Daniel Dennett - Free Will Determinism and Evolution

[bizzee1]

It seems to me that Dennett tries to argue that because there are what he calls "avoiders" in the deterministic universe of Conway's "Game of Life," that means that free will and determinism are compatible concepts. Dennett's reasoning is that since the definition of determinism is- for every specific point in time one specific future is inevitable/unavoidable- and that there are what he labels "avoiders" present in a deterministic universe (Conways "Game of Life"), then that is a case of -

[bizzee1]

-evitability/avoidability in a deterministic universe. This, he contends, shows that determinism doesn't necessarily mean an inevitable/unavoidable future and that free will is compatible with determinism.

I think Dennett fails to show that free will and determinism are compatible using this line of reasoning because Dennett's "avoiders," as he calls them, are only examples of avoiders of danger- they are not shown to be cases of avoiding any specific future that is claimed to -

[bizzee1]

-be unavoidable given past events. In other words, I think Dennett fails to show that for every specific point in time that there isn't one specific unavoidable future, because Dennett doesn't show that the specific instance of "avoiders" that he points out could do anything other than what was inevitable/unavoidable given past events.

However, maybe Dennett wasn't trying to show that there is not just one specific future for any given point in time. In that case, his definition of-

[bizzee1]

-"freewill" is identical to any definition of "not-freewill" that I've ever heard. Whatever the case may be, I think that his "avoiders" argument is irrelevant as it seems to me to use different senses of the words "inevitable/unavoidable" than those whom are of the opinion that freewill and determinism are incompatible are using.

[PoIsOnDiVx]

I totally disagree with the thesis of Dennett. Actually we don't live in a deterministic universe, cause determinism involves that we can determine the future starting from the present. And that is totally false, cause there is the unavoidable principle of quantistic indeterminacy. But we do live in a mechanicistic universe, so things do follow a single timeline, which is unavoidable. The thing that we have developed because of evolution is conciousness, which makes us believe that we are free.

[blahbl4hblahtoo]

that opening song is so much win

[HedgehogRebellion]

Life

Decisions

Values

Personality

Brain

DNA

LUCK

Once you can connect these dots...you will figure it all out.

[Thayer79]

I think too many people are hitching their "wagon" to one side of the coin or another, because it technically has to be ONE of them and not all of them. They are trying REALLY hard to justify it, but just don't have enough information to actually do it.

[Thayer79]

The brick analogy is poor, because, while most people wouldn't do it, the person could choose not to move and get hit. How far down in reality can we go to discover the determined reason the person didn't move? At this point I don't feel we are capable of doing so, but won't say we never will.

It happening doesn't make it unavoidable. It makes it unchangeable, but you can't assert that it could not have been avoided before the it happened.

[Thayer79]

I still don't think we know enough about consciousness to have any credible stance on whether or not we have free will or are determined. There are a number of people proposing and melding of determinism that still has choice, but none have been able to substantiate their claims on it and unfortunately Dennett is no different. I have no bad feelings toward hard determinism. If it's true then the criminal argument doesn't matter, because we are just as determined to punish them or change.

[ZephZhang]

Evitable (sorry, no accents, english keyboard) is a common workin french: avoidable.

[NetraAmorosi]

Well Huntington's could be cured by removing it by a retrovirus sense a cell immediately applies whatever changes are done to its DNA strands. Of course the retro-virus to my understanding would still need to be customized to each individual.

[Tom45931]

I like Dennett but I don't agree with his stance here. I don't think evolution has much to do with free will, don't think it is a fragile construct that could be lost and disagree with him on inevitability...

Surely a better explanation is to appreciate that the world can be seen on different levels, at the very lowest level everything is either determinate or stochastic, either way, no free will. But at the higher level of animals and people, of course there is free will, things are avoidable.

[reafdaw01]

@Tom45931 I agree. In a abstract metaphysical way there is no free will. What we call free will in everyday life is real but it is not what it was made out to be for millenia.

The metaphysical definition of free will is incoherent and not applicable to our physical world.

[tyotypic]

I've seen this lecture in two different videos, and I still do not see how it follows that in a deterministic universe, it something is able to be avoided. He seems to make the assumption that because it looks like something 'avoids' something else, it had the ability to do otherwise, and then uses the assumption to prove his argument. Argh.

