Page: ...
Jomember
517 posts
Location: Sheffield, England


Posted:
Ok, another psychological hot potatoe this one. Basically if proven a lot of good lawyers could get a lot of dangerous people released from prison, which is why it has not yet become a 'mainstream' concept.



IMHO! wink



Whenever you do anything - ANYTHING! - your concious self has not used free will at all to make that decision.



Actually, your subconcious has decided to do it.



You can then, if you wish, execute 'free won't'.



How many times did you realy have no reason to reach over there? Failed free won't execution.



Ever hit someone? Shouted?......... smile



Jo.

Educate yourself in the Hazards of Fire Breathing STAY SAFE!


FireTomStargazer
6,650 posts

Posted:
Written by: dream

Reactions - such as your biker and dog - have nothing to do with heart or free will. They have everything to do with subconscious thought and determinism.






Then take a different one: Fire in a house... people would instinctively try to escape by running "up the trees" - which will lead to entrapment - and ultimately death. (This way of) Escape is a programmed (sub-)conscious reaction. If you cannot override your "instincts" at the appropriate time, you will not be fit for survival in an artificial world...



Anyhow:



- I vote for the possibility of "free will"... (sub)conscious, deterministical brains this or that way...

- I cease to fall for the "make mankind feel guilty for "crimes" they never committed"-psycho trap as well as I do not accept blame on women or races for hoaxes and urban legends of some grumpy dirty old men...

- I realise and accept that everyone has his own perception and therefore definition of "freedom" or "will" and that everyone has a different desire and method to achieve it...



PS: There are x-number of options to get out of or into the situation - how to choose "the right one"? How's that work?
EDITED_BY: FireTom (1140339793)

the best smiles are the ones you lead to wink


StoneGOLD Member
Stream Entrant
2,829 posts
Location: Melbourne, Australia


Posted:
Silly double post. Genesis Two, right thread.

Good call Dut. There are a lot of bright minds at hop, and I’ve learnt much for some great discussions. I think you and spiralx are right about my use of robots. I suppose I’m thinking of brains in tanks, when I mean robots, as in the Matrix and other SF classics. Like in the Matrix, our "reality" only exists in our minds.

I’d never heard of "transhumanist", but I understand they strive to remove the evolved limits of our biological and intellectual inheritance. So, would it matter if we are “free” or “freer” if it works. I think the “physics” seems to impose deterministic barrier that are almost fatalistic.

It took me a lot of self-searching to realise, and admit that I am no different to organism with AI. I got a lot from OWD’s The Ultimate Theory of Reality. I got a “clearing” when I did the Landmark Forum. But it all comes back to our deterministic survival programming.

How to see around those limits? For me it’s realising that we are nothing more than animals with big brains programmed by our survival programming. We just fill our higher brain with memories (survival) and create stories (survival) in our mind). This meant for me that I had to realise I was just like everyone else. Not I was like everyone else, but somehow a bit special compared to everyone else. This means I don’t think I have a soul and will somehow go to heaven when I die. We aren’t any different to any other animal out there.

FireTom, from what I see, it’s deterministic instinct that supplies the immediate action to miss the dog.


Patriarch917, Jeff(fake) and others, the story of Creation is fundamental to us all, sans the genealogy. I’m sure there is a great message there if we can but find the truth. As an exercise, I tried reading it with some role reversal. So I’d insert man (Adam and Eve) for God. I think the ultimate truth is that God exists out there, outside our minds, outside brains in tanks of memory soup. Interestingly enough, there are many parallels between Neo and Jesus restoring man to his rightful place, from the Matrix.


cheers smile

If we as members of the human race practice meditation, we can transcend our fear, despair, and forgetfulness. Meditation is not an escape. It is the courage to look at reality with mindfulness and concentration. Thich Nhat Hanh


jeff(fake)Scientist of Fortune
1,189 posts
Location: Edinburgh


Posted:
Written by: FireTom



Then take a different one: Fire in a house... people would instinctively try to escape by running "up the trees" - which will lead to entrapment - and ultimately death. (This way of) Escape is a programmed (sub-)conscious reaction. If you cannot override your "instincts" at the appropriate time, you will not be fit for survival in an artificial world...




