Freethought & Rationalism Archive

callmejay · 01-22-2003, 10:46 AM

Ok. It seems that in all the "free will" threads, people are talking about different things. Here's what I want to talk about. (Hey, this is my post.) Free will, defined as follows: that in at least some situations, it is possible for us to choose between several options. If I put two objects in front of me, can I really choose which one I touch first, or is my "choice" based on deterministic factors or on random factors and therefore not really a choice at all. (From my point of view, deterministic and truly random factors are equally incompatible with free will, since neither involves a "choice.") Based on everything I know about the universe -- or even anything I can really imagine might be true about the universe -- I can't for the life of me understand how I could really have the choice to choose one or the other.

And yet, for the life of me, it sure feels like I do. It seems unreasonable to claim that we don't have the ability to choose, since there's nothing in life that seems more obvious. It's almost enough to make me believe in a soul.

I'm willing to accept that "me" isn't as unified an object as I've been led to believe, but it just seems wrong (i.e. untrue) that "I" have no choice whatsoever. Where does this choice come from??

AnthonyAdams45 · 01-22-2003, 06:48 PM

And, in many cases, the only thinking element of the causal chain. Thus, we feel that we have more "choice" when no other thinkers are involved. And so we do. At best, and I'm flying by the seat of my pants here, "choice" is the awareness of our role in the causal chain. We are aware that by doing A, event B can be expected to follow, and that by doing C, event D can be expected to follow. When we in fact perform A rather than C, that awareness is part of the causal chain leading to B. But performing A was shaped and guided by all the events that went into forming us before the awareness of A's leading to B. Our awareness, and our feeling of choice, comes at the end of the causal chain, and thus, we confuse it for a cause in itself. It is not.

callmejay · 01-23-2003, 10:41 AM

So are you saying that the whole idea of choice is an illusion?

AnthonyAdams45 · 01-23-2003, 03:48 PM

I think I prefer "misapprehension." I think it is fair to say "I choose to eat the salad before me", even though the choice of the salad over the chocolate cherry cheesecake is the result of dietary education and years of nagging to eat my veggies. Where I think the misapprehension occurs in thinking that this choice is separate from that causal chain that preceded it. The choice is mine. Only "I" could make it. But "I" am the current terminus of a causal chain. The choice is an effect of all that has gone before.

callmejay · 01-24-2003, 10:45 AM

But, in your example, could you have chosen the cheesecake? Was it literally possible? If it was, how do you explain the source of that choice? If not, why bother worrying about anything since we have no choices?

AnthonyAdams45 · 01-26-2003, 06:34 PM

No, i do not think one can choose other than the way one in fact has chosen. All I was trying to explain was that sensation we have that we could have done otherwise.

Why worry? I don't. Not really. But I am aware that I am a self-referrent system, one that constantly loops back on itself, and thus, may choose differently next time, and that the choice that was made last time acts as a causal force on my choices next time.

So, life is not so locked that it is boring, nor the system so simple that is completely predictable, not even for I who am its locus.

01-22-2003, 10:46 AM	#1
callmejay Regular Member Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Arlington, VA Posts: 466	Free will, one more time Ok. It seems that in all the "free will" threads, people are talking about different things. Here's what I want to talk about. (Hey, this is my post.) Free will, defined as follows: that in at least some situations, it is possible for us to choose between several options. If I put two objects in front of me, can I really choose which one I touch first, or is my "choice" based on deterministic factors or on random factors and therefore not really a choice at all. (From my point of view, deterministic and truly random factors are equally incompatible with free will, since neither involves a "choice.") Based on everything I know about the universe -- or even anything I can really imagine might be true about the universe -- I can't for the life of me understand how I could really have the choice to choose one or the other. And yet, for the life of me, it sure feels like I do. It seems unreasonable to claim that we don't have the ability to choose, since there's nothing in life that seems more obvious. It's almost enough to make me believe in a soul. I'm willing to accept that "me" isn't as unified an object as I've been led to believe, but it just seems wrong (i.e. untrue) that "I" have no choice whatsoever. Where does this choice come from??

01-22-2003, 06:48 PM	#2
AnthonyAdams45 Regular Member Join Date: Jul 2000 Location: Florida Posts: 156	"You" are part of the causal chain. And, in many cases, the only thinking element of the causal chain. Thus, we feel that we have more "choice" when no other thinkers are involved. And so we do. At best, and I'm flying by the seat of my pants here, "choice" is the awareness of our role in the causal chain. We are aware that by doing A, event B can be expected to follow, and that by doing C, event D can be expected to follow. When we in fact perform A rather than C, that awareness is part of the causal chain leading to B. But performing A was shaped and guided by all the events that went into forming us before the awareness of A's leading to B. Our awareness, and our feeling of choice, comes at the end of the causal chain, and thus, we confuse it for a cause in itself. It is not.

01-23-2003, 03:48 PM	#4
AnthonyAdams45 Regular Member Join Date: Jul 2000 Location: Florida Posts: 156	I hesitate to say "illusion" I think I prefer "misapprehension." I think it is fair to say "I choose to eat the salad before me", even though the choice of the salad over the chocolate cherry cheesecake is the result of dietary education and years of nagging to eat my veggies. Where I think the misapprehension occurs in thinking that this choice is separate from that causal chain that preceded it. The choice is mine. Only "I" could make it. But "I" am the current terminus of a causal chain. The choice is an effect of all that has gone before.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

01-23-2003, 10:41 AM	#3
callmejay Regular Member Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Arlington, VA Posts: 466	So are you saying that the whole idea of choice is an illusion?

01-24-2003, 10:45 AM	#5
callmejay Regular Member Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Arlington, VA Posts: 466	But, in your example, could you have chosen the cheesecake? Was it literally possible? If it was, how do you explain the source of that choice? If not, why bother worrying about anything since we have no choices?

01-26-2003, 06:34 PM	#6
AnthonyAdams45 Regular Member Join Date: Jul 2000 Location: Florida Posts: 156	No, i do not think one can choose other than the way one in fact has chosen. All I was trying to explain was that sensation we have that we could have done otherwise. Why worry? I don't. Not really. But I am aware that I am a self-referrent system, one that constantly loops back on itself, and thus, may choose differently next time, and that the choice that was made last time acts as a causal force on my choices next time. So, life is not so locked that it is boring, nor the system so simple that is completely predictable, not even for I who am its locus.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.