Dennett on free will and determinism

Dennett talks about his view on free will and why it doesn't necessarily rules out a determenistic universe. Ok, it's not about atheism but it's still a very interesting topic.

Category:

Education

Tags:

• Daniel
• Dennett
• free
• will
• determinism

[danYulia]

@AEFic well he's an avoiding agent LOL :)



[SephirothCrescent0ne]

There's no compatibility between the two because they are inherently contradictory to one another. You can't have free will in an predetermined existence because no matter options you're presented with, they'll all lead to the same conclusion. Choose to go left instead of right? No matter, the universe will just make you do 4 lefts and you'll go in the predetermined direction anyway. With determinism,the universe will impose its will on you, your "choices" are nothing more than an illusion...

[KeizerrO]

@0ctopusRex I understand determinism perfectly fine, but I never mentioned omniscience. Point is how can I know something I can prevent? Is it even logically possible for me to know what I'll eat next week if the universe is deterministic? 

[0ctopusRex]

@KeizerrO Do you understand determinism, or omniscience for that matter? Knowing everything isn't a prediction. If you know everything and thereby know what you're going to eat next Tuesday, you don't have a choice about what you're going to eat next Tuesday. If you know you're going to eat this, and the time comes and you eat that instead, then you never knew in the first place. 

[KeizerrO]

If determinism is true, it's theoretically possible to predict future events as they are already determined. Like what I'm going to eat for dinner next week. But knowing that, I can choose not to eat what was predicted. Which makes the prediction false.

If any avertable future event can't be predicted with certainty, does that lead to indeterminism or simply me being unable to ever know my future actions? Or will the universe "force" me to comply with the determined outcome?

[85jacob85]

what a nonsense argument about semantics... none of these arguments have any real meaning.

[TheMrpoxman1]

is is just me or does dennet just state the obvious

[Diosukekun]

smartest video i have watched in a whole while

[PurpleGhost]

@qigong1001

Ahh, thank you, that makes more sense now.

I don't understand the math for it, but I understand the concept enough to know what you're getting at. Paticles momentum and specific-location, not being able to be known/measured at the same time, and all that.

I think you are right, this would be a better hinge pin for the arugment. At least we can prove it's existence through external evidence. We know it's happening, even if not why.

Dennett actually mentions it in passing.

[qigong1001]

@PurpleGhost Oh sorry. QM=Quantum Mechanics. This goes to your point of "range of possibilities" but without the Dennett avoidance mechanism. The mechanism in this case is scientific uncertainty. Are you familiar with it? "Uncertainty" is fundamental to QM. Theres alot of arguing (for and against) its importance in "free will" as well. I think it allows for indeterminism which gives us "the range." From there its a mystery for now.

[PurpleGhost]

@qigong1001

Hah. Can't rule our any posibility; controversy causes interest, interest is needed if you want other minds thinking of answers along side your own (just as it is needed for others to notice the ponderance of your own.)

What is QM?? My apologies, I'm not necessarily very familiar with the terminologies of this topic.

[qigong1001]

@PurpleGhost You may have hit on it. It may mean different things to different people. I wish he was using "harm avoidance" as just an example. Unfortunately its in his book and almost every interview he gives on this topic. He has also stated that 'free will' may be an illusion anyway. That made me think that he is just trying to be controversial. Im not sure what his motive is...maybe sloppy or controversial or just gone crazy...who knows. I prefer QM as a mechanism for possible free will.