No animal would instinctively climb a tree to escape fire. That would be unimaginably stupid and would never become instinct. I'm not exactly sure what you're trying to say here since the higher brain functions which are utilised in place of instinct are still themselves deterministic. confused



EDIT: Actually a gliding animal might climb a tree in event of fire, but most other animals will just run.
EDITED_BY: jeff(fake) (1140351979)

According to Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle of Quantum Dynamics, we may already be making love right now...


FireTomStargazer
6,650 posts

Posted:
Exactly Jeff, thanks - the instinctive reaction would be just to run and escape (whether "up the tree" or "down the rabbithole" is not really significant here)... but this exactly is the wrong move (at least according to the fire prevention officers)...

So you are saying that no animal (least speaking of humans) would try to escape up the stairs in case of fire/ earthquake or would not try to run from a flood (tsunami)...

Question: In cases of emergency - are there only "deterministic processes" running in the brain? What is a "gut"-(re)action, what is an " intuitive " (re)action?... Where does this come from? What is subconsciousness?

the best smiles are the ones you lead to wink


Patriarch917SILVER Member
I make my own people.
607 posts
Location: Nashville, Tennessee, USA


Posted:
Do people duck when trees fall on them?

@Firetom: Your earlier questions to me led me off topic, so I sent a reply as a PM.

jeff(fake)Scientist of Fortune
1,189 posts
Location: Edinburgh


Posted:
Written by: FireTom

Question: In cases of emergency - are there only "deterministic processes" running in the brain? What is a "gut"-(re)action, what is an " intuitive " (re)action?... Where does this come from? What is subconsciousness?



Don't take this the wrong way but I think you've gotten confused on this issue.

Instinct comes from the most ancient parts of the brain, or even the spinal chord. Instinct governs those reactions which need to be taken very quickly- eg. move hand away from heat or dodge out of way of projectile.

Intuition comes from the subconsious, where a huge multitude of proscesses are taking place which we are not aware of. All the time the brain is gathering information without informing the consious sectors so we are able to make reasonably rapid descisions about things. eg- Spotting someone lieing or backing out of a situation that is looking dangerous.

Consious thought is simply the most recently evolved level and allows us to make correct choices if given enough time - like seeking higher ground in a flood or defusing a hostile situation with words.

All of these 'levels' interact in such a way that whichever response is most likely to be correct will be taken. Which means that people are able to overcome their insticts with their conscious thought to put themselves in danger and rescue a loved one from a dangerous situation for example. This is not free will however.

The brain is composed of neurons with are composed of molecuels which are composed of atoms. The situation is governed from the bottom up - that is to say that it would be perfectly valid to think of the brain as nothing more that a complicated series of chemicals interacting. To think of the mind as a kind of driver issueing commands independantly of that situation is thus rather erronious as without an appeal to the supernatural there is no mechanism by which that would be possible.

Sorry for the overview but I wanted to be thorough. Hope I've answered at least some of your quesitons. smile

According to Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle of Quantum Dynamics, we may already be making love right now...


Patriarch917SILVER Member
I make my own people.
607 posts
Location: Nashville, Tennessee, USA


Posted:
Good explanation jeff smile.

Is anyone really arguing that jeff's analysis is not correct? What we call "thoughts" are really just complex chemical reactions. Do you think that we could build a computer that would somehow be able to have a "free will?" Wouldn't it still be bound by its construction and programing?

To me, it seems that it order to have a truly "free" will, we would have to be able to supernaturally alter the chemistry in our brain in a way that is not controlled by the normal laws of physics.

onewheeldaveGOLD Member
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,252 posts
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom


Posted:
That's true if you're working on the assumption that free-will isn't compatible with minds that are determined by chemical reactions and physics.

Many of us however, as previously discussed, are happy with the notion of free-will being expressed by minds that are chemically/physically determined.

"You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it."

--MAJOR KORGO KORGAR,
"Last of The Lancers"
AFC 32


Educate your self in the Hazards of Fire Breathing STAY SAFE!


