Free Will

[no country for old wainds]

I realised, primarily through my dad's reading of Dawkins I think, that we are a product of our genetics and environmental experience. Our first action in life is determined solely by genetics, then our second action is determined by genetics and the experience of having done that first action, and so on. This idea creates a sense of evolutionary determinism about the whole process of life.

Don't get me wrong, this doesn't mean people should stop trying because events are unalterable. That bizarre form of fatalism is an unhealthy cop out. All I mean by "pre-determinism" is that you would have always made the choices you make, because with each action in your life you have followed a path derived from your own genes (the way those genes have reacted to things around you and the way you've evolved as a result).

My view on this is that it's basically irrelevant. Whether or not things are pre-determined in this sense is irrelevant to how we think and act - there's absolutely no reason in basing one's life around the idea. We're slaves to nature, yes, but our nature (and the nature of everything around us) doesn't become clear until our lives are played out - there's no *mapping in the stars*.

Of course, a lot of you will disagree with these ideas because, without the idea that choice is some divine right of ours, nature becomes our God, as opposed to Mr. Bearded Guy In The Sky.

So what, to you, is "free will"? Does it exist? Is its existence even relevant?

 

[Episteme]

Interesting question...I'll need to think about this one before replying.

 

[The.Donut]

My view, also, is that whether we have free will or whether we don't is completely irrelevant. If we don't then there's no point worrying about it and we can just continue doing what we're doing, as everything will be pre-determined. If we do have free will then there's also no point in worrying about it because we can continue with our lives doing what we're doing, making decisions based upon our past experiences.

 

[Kenneth R.]

my PoV is somewhat on the fence. i agree that in many cases whatever "choice" i make, if i were to rewind an endless number of times, i would always "choose" the same path. this could be due to my nature.

however, i don't think that choice exists without purpose. i think, whether or not our choices have active outcomes on what is to come, and regardless of the repeatability of past choices, that choice is something relevant. this stems from other beliefs of mine: that God could have chosen to create mankind and judge each immediately, putting them where he so fit; yet instead he gives us life on earth- a trial of choices to see where we would choose to go by our decisions. making us mortal and giving us choice (whether it's illusion or not) would show him profiles of how each being reacts, thus making his judgment easier to carry out in the end, and more fairly.

given that context, i believe that freedom of choice (ie free will) is an important and real element of life. though some may argue that everything is predetermined, it is impossible to tell for certain without living through the exact situations several times. in that sense i agree with TheDonut

 

[MetalAges]

I believe we are what our parents make us. I think there are some things carried over by genes that become part of a person's personality. For example with my kiddos, one is already very muscially "smart" and stubborn like her mama! Hehe. The other kiddo is getting very good with drawing, creative things. He's also very sensitive like his mama. Different aspects like that I think are carried over from our genes. But, I think those personality traits can be molded by the individual themself or by how their parents raise them. They will take a shape and course all their own. I don't think things like "Oh my Dad was put away for murder and drug convictions, guess I may as well give up now!" apply. We are what our parents make us, I am a strong believer in that. It is up to parents to help kids develop strong morals and thought process.

I don't believe that decisions or choices are hard wired into our brains. We do have the ability to make our own choices. Again, it is up to the way we are brought up that may very well determine the choice we make.

 

[Erik]

Indeed, it doesn't matter if we actually have free will or not, and I have thought for a long time that we don't -- that what we think and do are all the results of electrical impulses and chemical reactions -- but I've recently been thinking that as we still lack a real understanding of the physics of sub-atomic particles and so forth, it might seem a bit arrogant to hold that view. There COULD indeed be such a concept as "free will", in some way that's impossible to explain in terms of the world & its physics as we see them... but it still doesn't matter to anyone. What's happened happened and could never have happened in any other way.

 

[MasterOLightning]

I agree that it doesn't matter if we have free will. Genetics and experience may or may not be the determining factor in every single one of our decisions. Some people have a terrible childhood and are troubled adults. Others persevere and overcome struggles. It's hard to say whether genetics are the deciding factor between those two cases, when experiences are the same. I guess if personality is a result of genetics + experience, then things are somewhat determined. One could argue that both genetics and experience refute free will since both of those things are results of other people and factors. We can never know if we're predisposed to make the same decisions every time.

If we could somehow understand conciousness, we could see if we are merely computers performing functions based on a complex series of variables, or something different.

Overall, it's interesting to wonder, but has no impact on my life.

