Woo Denial

[Panthera tigris FC]

But they are only theoretically predictable.In actuality we never know the full causes that go into our decisions,so therefore the decisions seem like "ours".

This sums up my views on the topic.

Many posts here are imposing human limitations on the universe.

 

[Djevv]

This sums up my views on the topic.

Many posts here are imposing human limitations on the universe.

So you also believe your life is fully pre-determined and you have no free will?

 

[evo]

This sums up my views on the topic.

Many posts here are imposing human limitations on the universe.

It is more mendacious than that in my view.

When positing a soul it is really saying within me is a 'something'that can act outside the laws of the universe.Or put another way:my "I" is supernatural.

"I" can be first cause.

 

[Djevv]

Thats fine But unpredictable and uncaused are different beasts.
If it follows the laws of newtonian physics then it is theoretically predictable;caused. Why do you continue to argue this point?

Newtonian physics has been replaced by relativity, and at the micro level by Heisenberg. Heisenberg's principle seems to say that no-one can be absolutely certain of any measurement, and so the up shot of that is that there is a fundamental principle of randomness about the universe. Nothing can be entirely reliably observed and therefore predicted.

You must understand Newtonian physics,you are a science teacher.It is based around causation.Why would you be 'fairly certain' a repeatable experiment exactly the same would throw out different results?

When I wrote the above I did a thought experiment. Lets say you dropped a dice in a vaccuum bell on it's point exactly the same way every time mechanically, would you get the same result every time? You say yes, I'm not so sure.

If what you were saying were true it would make the pursuit of science meaningless.

Probability is a science which produces repeatable results from experiments so long as you do enough repetitions.

You must be familiar with Einsteins famous quote:"God doesn't play dice". What did you think that meant?

Yes and I think the context of what he was saying is a response to Heisenberg's principle of randomness. It didn't sit right with him. Here is a link on this subject which explains thing very clearly, but comes down more or less on Evo's side of the argument, but does leave the door open.

I've never actually used the word predetermined.

I believe our lives are determined,like everything else.

Yes, a lot of things about our lives are determined by causation, but I'm certain not everything. Without doubt we have the capacity and freedom to make choices. Again my evidence for this is the creative thoughts people have which bring things, without antecedent physical causes into being.

 

[Panthera tigris FC]

So you also believe your life is fully pre-determined and you have no free will?

Free will is an illusion. A perfect illusion from our POV though, so why not enjoy it!

Where do you identify the break in causation?

 

[Panthera tigris FC]

Yes, a lot of things about our lives are determined by causation, but I'm certain not everything. Without doubt we have the capacity and freedom to make choices. Again my evidence for this is the creative thoughts people have which bring things, without antecedent physical causes into being.

Again, an illusion. You could have parts of your brain removed/altered that would fundamentally change you....does that mean the 'soul' that you refer to in your earlier posts resides therein?

Evo's point on mundane actions is correct here IMO.

 

[Djevv]

Free will is an illusion. A perfect illusion from our POV though, so why not enjoy it!

Where do you identify the break in causation?

A truly awful thought! Fling open the prison doors if this is the case!

Explain in full the causes that lead to the invention of the wheel without freewill?

 

[evo]

Newtonian physics has been replaced by relativity,

Newtonian physics is still absolutely valid for 'billiard ball causation' such as a roll of a dice. It hasn't been "replaced".

and at the micro level by Heisenberg. Heisenberg's principle seems to say that no-one can be absolutely certain of any measurement, and so the up shot of that is that there is a fundamental principle of randomness about the universe. Nothing can be entirely reliably observed and therefore predicted.

Yes,and I'm saying that Heisenberg was premature in making that claim/principle. It is philosophically flawed.

In my view he is mistaking Indeterminsim,with Nondeterminism.

When I wrote the above I did a thought experiment. Lets say you dropped a dice in a vaccuum bell on it's point exactly the same way every time mechanically, would you get the same result every time? You say yes, I'm not so sure.

Ok,well I don't understand why you are not sure. You must be imaginaing some acausal agent at work if the dice is dropped exactly the same both times yet comes up with a different result.

Probability is a science which produces repeatable results from experiments so long as you do enough repetitions.

I hate to nit-pick but probability is a branch of mathematics.It has nothing to say on determinism(or lackthereof)

 

[Djevv]

Again, an illusion. You could have parts of your brain removed/altered that would fundamentally change you....does that mean the 'soul' that you refer to in your earlier posts resides therein?

Evo's point on mundane actions is correct here IMO.

I beleive the brain and the soul to be linked, so brain damage would affect the soul as well. Since the brain communicates the soul's will to the body then obviously brain damage will have an effect on the whole person as well.

What is a mundane action? Must have missed that one.

 

[Panthera tigris FC]

A truly awful thought! Fling open the prison doors if this is the case!

I have never understood this response to lack of ultimate free will. Why does that change anything about our subjective experience?

How your feelings on the matter affect the truth of it is beyond me.

Explain in full the causes that lead to the invention of the wheel without freewill?

We have brains that have evolved to grasp causation and the inherent predictability that goes along with this. We have also evolved the ability to use abstract thought and develop ideas such a mathematics, philosophy and science. Your idea about wheels is silly IMO as the design of this device which provides the least resistance for rolling could have come through trial and error or conceptually through inherently understanding the physics of the world around through living within it.