StoneGOLD Member
Stream Entrant
2,829 posts
Location: Melbourne, Australia


Posted:
Patriarch917, I think you have a point, but I think the opposite is more likely. For a start I think believing in the “supernatural” goes against free will. I don’t think we will achieve “free will” until we stop believing that some mystical “supreme being” created us.

I think we created this “supreme being” in our own likeness because we cannot accept that we are just animals, and will die and turn to dust like all the other animals. Our deterministic ego, just cannot accept that we will die, so it creates this grandiose story where we don’t die; instead we go to heaven. Therefore, I believe the way to “free will” and enlightenment is in conquering the ego.

I seem to remember having discussions with some hippies a few years back. They were chasing Satori enlightenment, which to them somehow meant conquering the ego.

I’m also back on line so hopefully posts will improve wink

If we as members of the human race practice meditation, we can transcend our fear, despair, and forgetfulness. Meditation is not an escape. It is the courage to look at reality with mindfulness and concentration. Thich Nhat Hanh


FireTomStargazer
6,650 posts

Posted:
Thanks for the PM Patriarch - I hope it came obvious that my above questionaire was rather provocative... I think that alike statements about Adam and Eve can be abused to ground repression against women... Also I do not see any different quality in the "actions" of A&E... Why would anyone have a conception of "lie" in Paradise anyways? Would I call a place "Paradise" where "the creator" has put lie? And the entire debate about A&E and the Bible (in here) is OffTopic...

So back:

Stone: I certainly agree! As long as we are depending on some "supreme being" as our creator, as long as we refer to a mystical source who is governing our life and is "in control" - certainly the conception of free will is contradictory IMO.

Even though I have to say that IMO to gain "free will" (if possible) there is nothing to destroy and there is nothing to conquer... Ego has it's justification in the system - or it would not be there in the first place. Fighting (ones-self) (IMO) is not the path of liberation.

clap thank you for your post jeff(fake) and for putting it in context.

Now there is little known about the exact processes inside the brain. There are a number of projects (Big Blue experiment) to get clues of how they work... but even if it's only a number of chemical reactions that are governed by certain mathematical/ chemical/ pysical laws - it doesn't prove anything.

The answer to the question - whether or not consciousness is a pure biological reaction or something from "beyond", whether "soul" exists or is just a human invention - is far more complex than just measuring brain waves. To find out how stimuli/ sensations are processed, how they are linked to memories, how all fields and processes interact, surely is a quest to scientists. Hence I dare stating that this will not provide the final answer.

Even identical twins, who have the exactly same conditions under which they grow up will develop different habits and have different thoughts. They will have a different perception of the world and experience the same situations differently. I am almost certain that even Clones will show this phenomenon.

I am buddying up with OWD and say that (even equipped with a deterministic brain that runs on deterministic processes) the exercise of "free will" is possible... maybe I'm a hopeless nutcase.. shrug

the best smiles are the ones you lead to wink


jeff(fake)Scientist of Fortune
1,189 posts
Location: Edinburgh


Posted:
Perhaps the discussion would be easier is we were to used different words for the different definitions of free-will. It seems to be leading to a lot of confusion.



No-one is rationally argueing that we can overcome the laws of physics but it's very clear that we can overcome instinct and intuition, I just don't regard that as free-will.



However it is also possible to argue with OWD's definition as well. I'll try and find the source if anyone requests it but there is evidence which points to disicions being made before they enter the conscious mind.



Deterministic free-will is a lot murkier than philosophical free-will...



There is also an article in wikipedia. wink I'm going to read over it before I discuss this further.



EDIT: Here's the beef of the article in relation to the discussion...
Written by: Wikipedia

In emergentist or generative philosophy of cognitive sciences and evolutionary psychology, free will is the generation of infinite behaviour from the interaction of finite-deterministic set of rules and parameters. Thus the unpredictability of the emerging behaviour from deterministic processes leads to a perception of free will, though free will as an ontological entity does not exist.



EDITED_BY: jeff(fake) (1140436190)

According to Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle of Quantum Dynamics, we may already be making love right now...


onewheeldaveGOLD Member
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,252 posts
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom


Posted:
Written by: jeff(fake)


Perhaps the discussion would be easier is we were to used different words for the different definitions of free-will. It seems to be leading to a lot of confusion.





