Free Will - Me, myself and I

[Freshman000000]

My answer to "what are you looking at?" was; "an image of you on my monitor".

:/

[rozeboosje]

@Freshman000000 LOL

[pigsbishop99]

If I touch a hot item my arm is jerked away fast to avoid getting burnt. I am interacting with the environment. But, that is not consciousness or free will, because the signal comes from the top of the spine not the brain and we do not attribute consciousness to that area.

Just thought I'd mention that to cloud the issue a bit.

[rozeboosje]

Good point.

Some people want free will to be something that cannot exist and that would be pointless if it did.

[rponnie]

Nice one.

About the software of the mind running on the hardware of brain.

All the cells in your body are replaced all the time, so the the hardware actually changes several times during life, including the brain.

In other words; we are not the stuff we are made off.

[rozeboosje]

Exactly. We're the patterns, not the stuff :-)

[yupiie]

that seems interesting.

[SpoolDonkey]

well. im not looking at you, i see you. but i see you in my mind, i am connecting with your mind.

in essence i am experiencing your thoughts just the way you did, in other words... by watching and listening to this pattern, i am experiencing you first hand. im am understanding you by for a short time suppressing my mind and allowing yours to enter.

i am looking at you, except i am looking from the inside out, and i shall continue to look as long as my mind retains your minds imprint.

[rozeboosje]

Thanks. Why is this vid set to comment approval!? Better go fix that.

[Rybot9000]

Ok, disregard my previous comment about the software-hardware dichotomy. I'm still having trouble following though. A lot is known about consciousness and decision-making through clinical neuroanatomy and specific work done by Francis Crick, Christoph Koch and Antonio Damasio to name a few. An excellent textbook on the subject of consciousness, including Free-will, is Consciousness: An Introduction by Susan Blackmore.

[rozeboosje]

Thank you. I'll check that out.

[psyke930]

I still don't agree on the mind issue. The mind in my humble opinion is nothing but our perception of reality. We percept the reality through our senses (which are in fact organs) that send input to our brain, that processes that information by sending electric signals back and forward. Well, at least that's how I see it. I don't think there is a software part of the brain.

If I am wrong, please correct me. Thanks.

[rozeboosje]

There is no software in the sense that it is imposed on the brain from the "outside", as if it were uploaded. But a kind of "software" emerges from the brain as the neural network matures. There is no true dichotomy there, agreed.

[xy11xy]

Very interesting.

[rozeboosje]

Thanks.

[rozeboosje]

Sorry folks. Something about this video attracts SPAMmers so I have had no option but to set its comments to "requires approval".

[patflix]

This is a wonderful journey.

Moving on to the next installment.

[rozeboosje]

Thank you.

[theStickerBush]

Great Intro!

We are all pixels here, no blood spills, a beautiful thing. I always say.

[rozeboosje]

:-)

[phaexus]

Maybe it's becoming repetitive, but you're high quality contenct provider, Pino. 5/5

[rozeboosje]

Thank you!

[bitbutter]

excellent series

"consciousness: we didn't only make a model of what other entities in the environment 'wanted' but we also observed what our own bodies were doing. We have a model representing ourselves and we attributed intent to that object."

What was the evolutionary advantage of this step? was it unavoidable? (does 'freedom evolves' deal with this in more detail?). So many questions!

[rozeboosje]

My guess (and it's nothing better than that, I hasten to add) is that as our ancestors went through a very bad patch (there is evidence for a near extinction in our recent past) our only chance for survival was to gather in groups and work together, and our brains evolved to deal with those group dynamics between increasingly intelligent individuals. As part of that it would be beneficial to gain an understanding of one's own behaviour that would lend itself to analysis.

[bitbutter]

That makes sense. To clarify, do you think that consciousness is fundamentally that story being told about the host body's intentions?

[bitbutter]

Thinking about it a little more, second order intentionality ("he thinks that i think"..) also confers clear survival benefits by allowing the animal to perform ad hoc (as opposed to purely instinctive) acts of trickery like bluffing or faining injury etc, and this kind of second-guessing necessitates a 'reading' of what the host body is doing.

