Some Things I Don't Buy about the Free Will and Determinism Debate

The free will and determinism debate is discussed and how the fallacy of composition and emergent properties might be relevant to the debate.

Category:

Education

Tags:

• free
• will
• determinism
• emergent
• properties
• quantum
• mechanics
• Newtonian
• physics
• psychology
• metaphysics
• fallacy
• of
• composition

[egokick]

"free will" is not defined in any meaningful terms.

[HeliumXenonKrypton]

A universe with free will is "equivalent" to a universe without free will. This knowledge is going viral. I can explain this view and trace is back to the Law of the Excluded Middle. Please take a look at my developments.

To find my main page search FaceBook for "Mathematics and Conjectural Reasoning for Math & Physics".

[Yamakoto120]

Sir, I find it amusing that you talk about an act of faith, that determinists must have in order to BE determinists, because they do not have sufficient knowledge, as you safely hide in the "I don't know" position. Are you a rational person ? Do you accept the scientific method ? Then surely you would be inclined to follow whatever has the most scientific evidence. That does not mean you can Even be 100% sure of something. But determinism provides a scientific explanation of particles and life.

[RockOnHellas]

You pretty much expressed all my thoughts on this issue, thanks. What is safe is that it's impossible to find a definite answer, maybe such is the nature of the "problem" that it requires that you wonder eternally, or it meants that both choices are correct, or this or that or this or that lol

[RyanJesseParsons]

Just because we can't predict the activity of certain particles doesn't mean that those particles were not acting determinitely. I think the fact that history only occurred in one way may prove that the universe is deterministic. As far as we know, it's not possible for a human to have two histories. To me that indicates determinism as the way of the universe.

[deathtotheism]

Very good speech! 

[geiadude]

Free will is nothing more than an evolutionism miss step upon evolutionism Are we locked on to it? We have the decide.

[selvmordspilot]

combination of arrangements in the system of the brain. Therefore one can say that our freedom is also relative to our lifespan. This results in thought experiments about immortality. If i'm immortal, i'm free to realize every single combination of arrangement in the brain (to think every thought?). This would obviously take quote some time, considering the vastness of the universe and complexity of the mind. but IN THE END even the immortal's freedom of will is limited to choosing when to die.

[selvmordspilot]

Also! (sorry about spam): I think your thoughts are good on this subject.

Another part of this debate is the mathematical implications of the minds vastness. (did you say 1.000 trillion? That's a lot!). The number of combinations of arrangements in the mind is limited, which is to say it is not infinite and thus the mind cannot be completely free. Some very complex combinations are impossible. But since we rarely live for longer than 100 years, it is impossible for us to realize every single >>

[selvmordspilot]

The quantum mechanics may not be directly involved, but they offer us physical proof that a thing can be two seemingly different things at the same time (particle or wave? or both! see N. Bohr.). This may be considered an important contribution to the debate, viewed from a somewhat scientific point of view.