Yes.


Written by: jeff(fake)


However it is also possible to argue with OWD's definition as well. I'll try and find the source if anyone requests it but there is evidence which points to disicions being made before they enter the conscious mind.





There is evidence that some decisions are made before the conscious mind is aware of them.

However, on my view, that is still compatible with that mind having free-will.

I never did see the mind as being purely the conscious aspect, much of the habitual behaviour and other aspects making up that mind are manifestations of the subconscious/unconscious parts of the mind.

"You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it."

--MAJOR KORGO KORGAR,
"Last of The Lancers"
AFC 32


Educate your self in the Hazards of Fire Breathing STAY SAFE!


jeff(fake)Scientist of Fortune
1,189 posts
Location: Edinburgh


Posted:
Is there any hard evidence that there are decisions being made within the conscious mind?

According to Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle of Quantum Dynamics, we may already be making love right now...


spiralxveteran
1,376 posts
Location: London, UK


Posted:
Is there any hard evidence there is such a thing as the "conscious mind" at all? wink

"Moo," said the happy cow.


jeff(fake)Scientist of Fortune
1,189 posts
Location: Edinburgh


Posted:
I was getting to that. wink

There is obviously awareness, but what other conclusions can be drawn?

According to Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle of Quantum Dynamics, we may already be making love right now...


Patriarch917SILVER Member
I make my own people.
607 posts
Location: Nashville, Tennessee, USA


Posted:
Can a mind be trusted to observe and verify its own existence?

We can tell a computer to produce the phrase "I exist." Does this mean that it is consciously aware of itself?

spiralxveteran
1,376 posts
Location: London, UK


Posted:
Dunno, I sort of see our "conscious mind" as being like a rolling log produced by some software program - the log gives a consistent account of the events that have happened, but doesn't itself say anything about the mechanisms that caused those events. Which seems likely to me to be to be a range of different mental agents all cooperating and competing.

"Moo," said the happy cow.


DutSILVER Member
lurker
380 posts
Location: Nashville, TN, USA


Posted:
this just in on newscientist/slashdot: the answer to all the questions posted here --

yes there is free-conscious-will that can influence decisions, but it sucks at decision making. much better decisions are made after informed sleep consolidation.

https://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn8732&feedId=online-news_rss20

-- dut

StoneGOLD Member
Stream Entrant
2,829 posts
Location: Melbourne, Australia


Posted:
I suspect what we call the "conscious mind" is just memory.

Jeff(fake) I think that definition or “perception of free will” is limiting, because even if I can’t explain why, it’s really from the old paradigm.

Moving on to the "indulgent" ontological discussion. Genesis 1 is not about creationism, that’s for sure. More than likely it’s about the move from polytheistic religion (worship many idols) to monotheism. Perhaps it’s unreasonable, but I think it’s possible that God/Allah was the first (or most published) person to break out of the determinist brain and enter a new realm of free will. The paradigm shift if you like. Perhaps, the concept of “free will” is the only thing that stands between us and heaven.

So the important question for me is - What do you think the world would look like if we all had free will?

smile

If we as members of the human race practice meditation, we can transcend our fear, despair, and forgetfulness. Meditation is not an escape. It is the courage to look at reality with mindfulness and concentration. Thich Nhat Hanh


spiralxveteran
1,376 posts
Location: London, UK


Posted:
Lonely, amoral and barren. All of the things that make us happy are part and parcel of how we've evolved...

"Moo," said the happy cow.


jeff(fake)Scientist of Fortune
1,189 posts
Location: Edinburgh


Posted:
Written by: Dut


this just in on newscientist/slashdot: the answer to all the questions posted here --

yes there is free-conscious-will that can influence decisions, but it sucks at decision making. much better decisions are made after informed sleep consolidation.

https://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn8732&feedId=online-news_rss20





And newscientist never exaggerates or prints things which are insufficiently rigourously tested. rolleyes

According to Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle of Quantum Dynamics, we may already be making love right now...


