The unsolved problem of "free will"

[Dancing David]

But can't just about everything but said to be an illusion? Like how we see images on tv, we see a certain picture, but it is "filtered/modified/put together" by the brain. Or how sight is a combined illusion of all the things involved in putting the picture together.
I once heard it said that one of the reasons why we blink when we are startled, it to check whether or not we are dreaming.

Our brains do manufacture the perceptions. I doubt that about blinking.

 

[lightcreatedlife@hom]

Our brains do manufacture the perceptions. I doubt that about blinking.

What?

Can't the word "illusion" be used to describe most of our reality?

 

[cyborg]

Can't the word "illusion" be used to describe most of our reality?

Since our perception can only ever be a highly compressed representation of reality it could.

 

[lightcreatedlife@hom]

Since our perception can only ever be a highly compressed representation of reality it could.

So how can anyone single out something as obvious as "freewill" for that label? If a bee can communicate where to find food to other bees, isn't it generating, and conveying, unique thoughts? Isn't that freewill?

 

[cyborg]

If a bee can communicate where to find food to other bees, isn't it generating, and conveying, unique thoughts? Isn't that freewill?

I dunno. Does one oxygen molecule bumping into another constitute the communication of where and how fast it is moving to? Is that the generation and conveyence of unique thoughts? Is that freewill?

 

[lightcreatedlife@hom]

I dunno. Does one oxygen molecule bumping into another constitute the communication of where and how fast it is moving to? Is that the generation and conveyence of unique thoughts? Is that freewill?

That's not the same thing. One is living, and the other is not... right? The bee may have found the flower through random action, but it knew its way home, remembered where it found the flower, and conveyed the thought.
Things with brains have more options than things without brains. From the reference point of their "I", choices have to be made. The more complex the lifeform, the more complex the choices.

 

[cyborg]

That's not the same thing.

It isn't?

One is living, and the other is not... right?

Is it?

The bee may have found the flower through random action,

I fail to see why you think any "random action" would have relevance.

but it knew its way home,

Water always returns to its own level.

remembered where it found the flower,

A beach remembers where all its pebbles are.

and conveyed the thought.

The sea carries its many passengers far and wide.

Things with brains have more options than things without brains.

A thousand pebbles is more than one pebble.

From the reference point of their "I", choices have to be made. The more complex the lifeform, the more complex the choices.

And at what value of complexity does freewill occur?

A simple number will be sufficient.

 

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

So how can anyone single out something as obvious as "freewill" for that label? If a bee can communicate where to find food to other bees, isn't it generating, and conveying, unique thoughts? Isn't that freewill?

I'm not sure that's even compatibilist free will, let alone libertarian free will.

~~ Paul

 

[lightcreatedlife@hom]

I'm not sure that's even compatibilist free will, let alone libertarian free will.

~~ Paul

How many types of "freewill" do we need before it is said to exist?

And using your definition of "libertarian freewill", isn't I/consciousness the third mechanism? An individual "will" that acts in a unique way?

 

[lightcreatedlife@hom]

I fail to see why you think any "random action" would have relevance.

The actions after the flower was found were deliberate, while finding it was chance.

Water always returns to its own level.

So, are you saying that water is conscious?

A beach remembers where all its pebbles are.



The sea carries its many passengers far and wide.



A thousand pebbles is more than one pebble.

And at what value of complexity does freewill occur?

If freewill has to do with making choices, very early.

A simple number will be sufficient.

I think at two choices, but certainly by five.

 

[cyborg]

How many types of "freewill" do we need before it is said to exist?

42.

And using your definition of "libertarian freewill", isn't I/consciousness the third mechanism?

Yes it is.

 

[cyborg]

The actions after the flower was found were deliberate, while finding it was chance.

Not withstanding that this doesn't entail that the actions before the flower was found were deliberate I still fail to see what relevance this actually has.

So, are you saying that water is conscious?

No.

It is quite simple really.

Why are you mystified by a bee's memory and not the ability for a rock to stay where it is? They both 'remember' information but you only start getting mystical about one category.

Why are you mystified by the ability for a bee to transmit information and not by water currents sweeping debris to far flung areas of the world? They both 'transmit' information but you only start getting mystical about one category.

