Free will redux: What is true free will?

[Piggy]

You ever gonna answer my question there, Bushy, or just admit that you were blowing smoke out your ear?

 

[Mercutio]

To disagree with your mental representation that Albert Einstein's thinking was solely a function of genetic and environmental conditions is not the same as representing them as a miracle, Mercutio.

I did not intend to say that this was your claim. It is, however, referred to as his anni mirabili (year of miracles) by others, but by no means by all.

If you have chosen to mentally represent Einstein's formulation of an equivalence between energy and relativistic mass in direct proportion to the square of the speed of light in a vacuum as solely a function of genetic and environmental conditions, well, that's your decision and I... wait, hold on. That's not right, is it? Let me try it again...

It's ok. What you are doing is arguing from ignorance. You (nor I, nor anyone, without the benefit of some control group and ability to manipulate variables) cannot know what factors influenced his decision. Nor mine to challenge your conclusion. The truth of the matter is that we study such things in controlled conditions, but can only infer that the same descriptive laws are in effect for the historical examples that someone chooses. I cannot conclusively demonstrate that any past event was the result of x, y, or z causes. No one can, for any theory. All we can do is show that under similar conditions, our theory predicts similar behavior, and other theories do not. Behaviorism can do this (and could be falsified, although it has not happened yet), but I do not think that any assumption of Free Will is falsifiable.

If you are determined to have it your way and... well, I guess that doesn't make sense at all, does it? How about... if your purpose in this is to... hmmm. Can't say that, can I? Suggests free will...

No, it suggests ignorance again. Or are you equating the two? Maybe 2 years ago on this forum, I suggested that "any sufficiently subtly determined behavior is indistinguishable from free will".

If Radical Behaviorism calls for portraying Einstein's thinking as solely a function of genetic and environmental conditi... goddamnit, this is tricky. No, not Tricky. But you knew that. Wait, how could you? That would have been suggesting a mental representation. And now I've gone and made a mental representation of a mental representation...

Sorry to say, but you are misrepresenting behaviorism again. You are saying that this requires a "mental representation", when all it requires is thinking. As you must realise, the two are not at all the same thing.

One more time... why do you commit yourself to this point of view... holy cow. Did it again. In all honesty, how would you rather I put this? Whoops! That's wrong, too...

Would you prefer I... well, excuse me. How could you, after all. Though I really am trying to single out a way to... oh, man. I've done it, again. No, I haven't. That would be another mental representation...

Again, it's ok. Like I said, I had assumed that you understood behaviorism better than you did. Your inability to properly use the vocabulary is quite understandable; you apparently have had experience with non-behavioral explanations. (a guess--just a guess: your view of behaviorism is influenced by just one or two profs in psych or philosophy classes, or by one or two books on psych or philosophy. It's just a guess, and based more on other people who have made similar arguments than based on your own.)

I'm ready to call it quits and just say, for better or worse, that I opt for Radical Behaviorism. But it won't let me...

Cute. Understandable, given your reinforcement history...

How did you get in there?

So... nothing substantial, then?

 

[President Bush]

So... nothing substantial, then?

Hey, I'll say it again:

... the popular picture of Einstein's ideas as a miraculous is simply a myth.

To disagree with your mental representation that Albert Einstein's thinking was solely a function of genetic and environmental conditions is not the same as representing them as a miracle, Mercutio.


If you have chosen to mentally represent Einstein's formulation of an equivalence between energy and relativistic mass in direct proportion to the square of the speed of light in a vacuum as solely a function of genetic and environmental conditions, well, that's your decision and I... wait, hold on. That's not right, is it? Let me try it again...


If you are determined to have it your way and... well, I guess that doesn't make sense at all, does it? How about... if your purpose in this is to... hmmm. Can't say that, can I? Suggests free will...


If Radical Behaviorism calls for portraying Einstein's thinking as solely a function of genetic and environmental conditi... goddamnit, this is tricky. No, not Tricky. But you knew that. Wait, how could you? That would have been suggesting a mental representation. And now I've gone and made a mental representation of a mental representation...


One more time... why do you commit yourself to this point of view... holy cow. Did it again. In all honesty, how would you rather I put this? Whoops! That's wrong, too...


Would you prefer I... well, excuse me. How could you, after all. Though I really am trying to single out a way to... oh, man. I've done it, again. No, I haven't. That would be another mental representation...


I'm ready to call it quits and just say, for better or worse, that I opt for Radical Behaviorism. But it won't let me...


How did you get in there?

 

[Mercutio]

Thanks for playing.

 

[President Bush]

Thanks for playing.

Indeed.