StoneGOLD Member
Stream Entrant
2,829 posts
Location: Melbourne, Australia


Posted:
What spiralx, are you worried you will have to give up sex, if you had free will? I doubt it will become a problem. I think Jeff(fake) is probably right, and we can’t escape the physics of our brain or the little voice in our heads. And if we stopped procreating we would die out as a species.

I suppose this is where the water gets murky. I was brought up a catholic, and all I got from the priests was this that abstinence from original sin or “sins of the flesh” was necessary to reach heaven. Well, I don’t think abstinence has worked that well for the RC church. So, perhaps the trick there is to embrace it by getting in touch with your inner robot and becoming human. Perhaps after that we can move on. There is certainly more to free will than this original sin thingy.




devil

If we as members of the human race practice meditation, we can transcend our fear, despair, and forgetfulness. Meditation is not an escape. It is the courage to look at reality with mindfulness and concentration. Thich Nhat Hanh


Jomember
517 posts
Location: Sheffield, England


Posted:
Wow, what a surprise to see this thread still going. Lots of quality points and discussion here, some of it has kinda repeated in circles but an excellent read. Can’t really add much on topic as it’s all been covered it seems – however there was an interesting tangent that finished rather abruptly and, imo, incorrectly….



Is it right to punish a crashed computer/program with a sharp slap?



Well first off, a slap is hardly an appropriate punishment - it would be like water off the proverbial duck’s back and not even noticeable (unless you happen to jar some connections loose…). A strong magnetic field to the processor, followed maybe by an electrical charge to the mother board, would be a far more apt (and interesting!) punishment. Hell, you could even mess around with the memory somehow.



But that’s an aside… is it morally justified to do so? The nature of a computer would immediately suggest to most (peaceful) individuals not – but that’s been sidestepped earlier in the thread so I’ll take a different approach:



Let’s look at the type of ‘misbehaviour’ exhibited by said computer.



* Computer displays an annoying/incorrect message



Well at first glance this may seem pretty rude and deserving of aforementioned punishment. However, what is to say the ‘computer’ (ie. Processor, mother board, and memory) is responsible? It could be that the peripheral graphics card(s) have spewed out some utter misrepresentation of the computer’s data, skipping many frames, or even completely changing the result. It could even be (less likely) that the graphics card has done fine, but the monitor has misinterpreted its work. Another ‘possibility’ is that the keyboard has corrupted the input, resulting in the annoying message. Yet another is that the visual message is, unaccompanied, annoying but would make sense with the corresponding sound (duly bodged or omitted by the sound card)…



I could add more but you get the gist – absolutely not correct to punish the computer; to do so would be capricious and rather unfair.





* Computer emits an abhorrent hum



Again, bad behaviour on face value – but who’s to say the computer is to blame? It could be the speakers, or the speakers’ connections, that are causing the hum, so to blame and/or subsequently punish the computer is exactly the same as saying, “I can’t look or think beyond the apparent.”







* Computer crashes more ordinarily, resulting in lost work etc.



In this case the user may be completely at fault, overheating the computers transistors/resistors and causing the irritating crash… alternatively the software could be at fault but that’s hardly the computer’s wrongdoing.





* Mouse pointer moves randomly



Interestingly, my rat pointer (I call it a rat now - it doesn’t deserve to be called even a mouse after its bs) has been moving sharply to the right for ages even though it should have been left. I did slap it down once or twice but to no avail (speaks volumes for the effectiveness of punishment – maybe I should have just spoken to it instead lol). Anyway, even more obviously that the previous examples, this was no fault of the computer – just a breakdown (at the rat’s end) of the ensuing interaction with it.





Ok this is getting a bit long now so I’ll wrap it up by concluding that, imo, there are very few situations in which a computer can be punished without the punisher(s) being at least as culpable (if not more so) than the computer itself. One exception could be a delibrate and unprovoked attack on another computer but, apart from this scenario, imo anybody that has tried the cruel and unusual punishment mentioned above is a human being of dubious moral integrity. However, if anyone has then I take my hat off to you for your ingenuity… Thanks for the read peeps, learned a lot as always.