When apes use tools do they do that through free will?

Explain to me where you see a breakdown in causation.

 

[evo]

Again, an illusion. You could have parts of your brain removed/altered that would fundamentally change you....does that mean the 'soul' that you refer to in your earlier posts resides therein?

In psychology they have done experiments on people with "split brains".The corpus collosum which is the part of the brain which links the left and right hemisphere has been removed surgically;often to alleviate really severe epilepsy.

This is one of them: http://hypnosisschool.org/hypnotic/brain-areas.php

Are there two Joes?Does he have two souls?

 

[evo]

How your feelings on the matter affect the truth of it is beyond me.

Exactly; proper science and philosophy is supposed to be a search of the truth regardless of where the investigation leads.

 

[Panthera tigris FC]

I beleive the brain and the soul to be linked, so brain damage would affect the soul as well. Since the brain communicates the soul's will to the body then obviously brain damage will have an effect on the whole person as well.

Why the need to posit a soul though? It seems like the brain alone will satisfy the observations.

What is a mundane action? Must have missed that one.

Quote from: evo on January 17, 2009, 09:31:30 pm
All thoughts are original--just because some are more mundane than others doesn't mean they aren't new.You haven't thought this through,in my view.

 

[Panthera tigris FC]

In psychology they have done experiments on people with "split brains".The corpus collosum which is the part of the brain which links the left and right hemisphere has been removed surgically;often to alleviate really severe epilepsy.

This is one of them: http://hypnosisschool.org/hypnotic/brain-areas.php

Are there two Joes?Does he have two souls?

I am familiar with these cases. A lovely example for this discussion.

 

[evo]

I am familiar with these cases. A lovely example for this discussion.

There is a really good philosophical discussion on it in this book.If you ever get the time.

I wish I could paste the relevant couple of pages for discussion but it is university property in PDF format.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reasons_and_Persons

 

[Djevv]

Newtonian physics is still absolutely valid for 'billiard ball causation' such as a roll of a dice. It hasn't been "replaced".

Yes,and I'm saying that Heisenberg was premature in making that claim/principle. It is philosophically flawed.

In my view he is mistaking Indeterminsim,with Nondeterminism.

Ok,well I don't understand why you are not sure. You must be imaginaing some acausal agent at work if the dice is dropped exactly the same both times yet comes up with a different result.
I hate to nit-pick but probability is a branch of mathematics.It has nothing to say on determinism(or lackthereof)

Heisenbergs findings may or may not point to something that is real. No-one is sure, or probably ever will be, since we can't actually make meaningful measurements.

Hate to nit-pick but probability and mathematics it's self is a branch of science, Gauss referred to it as the 'Queen of the sciences'. In probability in particular you do experiments, in many cases this is the only way to determine how probable an event is. My point is you get definite results from probability experiments, bell curves and the like. You would think certain ways of throwing the dice might produce variations observable in the graphs. All I'm doing here is wondering if randomness is real and it is so much a part of our existance. My lack of a philosophical background means I haven't seriously considered this stuff before.

 

[evo]

My point is you get definite results from probability experiments, bell curves and the like.

Come on mate,if a bell curve is used it is not certain by definition.It is not a definite result.It is always qualified by a standard deviation statistic.

Regardless,the usefullness of probability to scientists has nothing to say on whether Heisenbergs interpretation is ulitmately true of the world.

 

[Djevv]

I have never understood this response to lack of ultimate free will. Why does that change anything about our subjective experience?

How your feelings on the matter affect the truth of it is beyond me.

Since no free will is the 'truth', then people are not responsible for their actions and should not be held responsible for them, obviously. You don't find this problematic? Surely if this is truth and you are a truth seeker you should be following through on your findings.

We have brains that have evolved to grasp causation and the inherent predictability that goes along with this. We have also evolved the ability to use abstract thought and develop ideas such a mathematics, philosophy and science. Your idea about wheels is silly IMO as the design of this device which provides the least resistance for rolling could have come through trial and error or conceptually through inherently understanding the physics of the world around through living within it.

When apes use tools do they do that through free will?

Explain to me where you see a breakdown in causation.

Just because wheels are a good idea doesn't account for their existance. Someone needs to will them into existance. I am making exactly the same 'silly' point Evo made back here.

It is more mendacious than that in my view.

When positing a soul it is really saying within me is a 'something'that can act outside the laws of the universe.Or put another way:my "I" is supernatural.

"I" can be first cause.

A first cause implies acausality. This is where I see the breakdown.

 

[Djevv]

Come on mate,if a bell curve is used it is not certain by definition.It is not a definite result.It is always qualified by a standard deviation statistic.

Regardless,the usefullness of probability to scientists has nothing to say on whether Heisenbergs interpretation is ulitmately true of the world.

Standard deviation only relates to the shape of the curve.

Have enough trials (say for the sum of two dice) and you always get this curve.

Must say on this discussion, I never saw the connection between souls and dice before :hihi. Interesting discussion we are having nevertheless, but I have to do some work so cul8r.

 

[evo]

A first cause implies acausality. This is where I see the breakdown.

Thats right.

"first cause" to me is philosophically speaking an oxymoron;a contradiction in terms/concepts.