were many possibilities.

[jonheal]

My bowel tells me I need to poop right now, but I'm not going to just out of spite for biology telling me what to do. How does that fit into the mix?

Spite, like all other emotions, is a chemical process of the brain. And, as such, is dependent upon physics. Both your biology and your rebellion against biology are biological. You can't not be a biological creature.

Suppose you are a bit hungry, and a bit sleepy. You could go to the kitchen and get a snack. Or you could relax in an easy chair and take a nap. Or you might ignore both impulses and do something else entirely, like watch a few YouTube videos. Whichever course you ultimately decide to take depends on the conditions in and around your brain, from the input of your senses to the overall chemical balance of your body. But those conditions were never going to be any different than they were at the moment you chose what to do, and so there was in reality only one choice you were ever going to make, even if it seemed like there were many possibilities.

I did eventually poop. Couldn't take it anymore.

If you are a strict Naturalist, then yes, everything that happens in the Universe, to include the thoughts of your mind, are going to have some sort of Natural impetus. To say otherwise is to invoke religion or metaphysics, and once you have done that, you are deemed an imbecile and the Naturalists will heap scorn and derision upon you. Can't win that battle.

My (possibly biologically-induced) impulse is to depart from this thread, because it doesn't actually help my state of mind. Whether it happens to be the case or not, the notion that my "being" is nothing more than a collection of chemical reactions isn't particularly comforting. I would rather live out my life being deluded and be none the worse off for it.

[CaliforniaBurrito]

Suppose you are a bit hungry, and a bit sleepy. You could go to the kitchen and get a snack. Or you could relax in an easy chair and take a nap. Or you might ignore both impulses and do something else entirely, like watch a few YouTube videos.

Actually, you just realized you can't do any of those things because your job called you into work today. Now you have to defy your own biological impulses because you are socially conditioned. What do you scientists have to say about that eh? I suppose you can rationalize with saying that going to work provides food and shelter which are basic biological needs but that is a long term result of a grind that is not impulsive at all. Living for long term results doesn't coincide with an existence that is based on impulsive biology. People work for the long term in different ways e.g. school, career, family, religion, hell - even music production which leads me to believe that human beings are not just biological creatures.

Delayed gratification = death if you're not a human being.

[avasopht]

I'm confused

Ohhhh so am I!

...the subject isn't about whether you comform to societal standards...

OP Video Description: 'SOCIETAL CONDITIONING' might sound like either a grim Orwellian brainwashing technique or a fancy new way to wash your hair, depending on how warped your sense of humor is. But your surroundings—from the breakfast cereal you eat to the very design of the streets you live on—might have much more influence on how you think than most have ever given it credit for.

You are blurring the line between societal conditioning vs biology or conscious vs subconscious. It's absurd that we're talking about societal conditioning and gut bacteria in the same thread!

Wikipedia: SOCIAL CONDITIONING Manifestations of social conditioning are vast, but they are generally categorized as social patterns and social structures including nationalism, education, employment, entertainment, popular culture, religion, spirituality and family life. The social structure in which an individual finds him or herself influences and can determine their social actions and responses.

I think Bill Nye said it best. Whether you have free will depends on how you choose to define it.

Ok I'll meet you there.

I picked a video about free will to start the discussion. I could have picked any video.

So no, this is not a question just about societal conditioning.