Why is it that the number of plausible 'options' a brain has makes you want to seek "freewill" but not by the fact one beach may have many pebbles and another few? Their complexity is limited in both cases by the size of the system - it is hardly surprising then that the larger the system is the more interesting behaviour can be observed.

If freewill has to do with making choices, very early.

If it has to do with making choices I can show you some very small pieces of silicon you should consider.

I think at two choices, but certainly by five.

Yes well then we're going to have to lower the bar somewhat for free will to include - well, just about everything.

 

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

How many types of "freewill" do we need before it is said to exist?

What? We need to independently establish the existence of each type of free will that we talk about.

And using your definition of "libertarian freewill", isn't I/consciousness the third mechanism? An individual "will" that acts in a unique way?

It doesn't matter what you call it. How does this I/consciousness/will make decisions in a way that is neither predetermined nor random?

~~ Paul

 

[rocketdodger]

It doesn't matter what you call it. How does this I/consciousness/will make decisions in a way that is neither predetermined nor random?

~~ Paul

This sort of gets right at the heart of why the Libertarian free will (although I want it to be true) doesn't matter -- it is impossible for us to understand what it could be, let alone whether it exists.

We are unable to even imagine any cause that isn't the effect of some other cause, and unfortunately that means we are limited to understanding the universe (right now, at least) in a deterministic fashion. Its funny, though, how people (including me) want something to exist even when we are incapable of conceptualizing what it would be.

 

[Dancing David]

What?

Can't the word "illusion" be used to describe most of our reality?

No reality is the apparent world with which our senses interact. the perceptions we experience are based upon the sensations with the brain filling in gaps. As to the nature of reality, it appears to exist.

 

[Dancing David]

So how can anyone single out something as obvious as "freewill" for that label? If a bee can communicate where to find food to other bees, isn't it generating, and conveying, unique thoughts? Isn't that freewill?

Or it is following an internal genetic algorithim expressed in the nervous system?

 

[lightcreatedlife@hom]

What? We need to independently establish the existence of each type of free will that we talk about.

No we don't. If we are talking about different types of freewill, doesn't that say freewill exists? Something like how we talk about different types of love. That is, if love exists... it does, doesn't it?
Oh no. We talk about different types of Gods, and....

It doesn't matter what you call it. How does this I/consciousness/will make decisions in a way that is neither predetermined nor random?

~~ Paul

Are you asking how it works, or whether it works? No one can explain how (right now) but we know it does.
Predetermination cannot cover unique situations, and neither can random actions. At least, not without a lot of wasted actions, until one happens to fit. But even then, some type of freewill would have to be called on to help say when something fits.

 

[lightcreatedlife@hom]

Not withstanding that this doesn't entail that the actions before the flower was found were deliberate I still fail to see what relevance this actually has.

It shows that some of its actions were deliberate. At the insect level, only some of their actions can be said to be free. Once life reaches the level of mammals, more of its actions maybe considered freewill.

It is quite simple really.

Why are you mystified by a bee's memory and not the ability for a rock to stay where it is? They both 'remember' information but you only start getting mystical about one category.

Inorganic gave rise to organic, so I am not surprised that some of the properties of the one, can be found in the other. Though I would dare not say "memory" in reference to "inorganic" because of my earlier experiences in this forum.

Why are you mystified by the ability for a bee to transmit information and not by water currents sweeping debris to far flung areas of the world? They both 'transmit' information but you only start getting mystical about one category.

What is that one catagory?

Why is it that the number of plausible 'options' a brain has makes you want to seek "freewill" but not by the fact one beach may have many pebbles and another few? Their complexity is limited in both cases by the size of the system - it is hardly surprising then that the larger the system is the more interesting behaviour can be observed.

While both appear to be well thought out, directed even, the thing with the brain has actions that require constant, free, choices.

That, and the word "freewill" is usually not used in reference to nonlife.

Yes well then we're going to have to lower the bar somewhat for free will to include - well, just about everything.

There are levels to these things. Inorganic, no freewill. Less complex forms of life, something that looks like it. By the time we get to humans... something that can be said to be freewill. The same type of thing applies to what, (or who) can be considered conscious.