 

[hodgy]

hodgy, let me just say that you are damn inconvenient. I was perfectly happy with my little black box, and you have to go smashing it open.

So far I haven't been able to hold Humpty Dumpty together.

Muchas gracias. I do appreciate a good debu**sh**ifier.

No problem

 

[hodgy]

Can anyone succintly summarise President Bush's argument? I don't get it.

 

[President Bush]

You ever gonna answer my question there, Bushy, or just admit that you were blowing smoke out your ear?

External influences, controlling the sensory apparatus of my body from birth, have caused it to develop in such a way that it would tend to engage in few occasions of repetitive verbal behavior, even while acting as though this were of its (my) own free will.

Alternately, dissimilar external influences having controlled the sensory apparatus of your body from birth caused it to develop in such a way that it would tend to engage in continually repetitive verbal behaviors, even while acting as though these conditioned responses were of its (your) own free will.

That said, what is your question?

 

[Piggy]

That said, what is your question?

The external influence causing me to engage in repetitive verbal behavior is your obtuseness and refusal to address a direct question.

The question is simply: Where is the information which was impossible to know before?

And please, don't just say that the theory, theorem, and score are the information which was impossible to know before.

That's like saying that the Taj Majal contains more than simply a recombination of pre-existing materials, and when asked where these "extra" materials are, pointing to the Taj Majal.

If you think there's some part of the process which cannot be explained by behaviorism, as you claim, you can't be taken seriously if you simply repeat the outcomes of the creative process as your example.

You must specify what part of the process, and what information, you are referring to.

That's the question.

 

[hammegk]

The real question is "Who posts the silliest nonsense masquerading as thought; coberst or piggy?".

 

[President Bush]

If you think there's some part of the process which cannot be explained by behaviorism, as you claim, you can't be taken seriously if you simply repeat the outcomes of the creative process as your example.

Some part of the process which cannot be explained by behaviorism? Those are your words, Piggy. I had suggested that none of it could be explained by behaviorism. But never mind... I'm onboard, now.

Imagine Albert Einstein's mind as a white lab rat, Piggy.

This white lab rat is close to formulating an equivalence between energy and relativistic mass in direct proportion to the square of the speed of light in a vacuum when it accidentally steps on a foot pedal, releasing a St. Galler bratwurst with sauerkraut into the Swiss Patent Office.

(This near formulation of an equivalence between energy and relativistic mass in direct proportion to the square of the speed of light in a vacuum in the lab rat's behavior - or operant of Radical Behaviorism - must occur just before the release of bratwurst with sauerkraut into the Swiss Patent Office - the reinforcer of radical behaviorism.)

In no time at all, the lab rat is continually stepping on the foot pedal and following, of course, a geodesic path to pile its bratwurst in the corner of the Swiss Patent Office. Before you know it, voila, energy equals mass times the constant squared.

 

[Piggy]

Imagine Albert Einstein's mind as a white lab rat, Piggy.

This white lab rat is close to formulating an equivalence between energy and relativistic mass in direct proportion to the square of the speed of light in a vacuum when it accidentally steps on a foot pedal, releasing a St. Galler bratwurst with sauerkraut into the Swiss Patent Office.

Troll.

 

[President Bush]

 

[RandFan]

Troll.

I could have saved you some time and warned you but I was really enjoying the discussion. You and Mercutio did a great job.

Thanks

 

[hammegk]

I could have saved you some time and warned you but I was really enjoying the discussion.

?

You and Mercutio did a great job.

Yeah, at preaching to the choir.

Thanks

For apparently agreeing with your wordview?

 

[Piggy]

I could have saved you some time and warned you but I was really enjoying the discussion.

With friends like you, RandFan....

 

[President Bush]

Thanks

Eventually a science of the nervous system based upon direct observation rather than inference will describe the neural states and even's which immediately precede instances of behavior. We shall know the precise neurological conditions which immediately precede, say, the response, "Thank you."

BF Skinner
Science and Human Behavior, p 28

Guess I shouldn't come here looking for unprecedented EEG patterns.

 

[hodgy]

Hammegk, you seem to be supporting President Bush but neither of your arguments (on this thread) are clear.

Please can you state them and we can discuss...

Hint - make an assertion and we will debate it...

 

[Piggy]

Hammegk, you seem to be supporting President Bush but neither of your arguments (on this thread) are clear.

Please can you state them and we can discuss...

Hint - make an assertion and we will debate it...

I gotta step in and do what RandFan didn't do for me .... Hammegk has never made a clear argument. You will not get one out of him. "Thought exists" is about as far as he gets. After that, it's Jabberwocky. Just so's you know....

 

[hammegk]

Blather on as per usual.