Just my two or three pounds, for what they’re worth smile



Jo.

Educate yourself in the Hazards of Fire Breathing STAY SAFE!


nellpussPLATINUM Member
&*(%^&JHGBiguijuHGFHFGijgkfrpojknf5uyy&%798ij\;LLKKLF?l@~o{~l';U(*^&%uyfgj:@980hooH&*TgHUHK Jones.
18 posts
Location: The whales belly., Wales (UK)


Posted:
Everything is predetermined. But one is always free not to identify oneself with the body and not to be affected by the pleasure and pain associated with its activities. ~ Sri Ramana Marharshi

Hello boys and girls i'm Jimmy Carl Black and i'm the indian of the group.


FireTomStargazer
6,650 posts

Posted:
Splendid... it's the age-old merry go round... rolleyes

Is everything predetermined or not? If yes, then also ones in/ability (not) to indentify with the body, pleasure and pain is predetermined.

oooooommmmmmmmmmm meditate

I just love the gurus... smile

Nice member number btw... ironically he avatar and the quote posted have a connection - intended? ubblol

the best smiles are the ones you lead to wink


nellpussPLATINUM Member
&*(%^&JHGBiguijuHGFHFGijgkfrpojknf5uyy&%798ij\;LLKKLF?l@~o{~l';U(*^&%uyfgj:@980hooH&*TgHUHK Jones.
18 posts
Location: The whales belly., Wales (UK)


Posted:
HA HAAA, I just clicked reply thinking it would stick it in at the end from anywhere, new here see, ha haaa LOL...*goes to read rest of thread* biggrin...its weird, when i came here before, i was able to read different replys, and now its just links listed *scratches head* confused



edit: ha haaa, yeah WOW chuft!!!, it is a cool number isnt it cool *chants "23" with Laurie emmersion 4x4 voice*



ha haaa, yes the av and the quote are most synCHROnious...well spotted, LOVE IT!! biggrin



Whats going on though??? umm i'm on my friends compoo and i am able to read all the posts in the forums, but on mine its like a list of links...AAnnd...the links arnt in order, hense weirdness i wrote before because my post came up as in the middle of the thread, but on here their all sweetly hanging out together in order at the end as they should...baffled?? any ideas anyone? ha ha! weird rolleyes
EDITED_BY: nn23 (1180431194)

Hello boys and girls i'm Jimmy Carl Black and i'm the indian of the group.


nellpussPLATINUM Member
&*(%^&JHGBiguijuHGFHFGijgkfrpojknf5uyy&%798ij\;LLKKLF?l@~o{~l';U(*^&%uyfgj:@980hooH&*TgHUHK Jones.
18 posts
Location: The whales belly., Wales (UK)


Posted:
HA HAAA i put this earlier cause i dint know what i was doin but i wanna put it again and explain what i think also to describe my understanding.

Everything is predetermined. But one is always free not to identify oneself with the body and not to be affected by the pleasure and pain associated with its activities. ~ Sri Ramana Marharshi

The only choice we really have is whether or not we want to associate with the source of our thoughts, Consciousness, or the thoughts themselves.

The thing is that all thoughts, choices, senses, views and even perception of posts (including mine) within this thread are not reality, we are the experiencer and not the experience, and this applys to all thought. All thoughts are simply that which happens within the mind, and as this is so, the only reality is the source which these thoughts come from, Consciousness. This is why our only real free willed decision is whether we identify with the source of the thoughts, or the thoughts themselves.

The rest is just a matter of cause and effect, which only exists in the realm of thought which draws subject to object distinctions / dualities, subject choice to object interaction.

Seeing as our perception of objects is a result of thought which stems from Consciousness, is not everything there is united by our Consciousness, and if this be the case then duality (cause and effect, subject choice to object interaction) is simply a limitation upon an infinate and united reality which simply is.

Thats probably somit already said but in different words, but hey, there we go, feel free to slaughter biggrin

Hello boys and girls i'm Jimmy Carl Black and i'm the indian of the group.


Page: ...

Similar Topics

No similar topics were found
      Show more..

HOP Newsletter

Sign up to get the latest on sales, new releases and more...