John Searle on the freedom of the will

[SHIBBYiPANDA]

did say "his book on how the will could possibly be free" or "couldn't possibly be free"

and r u drunk in this video??? lol ur eyes look like you're tired as heck.....

[scoobydoo84]

epistemicduty, Really liked the video. Searle is one of the few on the right track. The reason there are so many paradoxes is because of the idiotic, dualistic, causal, materialist and behaviorism, misconceptions of the modern world since DesCartes. Consciousness is primary, stands above the rational faculty, as does the human intellect. There is free will, the materialists can't see it because their premise is false!!

[shanoxilt]

@scoobydoo84

Ummm, no. The world is not part of your mystical solipsism.

[vktrsx]

You explained it well.

Free will is sheer delusion, but well done just the same.

[esben6]

But then again, if consciousness can interact with and influence our neurobiological mechanisms, where does consciousness get its urge from?

[dianep123]

@esben6 Where does a feedback mechanism gets "its urge from" ?

There is no "urge" there is feedback, which is just a property.

[MusicAdd4ever]

Hi. I'm portuguese, I'm gonna have a test of phylosophy and I don't understand some words in your speach, so can you answer me this question please ?

- What is the problem of the free will ?

(I know all the theorys, but I don't really know what's the problem about free will.

Please, reply so I can see the answer.

Thks =)

[EpistemicDuty]

Sorry for the delay in responding. The problem of freewill is reconciling our free will with our psychological sense of freedom, with physics and brain chemistry

[MusicAdd4ever]

Thank you very much =) Are you a teacher ?

[TheValiantThor]

We are all students; We are all teachers.

[2bsirius]

Excellent summary of Searle's position. I wish my desk had been close enough to yours during philosophy exams, because I could have copied from your paper. Of course, I would have used used the field governor of my own ego and refrain from cheating - I hope!

[ContraWagner]

I agree with you and Searle. I came across Searle many times in studying philosophy of mind but never read his books unfortunately. What do you recommend?

[EpistemicDuty]

His first book on the philosophy of mind was Intentionality. It connects his work on the philosophy of language with the philosophy of mind. A good book on the materialist tradition is The Rediscovery of the Mind. He wrote a really good book attacking postmodern deconstructionist thought called The Construction of Social Reality. A good book summarizing his world view is Mind Language and Society. The book that I got my information on his views of freewill on is Rationality in Action.

[VideogameAnswerMan]

I had to watch this video a few times to kind of get a feel for what's going on. If you really pay attention to the video then what you're saying makes sense, but I'm still not sure if you are saying that we have free will or that we don't.

[EpistemicDuty]

Should've elaborated at the end. Although the system had to emerge deterministically, our will can still possibly be free, and also not random.

[EpistemicDuty]

I think I see where you are coming from. Your reaction to Searle reminds me of Dennett's reaction. Since searle advocates a first person approach to consciousness, and Dennett seems to be against such approach, it is difficult to see how such a gap can be bridged. If you take Searle's approach, his reasons as to why a computer can't be conscious are more understandable. But if you deny the first person approach to consciousness it is difficult to see how anything can be conscious

[EpistemicDuty]

Are you speaking in terms of intellect, personality, or both? I've noticed that people who disagree with Searle have a tendency to very strongly disagree with him. He can come across as very combative to some.

[denito9474]

There's still a kind of dualism there. To say that our neurological activity *causes* our conscious state doesn't make sense to me, it *is* our conscious state.

[EpistemicDuty]

I should say it causes the property of consciousness, and although we are just our brain our consciousness isn't identical with it just like liquidity isn't identical with H2O molecules although liquid water is "merely" those molecules.