[rozeboosje]

Sorry for the late response. Yes, I think you're making very valid observations there.

[Voltairier]

5/5 stars for content. Excellent description of the false positive reaction of evolutionary biological agents, seen and unseen(or existent vs non-existent), and projection of modeling via consciousness.

[rozeboosje]

Cheers

[Cristofer7]

5/5 brilliant...

[rozeboosje]

Thanks a million.

[ShortbusMooner]

Too deep for me. I'm not called Shortbus for nuttin'! LOL!

[rozeboosje]

:-)

[Rapax74]

I'm enjoying your series, Pino. 5/5

[rozeboosje]

Thanks

[worldlystone]

I just got done with that chapter in "breaking the spell". Daniel Dennet is a great writer.Can't wait for the next video!

[rozeboosje]

:-)

[SouthernInfidel]

This is going to be an interesting series. Looking forward to the next installment.

[rozeboosje]

Thank you. Building, and coming up in the next half hour or so.

[falsificationism]

Also towards the end of your video, you come off as a functionalist. Am I correct in that assumption?

[rozeboosje]

I don't know; I'm not that familiar with terminology. I could be.

[falsificationism]

Well in philosophy of mind...well actually if you have the time or inclination you should wikipedia the following: functionalism (philosophy of mind), eliminative materialism, and nonreductive physicalism. I'm an unsatisfied materialist myself. Let me know what you think!

[rozeboosje]

Will do.

[falsificationism]

Good video--lofty goal though :). I personally find it fascinating that we are beholden to our past experiences. If I "decide" to go to school x instead of school y, my experiences that shape my worldview and in turn influence future decisions which shape future worldviews will be different. Because of the influence of our worldview on our decisions, it can be argued that 'free will' is more limited than we would like to think.

[rozeboosje]

I think that no matter where we arrive at eventually, we'll have to accept that any freedom in our Will will by necessity be limited. There is of course our personality and experience putting limits on what we can decide, and simply physical limits. But I'm just about to post the darkest episode yet.

[falsificationism]

I agree. One cannot, for example, choose to make oneself more intelligent. I look forward to the dark episode.

[kurtilein3]

i think it would be possible to have the software in our brain running on an entirely different hardware.

our brain can do everything an universal computer (like your computer, or a turing machine) can do. interestingly, our brain cannot do much more than any other universal computer. it is not necessary to emulate our brain to create an artificial mind, any turing-complete universal computer will do the job.

[rozeboosje]

Yes, but I think we're a long way from achieving that yet. Also, of course, our brain and the "software" it runs are specifically geared toward running a human body.

[kurtilein3]

in order to create new algorhytms for given problems, the program would need to create random variations of related algorhytms, test them, and run a process of artificial evolution over them, and then integrate the new algorhytms into the system. quite difficult.

[rozeboosje]

Maybe. But not impossible. A glimmer of hope there :-)

[CliffKFF]

I believe they have software now that does this called "genetic algorithms" which are usually used in conjunction with neural networks.

[rozeboosje]

That wouldn't surprise me at all

[trick0171]

hmmm...I am trying to think how you will coorelate what you just stated with the concept of free will. But like you said...you are a long way from explaining that part so I should just wait. :)

[rozeboosje]

:-) - Yes, and I think we'll appear to be moving <b>away</b> from free will for a long while before we can see ourselves getting closer.

[nicanicamad]

I'm quickly becomming a big fan of yours!

[rozeboosje]

Thank you!

[bubonicnate]

you want to borrow my jeans? I will even take them off first if you want!

[rozeboosje]

Ooh. Promises, promises :-)

[CousinoMacul]

I'm free to comment first.

[CousinoMacul]

I commented before watching the whole video. I'm honored that one of my ideas worked its way into one of your videos. My basic thesis is that as social animals that work together to survive, the phenotype that tends to be most strongly selected for, is one that gives you an advantage over your peers in a social setting. I believe that this is where consciousness and the ability to empathize came from.

[rozeboosje]

You're welcome. It's always good to hear others think about the same things.