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
IIIIITHE1IIIII said:
pezus said:
IIIIITHE1IIIII said:


But then his decisions would be predetermined.

 

It's a paradox, really. The only way you could possibly make a (non-random) descision is if the world is determined, which means that every descision you make were already decided before you made them. Thus, the will is determined and not free.

It isn't that simple. It doesn't mean his decisions were predetermined, it means he made them himself based on his own experience. Regardless, I think it can be looked at in two ways; You do it in the predetermined way, I the free will. It's just a matter of interpretation 


But the thing is that there is always a reason for your "decisions". If those reasons are determined, then so is your "free" will. If those reasons are not determined, then they have randomly occured (as opposed to occuring following a pattern), thus making your "free" will based on radom events.

Free means independent, so it can't be dependent on randomness.

 

(You better read all of this, Basil!)

There are always reasons. I think no one says there's never a reason for us doing something, why would we need a brain then? >_>



Around the Network
pezus said:
IIIIITHE1IIIII said:


But the thing is that there is always a reason for your "decisions". If those reasons are determined, then so is your "free" will. If those reasons are not determined, then they have randomly occured (as opposed to occuring following a pattern), thus making your "free" will based on radom events.

Free means independent, so it can't be dependent on randomness.

 

(You better read all of this, Basil!)

There are always reasons. I think no one says there's never a reason for us doing something, why would we need a brain then? >_>

You just confirmed my statement.



Define free will



I LOVE ICELAND!

IIIIITHE1IIIII said:
pezus said:
IIIIITHE1IIIII said:


But the thing is that there is always a reason for your "decisions". If those reasons are determined, then so is your "free" will. If those reasons are not determined, then they have randomly occured (as opposed to occuring following a pattern), thus making your "free" will based on radom events.

Free means independent, so it can't be dependent on randomness.

 

(You better read all of this, Basil!)

There are always reasons. I think no one says there's never a reason for us doing something, why would we need a brain then? >_>

You just confirmed my statement.

No I did not. See, now I'm leaving this thread of my own free will



IIIIITHE1IIIII said:
pezus said:
IIIIITHE1IIIII said:


But then his decisions would be predetermined.

 

It's a paradox, really. The only way you could possibly make a (non-random) descision is if the world is determined, which means that every descision you make were already decided before you made them. Thus, the will is determined and not free.

It isn't that simple. It doesn't mean his decisions were predetermined, it means he made them himself based on his own experience. Regardless, I think it can be looked at in two ways; You do it in the predetermined way, I the free will. It's just a matter of interpretation 


But the thing is that there is always a reason for your "decisions". If those reasons are determined, then so is your "free" will. If those reasons are not determined, then they have randomly occured (as opposed to occuring following a pattern), thus making your "free" will based on radom events.

Free means independent, so it can't be dependent on randomness.

 

(You better read all of this, Basil!)

I'll be honest, this response took me a while, I probably erased and typed this probably 20+ times XD

There is always a explanation for the decisions you make that is true however the events leading to whatever decision you make can alter your decision and yes it can be random, otherwise if it wasnt random, than it wouldnt be considered free will. Dont you think randomness also is affected by free will, I mean in order for it to be random it would have be affected by free will itself o.O? If nothing random occurs in the world, than there is no free will.

If everything happened for a reason ONLY , than there is no free will, if everything happened for NO reason than there is no free will. Therefore the end result would be, things happen for a reason AND for no reason which end up being resulted in "Free Will". Its like day and night / light and darkness, one cannot exist without the other.

I think (from the striked through paragraph I made) I was trying to say Randomness itself is a result of free will, otherwise if nothing random occurred in real life, than it would be plain, boring and predictable, therefore no free will.

Edit : Either I am right or I just confused myself XD

Edit 2 : lol @ pezus



    

Basil's YouTube Channel


                    

Around the Network
KungKras said:
Define free will


Free will = The ability to make independent decisions and have an independent opinion.



IIIIITHE1IIIII said:
KungKras said:
Define free will


Free will = The ability to make independent decisions and have an independent opinion.

With that definition, a robot can have free will if it is programmed to make predetermined decisions from a set of input variables, independantly of other conclutions that differently programmed robots come to.



I LOVE ICELAND!

IIIIITHE1IIIII said:
KungKras said:
Define free will


Free will = The ability to make independent decisions and have an independent opinion.


You dont think Randomness can affect free will or be affected by free will itself as well?

For an example you played Super Mario Bros. Hacked version (example).

You see a ? block about 5 cells away from you but it has a goomba on top of it, you decide, oh hey maybe I should go hit the block, get a coin and some points from killing the goomba. But while you are heading towards it, moving up 2 spaces, you notice a Koopa troopa coming your way, now what if you have the freedom to move back a screen, what if for some random reason, the koopa troopa who was heading your way disappeared on the path you were originally going to take but as a result you moved back a screen and it disappeared?



    

Basil's YouTube Channel


                    

No.

In the first scenario, it is perfectly possible that he's already decided to rob a bank. There's no reason why rewinding time should automatically change your mind so that your actions are random.

The second scenario wouldn't really happen, but if it did, it would be because quantum theory made some significant change which caused him to freely change his mind.

There is no disproof of anything in there.



(Former) Lead Moderator and (Eternal) VGC Detective

gamrReview - Arthur Kabrick | My All-Time Top 50 | 2013 Metascores

                                        

Schopenhauer wrote the best thing I ever read about determinism ( a theory to which I feel inclined). Now, before you tell me that the quantum theory wasn't postulated when he wrote this and blah blah blah, just let me tell you that I don't care about it. I believe that the theory that defends the existence of infinital quantity of universes, and more so, the "logical" problems extracted out of that theory are plain stupid... A product of a ridiculous deduction that's been supported year after year based on a quantum empirical fact (that may or may have not yet been fully understood).
Anyway, what I intended to defend was the idea that we may do "what we will" but we cannot decide the nature of that "will" cause if fact, that's what we are. Time and space (and cause effect) are the "ground" in which the Will manifest itself (by Will, in a ontologic sense, we should understand the real being, regardless of how it appears in time and space).

Pff... this is hard to explain in little sentences, in a second language and hey, when you talk about this kind of things people tend to get defensive because the implications of such affirmations collide with the cosmovision each of us have of the world (and therefore affects us because we are defined to ourselves by the place we understand we occupy in the world we represent to ourselves). This is just as sensitive as religion because it affects the very same things.

My opinion: what we do is already written by a beingless writer in a paper called law of cause effect. There's no way in the world a subjective being or a group of them can mathematically predict in all extent what will happen because the variables are infinite and our methodoly and tools imperfect. Therefore, our sense of freedom is guaranteed. As rational beings, we have a saying in what we do, but that rationality does not scape the very same laws of the physical world (cause effect or even a quantum law if you please).