 

[Korona]

Even if causality existed and everything we did was predetermined then our actions would still matter, because as part of a causal system all our actions have an impact, and indeed our "choises" to do things exist as part of this system.

However I don't like the application of causality in extreeme cases like free will.

Firstly it is counter intuitive, I don't feel like I am predestined to do anything.
Secondly causality is contradictory if you push it to extreemes: I.e. if the universe is a causal system, with every event needing a cause then what was the first cause? (there can of course be no such thing). If something is the first cause, then this begs the question "what caused it?" if it has no cause then you have a causeless event, so the idea that everything must have a cause is false, so spontaneous action can exist.
Finally, our minds would only be subject to causality if they were a mechanical system like a giant computer, which I reject as I have not heard a convincing arguement why it should be so. It may very well be a quantum system where causal laws do not apply, indeed this fits better with my own experiance.

 

[Fourka]

what we think and do are all the results of electrical impulses and chemical reactions

If one thinks about it and analyses it step by step from "outer" to the "inner" behaviour, this is what the answer will be. Play with chemical reactions and electrical impulses and get different kind of behaviours.
This is where anti-depressants come in for example, they provide you with the appropriate chemicals to react in your brain and correct the reactions on your brain.
Now I'm not sure whether this could go any further since I'm not an expert and noone is SO expert as to the brain functionality...

 

[cthulufhtagn]

It's a somewhat scary concept that your "mind" exists as a physical thing, in your brain--that is, if you experience some kind of physical brain damage (or a lobotomy for that matter) it can permanently and irreversibly alter your personality.

 

[Cythraul]

Which brings us to an important question: is what we call the mind simply a manifestation of the various processes of the brain? That is, is the brain sufficient for reasoning and conceptualization or is the mind something different and separate from the brain?

 

[Krigloch the Furious]

I believe that I just had wicked tacos with... cheese, salsa, onions, lettuce, and sour cream. I had 3... they were delicious.

 

[MasterOLightning]

Which brings us to an important question: is what we call the mind simply a manifestation of the various processes of the brain? That is, is the brain sufficient for reasoning and conceptualization or is the mind something different and separate from the brain?

I think science will come close to proving in our lifetime that there is no separate "mind." The brain is just an extremely complex machine that factors in thousands of variables to make decisions. Things like religion are a function of biology that give people a function, another reason to reproduce. There's evidence of a gene that predisposes people to be religious. All native peoples have some sort of religious desire ingrained in them. We trick ourselves into believing that we aren't basically machines. Artificial intelligence is an oxymoron. Machines just have less sophisticated intelligence mechanisms than humans, not artificial ones.

 

[cthulufhtagn]

I think the fact that you can cut a chunk out of my brain and change my entire personality refutes the concept of a separate, metaphysical "mind". Scary thought, huh? People want to believe that there is more to a human than it appears; they'll look for anything to validate their belief that they have some immortal part of them...but everybody dies. Nobody likes hearing that they are just a speck on a speck of a planet in a speck of a galaxy, but then it's not an easy concept for us to grasp; in fact it goes against our built-in self-preservation instinct. What if death is just...death? Nothing. Do you remember anything from before you were born? Of course not...doesn't sound so bad to me, considering the alternatives most major world religions offer...

 

[Darth Kur]

Ah, the ages old "Nature vs. Nurture" argument. This has puzzled and fascinated people throughout the centuries. It is my firm belief, garnered both through study and personal experiance, that it is a fine mesh of the two combined. There are obviously inherant traits that are brought forth through ones genes. Not only in each individual and throughout their family but there are specific genetic traits that are present and unique among the different races that habitate this planet. One needs to only take the time to study the varrious peoples histories and current activities to see this. You can also garner such facts by observing the majority of the prison populations in the American penal system for instance.
This is not to say that an individual can not go againts such "primal instincts" and become something different from the norm. It just takes a concerted effort and a strong will.
Also the nurture part plays a great role in any individuals personal evelution. For example if a child is pampered and doted upon all though it's development the distinct possibility of that person in adult life will retain such expectation in life for everthing to fall into place with ease and if things do not the ability to cope might be severly impared thereby making this individual inept at functioning at a normal level in society.
This is not to mean that the above scenario will happen but instead would tend to tip the scales towards that specific result.
That of coarse is only one small example in the vast myriad of possibilities that exist. The complexities of the make-up of the brain, it's electro-chemical processies, varrious resultant emotional states brought forth from interactions of such and the even more complex mysteries of DNA, the very building blocks of our existance, continue to confound the most eliete intellectuals upon our world. We've only scratched the surface of unraveling the mysteries revealing a very long and ardulous road ahead of us, with each new discovery more fascinating then the one previous.

