Why prediction is problematic/free will and determinism.

[cloudstrife1288]

I really really like your video. I like your ideas about introducing the prediction itself into the system of prediction. I also like how you said the question of determinism should be placed outside the realm of philosophy and into that of empirical science, which I entirely agree with. I also like how you said whether we have free will or not is a matter of your definition of free will.

Everything you said pretty much puts the debate to rest. Determinism should not be a (continued)...

[miselaineeous]

Great video! I have been trying to explain in another discussion, how determinism and pre-determinism are not one and the same, and in fact, I think pre-determinism is as undefinable as "God" or "free will" for that matter. You explain it very eloquently from a similar angle. I talk about it briefly toward the end of the video I'm responding with. I need to make a video where I really spell it out clearly though..

[jaywalker23]

Thanks. I agree with the points you made in your video. I think the concept of free will is obsolete. It all boils down to whether the universe is deterministic or random -i don't see how anyone can be more free in either type of universe

[thom188]

very good video! one of the best I've seen here on youtube about determinism... the issue of predictability is very interesting

[jaywalker23]

thanks

[rhetoricalmonkey]

Should the individual be blamed if some solar radiation zips through his head and changes the state of a neuron? - No

Should the individual be blamed when some random subatomic activity is going on in his brain? - No

Should the individual be blamed when some undetermined chemical processes are going on in his head? - No

Should the individual be blamed for the way his genes design his brain? - No

Should the individual be blamed for the way he was nurtured as a child? - No

[rhetoricalmonkey]

Should the individual be blamed because his environmental circumstances has resulted in him thinking science, or Islam, or Christanity, or Buddhism is the only way to truth and salvation? - No

Should Christians be blamed for eating cows or should Muslims be blamed for eating camels or should Hindus be blamed for being vegetarians? - No

Should Deomcrats, Republicans, Socialists, Capitalists, Fascists, Nationalist, or Communists be blamed for the ideology that has infected their head? - No

[rhetoricalmonkey]

Should homosexuals be blamed because they find individuals of their sex stimulating? - No

Should the individual be blamed because some word or group of words doesn't evoke the same emotion or degree of emotion that it evokes from someone else? - No

Should the individual be blamed because some word or group of words doesn't make him imagine precisely the same thing as someone else? - No

Do we blame the average individual of Rome because the Roman Empire fell? - No

[rhetoricalmonkey]

Do we blame Muslims for stoning women to death because we FEEL differently or because we FEEL they could have acted differently?

Do we blame the Muslim whose personal experiences have resulted in him thinking like we do about the matter?

At what point do we start blaming individuals for a mind-set that was obviously a consequence of the environmental circumstances to which they'd been personally exposed?

Is blame a prerequisite to incarcerating individuals in order to protect society?

[jaywalker23]

I agree with you on some points. When biological determinism severely restricts your capacity to choose, as is the case with homosexuals, then it's hard to put blame on the individual because it's not really a matter of choice.

However determinism in general doesn't necessarily put restrictions on the individual the way that homosexuality does. It merely implies that your choices are traceable to other causes. It doesn't take the capacity to choose from the individual or..[cont]

[jaywalker23]

the capacity to reflect on the ramifications of his actions. When muslims stone women,. One may argue that they were raised that way so they couldn't help it. But predisposition isn't determinism. They weren't forced against their will. They did it of their own volition, knowing full well the implications of their actions. Whether their volition is subject to deterministic factors is another issue...[cont]

[jaywalker23]

While Blame may be subjective, punishment is based on objective laws that are there to curb actions that are destructive to society. If you take away punishment then don't you become guilty of contributing to the causal chain that would inevitably lead to people committing more crimes?

