Does free will exist?

[Outdated]

I can ... say my meaning on PM.

 

[lunarious]

Is he supposed to be pretty?

 

[Hypnalis]

He's an individual. Also a very successful creative and showman. At a level of competence where he's immune to questioning or criticism

The look is part of his stage persona.

A couple of quotes (from wikipedia) about the look:

He considers the eye makeup important because while he is playing the piano he is not able to use his arms and relies on his face for expressions and gestures; the eyeliner makes his features more distinguishable for the audience.

He has said that much of his look and persona is about "treading that line between mocking yourself and wanting to be an iconic figure. Mocking the ridiculousness and completely unrealistic dream of being an iconic figure."

He's also an atheist, and makes jokes about religion. But he certainly has a right to be an atheist.
And why not makes jokes about that too? We live in a world where even Star Wars films and shows no longer distinguish clearly between good and evil. In the Western world, morality is relative.
It's not only reasonable and legal to make jokes about morality, belief, and religion - it's become a completely justified and important target for intelligent comedians. Because many of the traditional western religions have changed sides.

Clearly religion's problem isn't a few peaceful atheists, few of whom are noisy (and OFC Minchin gets a pass because he's a comedian - he's supposed to be "noisy" ).

The erosion of belief in moral principles removes the possibility of genuine religious belief.
And I mean that literally BTW (and not using the stupid new meaning where "literally" means "I'm lying, and need an alternative to 'not gonna lie'" /lol)

And FWIW, back to the topic:

"Free Will" is an unresolvable question. The only real use for it is to entertain drunken philosophers, the way drunken physicists play "orders of magnitude".

But believing free will doesn't exist is very popular among the "Dark Triad", a group that's rapidly expanding in both number and influence thanks to the marvels of modern education.

 

[lunarious]

To answer only one point from the points you made:

He's an individual. Also a very successful creative and showman. At a level of competence where he's immune to questioning or criticism

I know such people also. Some of them claim relationship to The Diety. And i'm your connection to them aswel some others of our Group.

We're all on Free Will. ... Because it's unclear to me (and I hope and pray it remain such)

Beauty is at most where mystery is biggest ~ Chinese Wisdom

The Beauty is not on this dude's eyelashes, noe it is in his attitude of Laughing ... if you laugh much you use from your Libido (is that right word?)

 

[Hypnalis]

I believe there is a politics section to the forum.

I just mentioned politics because of your comment about the 4-year-old with their finger on the big red button.
Foreigners can't tell the difference between a dog-whistle and a joke any more, so I chose a different approach

I'll have to read that article, and perhaps a few more first. but I will reply to the rest of the post that quote comes from. We seem to be quite close on this - possibly already "on the same page".

I've found the various "Evolutionary Xxx" sciences to have very good explanatory power, so the approach you took resonates, And I was already aware I was ignoring a large grey area between "Culture" and "Morality".

Anyway, if you have a collection of links (even if it's a lot), please post them (or use a convo).
This is a topic I'm more than happy to spend some research time on.

 

[Jonn]

@OP

And consider ppl who are psychotic/delusional.
Do they even have a semblance of free will in such a state?

Is "Free Will" conditional?
I dare say, that even if it does exist, it would be.

 

[Au Naturel]

I just mentioned politics because of your comment about the 4-year-old with their finger on the big red button.
Foreigners can't tell the difference between a dog-whistle and a joke any more, so I chose a different approach

I'll have to read that article, and perhaps a few more first. but I will reply to the rest of the post that quote comes from. We seem to be quite close on this - possibly already "on the same page".

I've found the various "Evolutionary Xxx" sciences to have very good explanatory power, so the approach you took resonates, And I was already aware I was ignoring a large grey area between "Culture" and "Morality".

Anyway, if you have a collection of links (even if it's a lot), please post them (or use a convo).
This is a topic I'm more than happy to spend some research time on.

https://www.newscientist.com/articl...ll-doesnt-exist-according-to-robert-sapolsky/
Steven Pinker on Free Will

The Standard Argument Against Free Will

https://whyevolutionistrue.com/2021/12/23/sabine-hossenfelder-on-superdeterminism-and-free-will/

 

[Hypnalis]

@Au Naturel

Thanks for the links!

I've seen a few YouTube videos by Pinker. Always interesting and informative.
And I've seen Sabine Hossenfelder's video on YouTube (possibly the same material).

I'll check the others of course.

But I was actually fishing for information about Culture/Morality. I've been a believer in the approach that took use to the "Evolutionary Xxx@ sciences since long before they were well known.

But of course that has almost certainly led me into the uneven collection of domain knowledge that random thinking and research usually induces. My interest was art of my figuring out *for my personal use( what NT's are thinking and saying when they state obvious falsehoods with full sincerity.

Which, at least from my perspective, is a domain that exists at an intersection between (among other things) those three: Culture, Morality, and the influence of evolution on those things.

Also selfishness, arrested development (like the modern favorite "learned narcissism" via emotional dysregulation), and various kinds of large-scale irrational behavior. But those kinds of things are better explained as behaviors that arise when our evolved behaviors don't fit the environment.
IMO the "Evolutionary Xxxx" sciences aren't there yet, and may not be the right approach.

