spacer1

Scientists have just concluded that determinsim is absolutely, multi-versally, no-doubt-about-it true. Perhaps more disconcerting, however, is that free-will has been proven to be nothing but an illusion. Every movement you have ever made and every thought you have ever had, were laid down and planned out seconds into the inception of the universe. You have no control over any of the events of your life, not even the choice to end that life - unless it was part of your destiny, which had been planned out since, and was caused by, the Big Bang.

However, you are still conscious of your entire experience. It's just that you have absolutely no control over it.

If this were true, how would it change your perspective of life? (Assuming that it's not your prevailing view.)

(And remember, every response you make - and this response I am now making - are not really "choices" of yours, or mine. They were always going to happen.)

Jarlaxle

um.. would my perspective be determined as well?

Quantum Ninja

I can't really say how it would change my perspective of life because I would have no control over how that perspective would change. I'm going to guess though and assume that I would submit to the illusion of free will and continue to live my life like I was in control of it.

This question reminds me of something we talked about in a philosophy course last semester. We were talking about how if determinism were true, should people still be punished for their actions. I think I was the only one in the class that thought the discussion was trivial. If we initially accept the principle that everything is determined, then why are we talking about what we should or shouldn't do to criminals. We have no choice but to punish them if that's what we're destined to do. The word "should" doesn't really make sense in a deterministic world.

Keith Russell

quantum, agreed.

K

Adrian Selby

While free will might in actuality be an illusion, this doesn't mean that we have any clue about what decisions we'll make, because the determining factors are hugely multifarious, and if they essentially boil down to an atomic level, it follows that without a complete understanding of the movement of every atom, we cannot predict what it is we'll do, though in principle its predictable.

I think therefore that on an interpersonal level it is still useful and meaningful to use these concepts. However, i don't necessarily think its right.

There does seem to be a bifurcation in the concepts and vocabularies applied to those considered to have free will, and those who are mentally ill. Where they're mentally ill, the language stops being about personal responsibility and becomes all about external and internal determining factors 'causing' acts that are anti social, dangerous or worse.

While the person is supposedly capable of acting freely, the decision processes that lead to criminal behaviour, and the reprobation that follow are couched in the traditional terms of punishment, remorse, guilt and so on. The former cases seem to be more amenable to the neuropsychological explanations for 'what's going on when they're 'compelled' to do x or y' yet in the latter case we seem reluctant to address the issue of jurisprudence from the perspective that acknowledges some ramifications of materialism.

I don't think this bifurcation of approaches is right, indeed, it seems inconsistent if one has a certain metaphysical model that admits of determinism, yet there are many who seem happy to utilise the concepts rooted in different approaches to guilt and punishment and responsibility without addressing the underlying issue.

spacer1

If you are conscious of your experience? Surely not.

madmax2976

The question that needs to be addressed is "What is free will"?

One possibility is that it is the making of chioces is based on a wide variety of inputs. Just as in a compter, inputs are received, the inputs are processed, and an outcome is acheived. In the case of humans the "processor" just happens to be much more advanced - to the point that it is aware of its own existence.

Another possibility is that the making of a chioce has some element which is not determined by anything - random elements. But if choices are ultimately decided by "random" elements, can we truly call them chioces at all? Is "free will" synonomous with "random actions"? If so, what sense is making chioces based on random events? If things are not determined, then things would just happen willy-nilly, for no reason and where is the free will or choice in that?



Q. Since everything is determined, you don't really have free will you know.

Z. Whats free will?

Q. It is the making of chioces without being determined or constrained by outside forces.

Z. You mean free will is in the interjection of random elements?

Q. No, no. Free will means "you" and "I" can make decisions without being forced to do so because of the way our brains happened to be wired.

Z. Well how do you and I come to be the way we are? Are our personalities / experiences/ knowledge all random, or are there reasons why you and I are the way we are?

Q. Well of course our personalities and so forth are greatly determined by the culture we live in, the experiences we've had, and the knowledge we've gained. But there is a part of us that can still choose despite all these things.

A. Oh, you mean there is a part of us that is random?

Q. No, its not random, its just not determined by anything outside of ourselves.

A. What is it determined by?

Q. Well nothing, thats where free will comes in.

A. So its not determined by anything, yet its not random - is that right?

Q. Yep.

A. ???

Godless Wonder

That is pretty much what I already believe, so no change.

I'm not sure the universe is "deterministic"", because I suspect that quantum effects make things non-deterministic. However, that still doesn't get you free will, it just makes the uncontrollable future also unpredictable (at a nanoscopic level anyway) Determinism vs. Non-determinism is a separate question from free-will vs. no-free-will. Non-determinism is necessary but insufficient for free-will.

But, I continue to live as if free will were mine because I could not do otherwise, on account of lacking free will and all. :-)

spacer1

Let me cut to the chase here:

I am interested in the relationship between consciousness and free-will, or more precisely, if determinism is true, what is the need for consciousness?

madmax2976

But what IS free will? If you have it, how exactly do you define what it is you think you have?