[surix]

Didn't he say that there is more than 1 possible future in the beginning? Yet he didn't provide any argument to support that claim

[jlorz]

After I watched this video I was very grateful that I *at least* lived at this time of technology. It boggles the mind what we might learn tomorrow...if we're still around.

[DanielRDahill]

After I clicked on this, I was sad. Only 9,000 other people on the internet are interested in this Video.

[prescod]

@williamblakeism I have a hard time interpreting your question. But your use of the word "really" makes me suggest you watch the beginning again and look for the analogy of "real magic". Can you define "real free will?"

[phlewis86]

Very insightful and interesting. I really learned a lot from watching this.

[Liaomiao]

i've never been able to satisfactorily reconcile free will with determinism, and although i have much respect for daniel dennett, his views have far from convinced me. Interesting and insightful nonetheless. thanks for the upload

[pineappledust]

Let me just be the first the say, the intro music is phenomenal. 

[Johnnyredtail]

There is neither creation nor destruction, neither destiny nor free-will. Neither path nor achievement; this is the final truth. Sri Ramana Maharshi

[HedgehogRebellion]

@Johnnyredtail You are saying that there is no determinism or free will, yet you are not offering an alternative. I am a hard determinist. Our lives are the result of things we cannot control...our DNA and our (mostly early environment, niether of which we can pick.

[Johnnyredtail]

@HedgehogRebellion Actually that was a quote by Ramana Maharshi. Its not something you would understand unless you subscribe to the vedantist view of advaita. As far as the intentional stance is concerned there is a free will worth having as Dennett explains in his book "Elbow Room". The self as nothing more than an artifact of countless mindless agents, all of which have their very own intentional stances, is also in accord with Advaita. Here Ramana and Dennett are in accord.

[HedgehogRebellion]

@Johnnyredtail OK...let's backtrack a little here! First off...quote are we talking qbout here? Second, what exactly is Advaita and how does it provide evidence for free will? MY argument against free will is in my only video, and for 3 years it has been undefeated against all challengers.

[Naytardo]

I admire his motivation, but come on.... His best evidence for a nondeterministic universe is... wait for it... a DESIGNED simulation of evolution. Consider this: THE WORLD IS NOT DETERMINISTIC BECAUSE THERE EXISTS A SUPERNATURAL REALM. There could possibly, reasonably, rationally, logically be a designer. It stops this crow. When and how did we rule out this option? No one will belittle you for eating crow once you reevaluate. Please think about this.

[henryporter101]

An astonishing lecture by a brain that is brilliantly programmed-thanks for uploading.

[pineappledust]

@henryporter101 nice. :)

[UnknownRex]

Anyone got the URL for that game of life?

[kinkokonko]

boring shite. watch or play chess if you want infintie vs determ argument

[spiritualbully]

the sum can be freer than it's parts, it's not a contradiction, it's called "composition fallacy", however, we must still ask why are free as a sum of unfree parts, free?

Are we free (or appear to be) because we are ignorant? Or are we ignorant and unable to predict decisions, because we are actually free and in violation of nature?

[German1184]

“Free will”, just as the concept of god, has a long history meaning different things at different times.

[German1184]

1:05:00 Dennett talks as all philosophers of the past were free will defenders.

Dennett knows very well there is a long tradition of determinist defenders: some atomists were determinists , some Stoics, some Buddhist etc.

Spinoza (1632 –1677) is a more a recent example: “From a given determinate cause the effect follows necessarily”.

All these I mentioned had to deal with the “how to blame people for what they do” problem.

[nahamsharc]

Where can I find that Art of Infinity Lecture?

[invisblchzbrgr]

I was absolutely riveted by the life world simulation-thingy. AMAZING! Also kind of cute the life world god hobbyist types have so much affection for the little worlds they make.

[iliveon]

1:37:08 Cool atheist beat :)

[iliveon]

The analogy of importance of deterministic molecules to the importance of chess moves is the most enlightening deterministic-free-will combination ever

[disrachurchill]

I jus hate him presenting ideas. always walking round and about.

[SublordUtilax123]

@disrachurchill wrong. he covered all the bases very carefully to make sure that everything is crystal clear and nothing was missed.

[alucardletombs]

Judging by the length of his beard, a couple of years ago, 2005 maybe?

[Zurein]

When was this recorded?

[Snagabott]

@Zurein It says 2-3-03 in the beginning.

[hymnofashes]

Actual lecture starts at 13:55

[twooffour]

@hymnofashes But Shermer is coo, too.