Kasz216 on 12 September 2009
| Rath said: However Roger Penrose (the person whos paper Tegmark was disputing) has written a critique of that critique. I don't really understand the mathematics behind it but apparently one of the variables Tegmark used wasn't correct. Also I'm not saying that peoples choices are always 50/50 - I'm just saying there is a possibility that their choice isn't always 100/0. Even you used the term 'very rarely', not never - if you think they ever do then you believe that free-will is not an illusion. Can you please clarify your stance? Or you deterministic or not? Compatibaiist or incompatibilist? Also saying quantum theory free will doesn't bear out experimentation is bollocks, nobody has devised an experiment to falsify it yet. |
Except it was correct... the only people who claim it wasn't are the two people who's theory was disporven. Outsiders don't take the critique of the critique as valid.
And yeah... it doesn't bear out to expermentation. Nothing outright disproves it but every twins study every done strongly rules agaisnt it. Afterall given very different circumstances... two identical DNA twins make amazingly similar choices.
There is nothing to suggest the "Quantum Computer" theory and everything to suggest that even if the brain did work like that... it couldn't work like that.