[rhetoricalmonkey]

When an individual is predisposed to homosexual behavior, you call it determinism. But when a Muslim is predisposed to stoning "whores" or "atheists," you say it isn't determinism. You confuse me. I see no difference. The homosexual chooses to behave in a manner that is consistent with the mind-set he has developed. And the Mid-Eastern Muslim chooses to behave in a manner that is consistent with his mind-set. And in boh cases the predisposition was biologically determined. The biological (cont1)

[rhetoricalmonkey]

(cont1) factor involved in both cases was an organ called the brain. And the development and function of the brain is determined by two factors commonly called nature and nurture. The homosexuals reflection of ramifications for his actions, and the weight value given for one option over another isn't the same for the non-homosexual, because something is different about their nature and/or their past personal experiences (nuture), not becaues of some objective value everyone is aware of (cont2)

[rhetoricalmonkey]

(cont2) and feels. By the way, giving positive reinforcement for criminal behavior would lead to a higher crime rate. And taking away sanctions for unruly behavior would not curb crime. However, I do not see why blame must be a prerequisite to behavioral modification or protecting society. Apathy is the key. Oh, and determinism is more like a network than a chain. So just because we cannot ascertain or accurately predict a given phenomena does not mean that the phenomena happened by magic. (end)

[freezazoid]

and i really think the question of the death sentence is something totally divorced from the concept of free will v.s. determinism. Death row is a moral dilemma. Yes it's an interesting question of could this person not have committed the murder? But it's in irrelevant question because society already holds people accountable for their own actions. That's the prerequisite for punishment. The severity of the punishment is the question.

[jaywalker23]

i agree. determinism doesn't take away from you the capacity to choose or to reflect on the ramifications of your actions. I wrote a more detailed article about this. check the description box

[schrodcat]

freezazoid

"it's in irrelevant question because society already holds people accountable for their own actions."

I see no problem there also, because (as you agreed) whether or not we implement the death penalty is completely "deterministic", and we have no bearing with it :-)

[freezazoid]

if you could rewind life. The result would be the same everytime. EVERY TIME. Because all of the parts and counterparts of the scenario are always exactly the same. The same thoughts that were in your head and the same emotion that was in your body. everything is the EXACT same... including the result. and a result isn't necessarily a result; it's just the continuation of events. You don't change your future ever. But you do choose it. One time. One choice per moment.

[schrodcat]

freezazoid

"if you could rewind life. The result would be the same everytime. EVERY TIME"

We are not able to do that with one single interacting unit almost size-less, because doing that defies the laws of Physics as we know them today, and yet you propose it would happen for a giant living body? Mm!

[jaywalker23]

it's a thought experiment. Basically, what i was trying to point out in the video is if you were able to go back to or to replicate the exact same initial conditions, would you get the same result everytime

[schrodcat]

Yes I understand, and I'm Ok with your point: "let's suppose that if you do that that's what happens..." That's fine! But I was responding to freezazoid who claims: "this is what happens every time you do that," and he proceeds from there. One thing is state A, and then not-A, and see if the consequences differ (as you did). Another thing is as freezazoid (and many) did: to say that A is true (while it's more likely to be false). It's the most common fallacy in people discussing free will.

[JuSdAt]

"in a way" is not good enough. I've been studying this for about two months and I can tell you my new revelation. It's chicken and egg baby, chicken and egg

[undefinedego]

how did you get that humming technology sound as a background noise in this video? is that your computer equipment or did you add that in later?

just wondering because that sound is so awesome... also great video.

[jaywalker23]

thanks. I downloaded the audio file from somewhere. I can't remember where

[kalin666]

and cut your nails, holy crap

[jaywalker23]

"Holy crap" Nah I think I wanna keep them for shock value :)

[kalin666]

free will only requires the ability to "do otherwise", prediction need not be involved. And redefining free will is a mistake, we either have it or we don't.

[jaywalker23]

I'm not sure what you meant by "to do otherwise". If you meant, to be non-deterministic then I don't see how that is contradictory to my points in the video. I was discussing what free will would be in a deterministic universe.

i tackled free will and prediction separately and independently in the video. I never said that one was required for the other to exist. I just have problems with people who define free will as the ability to change their own destiny. [cont]

[jaywalker23]

[cont]The word destiny implies determinism. I brought up prediction to highlight the possible paradoxes with that definition.

If the universe was deterministic, to be able to break free from the deterministic chain, you have to be aware of the deterministic chain and prediction becomes necessary. Without awareness, even if you think you're doing the least likey action, you're still following the rule of cause and effect[cont]

[jaywalker23]

Prediction becomes problematic when awareness is present because the prediction becomes part of the system and any change that the prediction introduces into the system it's predicting will affect the outcome and vice versa. Infinite loop. So you're contention isn't really in line with my arguments :)