How to disprove free will using basic logic

## Forums - General Discussion - How to disprove free will using basic logic

### Do you agree with me?

 Yes 9 12.00% No. You are wrong but I can't prove it 11 14.67% No. You are wrong and I w... 25 33.33% I'm just confused... 10 13.33% See results 20 26.67% Total: 75

I read a test online that said a few people were sat in a room and asked to do something and they had there brains wired up to see what it would do apparently 60% of brains had worked out what they would do and the people did that straight away but 40% seemed to be able to overcome the brain and do something different sounds quite interesting

Around the Network
 Millenium said:While I wouldn't see that "Free will" does not exsist, it is likely that if you reserved time and exactly nothing changed up untill the point that "he" decided to rob someone, that he would decide upon that action time and time again. Should sometime (Even if it's tiny) change before that with him or around he, the decision could very well be different.

This. If you reverse time, and dont do anything else, you basicly didnt do anything to change his/her decision

IIIIITHE1IIIII said:
 Jereel Hunter said:I suggest everyone use their free will and bail from this discussion. The argument is entirely flawed.

And I suggest you stay away from discussions if you have nothing to add.

But I did add something. A suggestion. To Escape. Your basic argument, that there is no free will because our own reasoning faculties would lead us to the same conclusion every time given the same criteria is flawed.

By saying every thing in your life is random due to you CHOOSING to do a different action every time shows that your free will does exist and each decision creates its own circumstances hence your life is all randomed up. I dunno if that makes sense to you but i see your logic.

Wait... does this mean im not human?

A good head and a good heart are always a formidable combination. - Nelson Mandela

A radical is a man with his feet planted firmly in the air. - Franklin.D.Roosevelt

 chris.m95 said:By saying every thing in your life is random due to you CHOOSING to do a different action every time shows that your free will does exist and each decision creates its own circumstances hence your life is all randomed up. I dunno if that makes sense to you but i see your logic.

I am actually saying that our choices are determined by all the random or determined things happening around us. Thus all your "choices" are determined no matter what, and you can't shape the future in more ways than one.

But yeah, like I said before; I am really not certain, obviously. But right now it seems logical.

Around the Network
IIIIITHE1IIIII said:
 chris.m95 said:By saying every thing in your life is random due to you CHOOSING to do a different action every time shows that your free will does exist and each decision creates its own circumstances hence your life is all randomed up. I dunno if that makes sense to you but i see your logic.

I am actually saying that our choices are determined by all the random or determined things happening around us. Thus all your "choices" are determined no matter what, and you can't shape the future in more ways than one.

But yeah, like I said before; I am really not certain, obviously. But right now it seems logical.

situations make choices for us we choose what path to take

Wait... does this mean im not human?

A good head and a good heart are always a formidable combination. - Nelson Mandela

A radical is a man with his feet planted firmly in the air. - Franklin.D.Roosevelt

chris.m95 said:
 IIIIITHE1IIIII said: I am actually saying that our choices are determined by all the random or determined things happening around us. Thus all your "choices" are determined no matter what, and you can't shape the future in more ways than one. But yeah, like I said before; I am really not certain, obviously. But right now it seems logical.

situations make choices for us we choose what path to take

And what the choices we make is determined by our past experiences.

Sorry not going to read the entire thread. Just post my response to the OP. Being predictable does not mean the person did not have free will. I can understand someone ideology their specific type of person they like to victimized and every thing about them. Yet I can never be certain that they will act as predicted. I have heard so many arguments that your childhood and the events in your life dictate your actions and that biologically you do not have a choice. Well honestly I am living proof that is false, a child of divorce who spent years in respite before his mom remarried moving away at which point he entered foster care. Bullied his entire life to the point of attempting suicide, turning violent in Middle School sending people to hospital in vicious defensive strikes against bullies. Watching my foster brother slowly spiral downwards till he OD'd. I have been a victim of sexual crime, child abuse a child who spent years upon years in a living hell. One with Aspergers Syndrome and Terrets, OCD. I went through the ringer.

But today while my other foster brothers are dealing. Some girls turned to the streets. Of the foster children I was with I am the only one to have completely thrived. Today I have gone on mission trips I volunteer with different organizations I teach Sunday school.

So my up bringing my childhood even up to my teen years did not dictate my choices. Today I still make my own choices and no its not some chemical in my brain outside of my control. My impairments may hurt my ability to thrive socially but nothing has taken my freedom of choice away!

I have a friend headed to the RCMP who talked with me a while about psychological profiles. He was blunt I thought they were way better then they are. He said roughly 70% probably a little under of cases the profiles actually get right. No matter how well they are trained no matter how predictable a person is, they can always surprise you and change at the drop of a hat.

Qaddafi thought billions in brain washing all the best techniques the psychologists the smartest manipulators in the world would guarantee him power. Yet he lost it, he played with fire and he thought he had control of his people to the very end was in denial that he had lost.

That is not to say you cannot manipulate peoples actions if you understand their ideologies of course that is highly unethical. But also you can never be certain that the individual will react the way you think they will.

So yes Free Will exists!

-JC7

"In God We Trust - In Games We Play " - Joel Reimer

I will respond to you with this: Everything happens for a reason.

The concept of free will can be illustrated like this: Imagine there were two parallel universes that were exactly identical, and each contained a person that had exactly alike experiences throughout his life as the other, due to the identicalness of the two universes. Now, looking at one moment in both there lives, for example; suppose they both came to a split in a path that leads left and right. Even though they have both had the exact same experience in life and both are biologically equivalent, free will would say that the outcomes of this moment could be different. That is, one might go left and the other right.

Now, the exact same thing would happen in a demonstration of randomness: two identical universes, two identical people, same situation upon which to decide, but different outcomes.

That they have similar outcomes, free will and randomness, does not necessarily imply they are identical in nature (if you can ascribe a nature to free will). While they share the common characteristic of the future not being set in stone, they differ in that free will contains conscious control, whereas randomness does not.

That, I believe, is the deficiency of both of our demonstrations. They only examine the outcomes, which, for randomness and free will, behave exactly the same way.

The dichotomy you set up, I think, further illustrates the difference between free will and randomness. You said (paraphrased) "If outcomes are not determined, then they is random. Since randomness is not free will, free will cannot exist." The problem here is a contradiction between the first premise and second premise. You posit with the first that there is only determination and randomness, that they are the antonyms of each other, that they are the only two possible causes. But then you mention that free will is not randomness, which implies that free will is a third possible cause. And if free will is a third possible cause, then an outcome might indeed be generated by determination, randomness, or free will, whereas your first premise says there is only two causes possible.

Okami

To lavish praise upon this title, the assumption of a common plateau between player and game must be made.  I won't open my unworthy mouth.