Deleted

  • Gatsby@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    You react to choices the specific way you do because of experiences you’ve had previously.

    Reverse time without changing anything, you’ll always make the same choices because you’re having the same thoughts each time every time, because you’ve been conditioned the way you are.

    The universe doesn’t “know” where it’s going, but the plan is already in action. You can choose whatever you want to do, but if you were the same person in the same circumstance, you would and will always make the same decision.

  • Dragandroid@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    I think it’s more complicated than free will existing or not.

    If you knew every single possible value about the universe at its start and had a perfectly accurate model of physics, you could theoretically predict/simulate everything that would ever happen. For practical reasons, though, that’s impossible, even ignoring weird quantum effects, for the simple reason that that is a lot of data points, more than any of us could reasonably keep track of- it’s like how, in sufficiently controlled conditions, a fair dice can roll the exact same number 100% of the time, but there are enough variables that are hard enough to control for in a normal situation that it’s basically random.

    Similarly, if you knew everything about every human on Earth, you could theoretically predict exactly what any of them would do at any given moment. Of course, that’s just not practical- the body and brain are a machine that is constantly taking in input and adapting to it, so in order to perfectly predict someone’s thoughts and actions, you’d need to know every single detail of every single thing that has ever happened to them, no matter how small. Then, you’d need to account for the fact that they’re interacting with hundreds of other people, who are also constantly changing and adapting. It’s just not possible to predict or control a person for any reasonable length of time like that, because one tiny interaction could throw off the entire model.

    Just look at current work with AI- our modern machine learning algorithms are much more well-understood and are trained in much more contained environments than any human mind, and yet we still need to manually reign them in and sift through the data to prevent them from going off the rails.

    So, technically, I suppose free will doesn’t exist. For practical purposes, though, what we have is indistinguishable from free will, so there’s not much point getting riled up about it.

  • Mugmoor@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    My brother and I have been having an ongoing debate about this and Simulation Theory for a good few years.

    In my mind, it’s a pointless question to try and answer. It makes for a nice thought experiment, but actually having a belief in it is useless.

  • mcc@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    So that’s a topic that fascinated so many people forever.

    With all these people fascinated by it, some of them weirdos put their whole life’s at it.

    And these weirdos came to a few absolutely terrifying conclusions:

    1. The ultimate future is predictable: 2nd law of thermal dynamics means the universe will eventually end with energy being equal everywhere, so there is nothing because there is no difference. That’s the heat death of the universe.

    2. Otherwise nothing is absolutely predictable: the uncertainty principle says you can either know the precise position of a particle, or you know the precise movement of a particle, you can’t know both at the same time. So yeh if you know the initial condition you can make a prediction, but you can’t know the precise initial condition at particle level, and since the world is made of particles, you can only make imprecise predictions without 100% certainty.

    You could argue that the human mind is a quantum machine. You don’t know it’s initial condition. Nor do you know the precise initial condition of every human mind in the world. The impreciseness of any prediction, even if it could be small individually, adds up in the scale of the world, the universe. So that can be you foundation of free will, up to the heat death.

    • taladar@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      The fact that something is random doesn’t really mean that it is under some sort of conscious control of the individual whose tiniest constituent parts behave in random ways though.

  • AaronMaria@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I have the feeling most people cling to free will as a concept because not having free will raises questions if a “self” truly exists. However the existence of free will can be as scary if not more, since how could we define a “self” if it could freely do something not based on what defines it.

  • geemili@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    The question is underspecified. Why do you want to know if free will exists? What will you do differently if it does exist vs if it does not exist?

    This is similar to questions like, “is water wet?” You can generate endless debate on the topic, but it’s all intellectual masturbation until you are genuinely looking for the answer to a specific question.

  • oxalisautomata@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Quantum mechanics shows the universe really does just operate on probabilities. On the smallest scales we can probe we see that the universe is non-deterministic. But average out those probabilities 10^20 times for a coin and everything may look pre-determined to our macroscopic lives.

  • SpinalPhatPants@vlemmy.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Deterministic with no actual free will, but complex enough that we’ll never be able to tell the difference. Essentially, our choices may technically be predetermined but for all intents and purposes, they are indistinguishable from free will and can’t be predicted.

  • ArugulaZ@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Now see, if you’re looking at things from a biological point of view, it’s important to recognize the forest from the trees. A few trees are, well, just a few trees. But a great many trees together constitutes a forest, and becomes more than the sum of its parts. I feel the same way about the human brain. Yes, it’s a series of electrical and chemical impulses, but there are so many of these working in tandem that it becomes exponentially more complex, akin to ever-advancing computer technology. It’s complex enough that we think, we talk, we make decisions. And those decisions aren’t based solely on instinctional drive, and can even be made in opposition to them.

    It’s true that human behavior can be accurately predicted based on an individual’s natural tendencies, but there are never any guarantees. There’s always a choice, a chance to veer off course. Decisions can be prudently made after careful research, or made on a frivolous impulse. Maybe you even realize that you would ordinarily take one action in a given situation, but do the exact opposite. You consciously chose to ignore your first impulse. If free will is an illusion, it’s a damned convincing one.

  • Gsus4@lemmy.one
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Some entities are more deterministic than others. A rock is more deterministic than an animal and a human is less deterministic than an animal because its “causal inertia” (the opposite of free will) is weaker: it can be influenced by more factors than the rock and is more unpredictable. Some people lead more deterministic lives than others.

    • Bennu@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Not necessarily, no. You may believe something and yet not be free to believe otherwise.

    • Hovenko@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Free will would mean that you believe in something without any ties to your environment, how were you raised up, your mental state, biological factors… etc. It would mean you started believing in something without any of those factors and just the concept of believing is predetermined by the fact that you are a human.

      I don’t think you can defend such a crazy ass huge concept as free will by such a simple argument. You need to start with definition, what do you understand by free will. Is it a binary state? Or is your will free only to some degree?

  • Bennu@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I just wanted to say that if you guys truly want to see what serious answers can be given to these type of questions you can always take a look into philosophy and just so happens I’m trying to build a philosophy community on Kbin so feel free to check m/AskPhilosophers, and m/LearnPhilosophy.

  • agentshags@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    That’s a wild question.

    And I asked myself this earlier in the shower.

    I decided I would probably never know, and ended up upset I needed to get out and get ready for work.

    Sometimes I wonder if the cosmic joke is we could comprehend a situation like free will, but never actually find out of it exists.

  • k110111@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Religion warning:

    I think free will exist but there is also a bigger plan. Like think of an open world video game, you can choose to do some things which will affect some other things but there are some parts fixed/determined to happen