 

[anonymousnick2001]

Free will is almost a paradox. Liken it to a man in a jail cell. He is restricted from doing almost anything in life, from having a job, a nuclear family unit, driving, drinking, socializing with friends, listening to music, exercising, spending time in the great outdoors, etc. Yet, within the cell, he can still walk around and blink his eyelids and whistle.

That is partial determinism. We are a product of genetics and experience, but are free to do whatever we want within that framework.

 

[Demiurge]

this article articulates my thoughts on the matter: http://www.benbest.com/philo/freewill.html

 

[Intoxicator]

Whether we have free will or not is irrelevant. I believe we have free will, because for events and actions to be predetermined, there has to be something controlling these events and actions. What would control these things? A god, perhaps? But because I don't believe in gods, I don't believe things can be predetermined. If there is a god who has already decided each of our fates, then there's no use worrying about it, because we can't help ourselves. If this god created a heaven or hell for humans to go to when they died, it'd be choosing each humans final destination, therefore creating a pointless system. Take the Christian religion for example. Christians believe that their god has granted them free will, yet they also believe in prophecies and that their god knows everything, including each human's choices in life. If a prophecy can come true, then we do not have free will. For example, if the nations of the world were to go into nuclear war and all life on Earth (at least human) were destroyed, then the Christian prophecies of Revelations could never come true. But if the Christian god keeps things like this in check, he is not giving humans free will, therefore dooming certain individuals to Hell and blessing others with Heaven (by his choice). Also, if a god knew our every choice in life and ultimate destination in an "afterlife", our actions would be predetermined and therefore, we couldn't truly choose our own path.

 

[Etaoin]

So what, to you, is "free will"? Does it exist? Is its existence even relevant?

So far in 41 years, I think I "know" one thing : the only thing I have to do is die...everything else is a choice.

I made my past choices based on both "nature" (the situation I was born into along with my genetic template) and the controlling interests of those who had power over me and my existence ("nurture", if you will). Depending on where you live, who you live with, and how much control they have over you and yours, your choices may seem limited, but they are choices nonetheless. And if I'm to remain sane and relatively harmless to those around me, I must believe in free will, or I will go out and choose to kill some people who have had more than their share of control over me and those I love. Regardless of whether or not there exists a higher being who has interest and/or control over my life, I must be able to tell my loved ones that I love them and make my choices without regret or remorse. Until I'm dead, as far as I know, I die alone.

 

[TheDreamingMind]

Okay stepping a little left field here I'd first like to talk about key words involved in this discussion:

Free Will could be separated into its components: Freedom (in this case generally meaning to be unbounded by "something") and Will (personal determination, ability and lets say a cause for enacting Choice). This adds up to what I'd call Free Choice. The problem with choice is that to make a choice you need choices, and even not to choose is still an alternative (ie another choice). At first look it pretty much seems that freedom of choice cannot exist, because being forced to choose goes against the meaning of freedom. Secondly freedom is a dualistic concept, to NOT be chained, bounded, enslaved, controlled, etc etc. So the idea of freedom depends on the idea of slavery and vice versa, however these are only human concepts, and as we know human concepts, even mine (haha) are not without flaw.

Next:

Which brings us to an important question: is what we call the mind simply a manifestation of the various processes of the brain? That is, is the brain sufficient for reasoning and conceptualization or is the mind something different and separate from the brain?

We trick ourselves into believing that we aren't basically machines.

What I'd like to put foreward here is the idea for the brain perhaps being a vessel for consciousness, a consciousness that is not physical and is singular (sorry for going down the religious road but bear with me). Think of this like a television set being the vessel which recieves a broadcast. Our brains are set up in a way that the consciousness is filtered into such things as human interaction, survival instincts and so on (and also incidenelty has additonal unused hardware/software for upgrading.) Just as the picture and sound of the broadcast through television can become fuzzy or snowed under due to changes in hardware, so can the broadcast of consciousness be distorted when general brain structure is changed (say by having a big chunk of it removed ). So perhaps we are not "tricking" ourselves into believing we arent machines, merely being unable to come to grips with being more than machine.