I'm hoping the early historical reviews (in five to ten years) of the ongoing "erasure of women" will lead to advances in those areas, but I'm not too optimistic

 

[Au Naturel]

But those kinds of things are better explained as behaviors that arise when our evolved behaviors don't fit the environment.

The human brain is designed to live in small tribal groups hunting for roots and berries and occasional meat. Instincts that are designed for hunter-gatherers in large extended families are often counterproductive for high technology, dense populations, and anonymity. There is nothing in our brains to prepare us for social media and nuclear bombs.

Humans are only able to function today because we can learn lessons that partly override our instincts. I think that ability has been pushed to the limit for everyone and exceeded for many. "Irrational" behavior, large and small scale, is usually instinct overcoming reason. This is not to say instincts are bad or to be repressed but rather understood as "not neccessarily applicable in this situation."

There's also the possibility that society has entered a kind of "mouse utopia" that contributes to cultural dysphoria.

https://www.sciencehistory.org/stories/magazine/mouse-heaven-or-mouse-hell/
If you want to explore this further, Sapolsky has a collection of lectures from his Evolutionary Psychology at Stanford. There are 25 different lectures, all well over an hour in length, discussing different aspects. Some topics, like Aggression, are covered in multiple lectures.

 

[Jonn]

Now consider:

A Grasshopper.
Does it have Free Will?
Or is it simply at the mercy of its biological programming?

 

[lunarious]

Now consider:

A Grasshopper.
Does it have Free Will?
Or is it simply at the mercy of its biological programming?

In Islam it is not allowed to eat several things included insects. However Shrimps and Grasshoppers are allowed/Halal.

John the Baptist ate gresshoppers, so must yield. ... luckily it is optional.

 

[Jonn]

I am neither in agreement nor disagreement.
I simply find this interesting.

Stanford University neurobiologist Robert Sapolsky wants everyone to know that, unfortunately, we humans have no free will. None, whatsoever.

Sapolsky told the Los Angeles Times that he’s spent his life studying human behavior—along with baboons in Africa—and believes that every decision, no matter how big or small, comes predetermined thanks to neurochemical influences. Neurons simply react to outside influences, whether from events decades or milliseconds before, that they can’t control.

https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/a45666440/humans-dont-have-free-will-says-scientist/

 

[lunarious]

I am neither in agreement nor disagreement.
I simply find this interesting.


https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/a45666440/humans-dont-have-free-will-says-scientist/

Use it wisely

Unless you grow tomatoes in your Garden, tomatoes are not free. I need to get some, or cucumbers, to my eggs.

Edit: John, i thought you were replying to me. Sadly i disagree with this Doctor. Humans does have Free Will.

 

[Jonn]

Use it wisely

Unless you grow tomatoes in your Garden, tomatoes are not free. I need to get some, or cucumbers to my eggs.

Do you buy any fertilizer?
Do you pay for the water to irrigate your garden?
Did you pay for the tools to till the earth?
If so, your tomato is not free.

Now no shrub had yet appeared on the earth and no plant had yet sprung up, for the LORD God had not sent rain on the earth and there was no one to work the ground,

 

[Jonn]

The sciences have grown steadily bolder in their claim that all human behavior can be explained through the clockwork laws of cause and effect. This shift in perception is the continuation of an intellectual revolution that began about 150 years ago, when Charles Darwin first published On the Origin of Species. Shortly after Darwin put forth his theory of evolution, his cousin Sir Francis Galton began to draw out the implications: If we have evolved, then mental faculties like intelligence must be hereditary. But we use those faculties—which some people have to a greater degree than others—to make decisions. So our ability to choose our fate is not free, but depends on our biological inheritance.

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2016/06/theres-no-such-thing-as-free-will/480750/
I am not arguing for nor against this concept.
I am simply presenting it for consideration.

 

[Au Naturel]

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2016/06/theres-no-such-thing-as-free-will/480750/
I am not arguing for nor against this concept.
I am simply presenting it for consideration.

Determinism may be one of those things human minds aren't wired to comprehend. Like quantum mechanics, we can mathematically model it, but nobody really understands it. It may not be fully comprehensible with the hardware we have installed.

 

[Jonn]

Your Brain: Who's in Control? | Full Documentary | NOVA | PBS​

Are you in control, or is your brain controlling you? Dive into the latest research on the subconscious with neuroscientist Heather Berlin. Sleepwalking, anesthesia, game theory, and more reveal surprising insights in this eye-opening journey to discover what’s really driving the decisions you make.

 

[Joshua the Writer]

Of course it does. We make our own choices, rules, and destinies.

 

[stevens]

Does free will exist, what are people's opinions please?

I'm fairly sure that free will exists. On the other hand I know for certain that limitless possibilities do not. This is like being able to freely choose between three Mayoral candidates in Hong Kong, but not really liking any of them.

 

[c flat]

I believe so. The framework I've arrived at through my thoughts and experiences doesn't make any sense without it.