/lit/ - Literature

>>16412197
Yes.

>>16412197
it has absolute zero impact on my life one way or the other

>>16412203
But all your actions and thoughts are determined by your genes and experience. You have no free will.

No, that theory has been refuted hundreds of times, only men with a strong sense of self would fool themselves into believing it.

>>16412203
sorry not sorry.

>>16412197
Of course. Free will obviously exists. Any attempt to rationalize to the contrary is a major cope by people trying to escape responsibility and rationalize failure.

>>16412240
Everything you do or think is determined by your brain, your genes, how you were raised, etc. It's all a process of causality in which you have no say at all.

>>16412305

>your brain

My is me though you armchair neuroscientist. Deterministacally down a bottle of bleach please.

I don't know what people mean when they say "free will." Do people who belive in free will mean that the reason for some of decisions people make can be attributed to this free will thing?

>>16412340
They mean people have complete power over their decisions.

>>16412322
Then you also have free will over your liver, your heart, and all the other organs just because it's "your" organs?

>>16412305
Determinism is not true, indeterminism is.

I can think any thought I want at any moment in both the languages I'm fluent in, or any image I want whenever I want. Is that free will? IDK, but it's enough for me.

>>16412197
Is the belief my choice? xddd

Doesn't really matter to me

Even ignoring physics and causality, we are still, at our core, biological machines; slaves to desires outside our control. Like Schopenhauer said:
>A man he do what he wants but he cannot will what he wants

>>16412486
not true btw

>>16412197
Anyone who thinks about it for more than a second unclouded by bias will of course recognise the idea of a free or individual will is an absurd thing, nevertheless clearly that it is so innate for us to envision ourselves as willful and in some sense free beings is what matters

idk, can't be bothered to commit to this effortpost right now, basically your senses and genes (and experiences even) push you through a life that seems motivated by a unique will so just fucking go with it??

>>16412231
Then how could I not believe in free will?

>>16412340
They attribute their decisions to themselves and not the environment. That means they have a developed sense of self, which requires proper brain function not found in the large percentage of mentally ill people who dont think they have free will
>>16412305
Youre dumb. Thats the same as arguing it's impossible for me to kick a ball because it would be my leg doing it. My leg is part of me and I control my leg. In the same way, my brain is part of me and I control my brain.

>>16412517
Your low IQ determined this stupid opinion

>>16412197
Either way does it matter?
If there is free will then every action I take can’t be blamed upon a higher been and I’m the only responsible for my actions.
If there isn’t free will then it doesn’t matter what we want to think everything is predisposed and we are all just a cog in a great machinery

currently I believe in a freedom to choose between alternatives that are given by God. so it's kind of a mix. or, really, that God frames a situation, and this forms the basis for action. I look at it as God telling you stories, casting you in different roles to see how you will play them out. If God wills He frames it in a way where He knows you will only ever think of one action, and so this choice is not free. He is over all things competent.

And God knows best.

>>16412197
define free

>>16412531
define 'define'

>>16412514
>Anyone who thinks about it for more than a second unclouded by bias will of course recognise the idea of a free or individual will is an absurd thing
NPCs just cant comprehend how its possible to have free will lol. When they start to think about how it would be possible their brain shuts down and they get "Error: this is absurd" message.
>its so innate for us
Not all of us, apparently ;)

>>16412529
so in reality you choose between alternatives created by God. this is what I currently suspect.

>>16412537
Actually it took me some convincing, I had the same thoughtless/ kneejerk rejection as you're going through right now when confronted with the idea initially
Whatever, you're just shitposting/ devil's avocado or whatever

>>16412559
Trust me, Ive thought about free will more than you did and the more I thought about it and the more I examined the counterrarguments the clearer it became to that I have free will.
You however likely don't , hence my apt description of yours truly as a NPC (which I'm sure you agree with, given you don't think you're in control of your decisions, which is literally what being a NPC is).

Will the only absolut thing,iq fell off have you not heard...

>>16412535
you are a clown because mom feeds you unconditionally.

>>16412525
>Error: can't parse argument. More computational power required.

>>16412531
FREE: You are not determined to do a specific thing. Given your personal background, genes, etc. you still have the power of choosing between different options, and the choice you are going to choose is not determined.

>>16412514
>not true btw
Yes it is btw

Damn, arguing against people who believe theres no free will is like talking to an NPC.
Oh wait....

>>16412667
Sure, man

>>16412226
SPBP.

>>16412197
>>16412231
>>16412235
>>16412305
>>16412509
>>16412514

>Lo cielo i vostri movimenti inizia;
>non dico tutti, ma, posto ch’i’ ‘l dica,
>lume v’è dato a bene e a malizia,

>e libero voler; che, se fatica
>ne le prime battaglie col ciel dura,
>poi vince tutto, se ben si notrica.

>A maggior forza e a miglior natura
>liberi soggiacete; e quella cria
>la mente in voi, che ‘l ciel non ha in sua cura.

>Però, se ’l mondo presente disvia,
>in voi è la cagione, in voi si cheggia;
>e io te ne sarò or vera spia.

Isn't Sam Harris actually a compatibilist? Are there serious thinkers nowadays who are either hard determinists or libertarians?

>>16412801
Im a serious thinker and I'm a libertarian.

>>16412801
Compatibilism is literally just "hard determinism but like, pretend it's not lmao"

>>16412809
Cope

>>16412809

>>16412231
Only true for the lesser peoples.

>>16412806
Seriously thinking about killing yourself, one would hope.

>>16412875
Seething

Imagine being so dumb as to deny causality itself.

>>16412938
free will doesn't violate causality.

>>16412958
Of course. Free will is obviously exists and is perfectly compatible with causality. My point was that determinism was not.

Anyone around that can summarize the refutations of Laplace's demon for me? Pretend I'm a woman when it comes to complexity.

>>16412982
Not determinism itself, but the position that determinism implies theres no free will.

>>16412923
Cope

>>16412999
Dilate

>>16413010
Have sex

>>16413021
yikes

>>16412509
We have actually overriden most of our “biological programming” which is why we have sex for fun/pleasure instead of reproduction and why we eat foods made for pleasure. We operate nothing like animals, we are demons.

I don't "believe" in free will or determinism. Neither make a discernable difference to reality.

>>16413121
Its literally the difference between life and death

>>16412197
Sam Harris is literally the worst person you can read regarding this subject. His worldview is contradictory and self-refuting. He's an imbecile.

>>16412486
But you still don't know why you make those decisions. You may come up with reasons but you still don't know why you chose those reasons. Your consciousness is perceiving a conversation in which you don't partake. You don't decide your thoughts, you perceive them.

>>16412197
Yes.

>>16413067
animals also have sex and eat for pleasure, and if you alter their environment too much they will not reproduce properly or be healthy.

>>16412509
Either way, to my understanding, Schopenhauer believed in what we would call "free will" because it pertained to the noumenal world and thus it was not subjected to the principle of sufficient reason. It wasn't a deterministic spinozist scheme at all.

>>16412484
But can you call that indeterminancy free will?

>>16412305
>Everything you do or think is determined by all the things that make up you
>therefore you don't have free will
lmao retard

>>16414598
follow the causal chain backwards

>>16412197
>free will
You’d have to define the former term and the latter’s meaning in relationship with the former for me to give an answer.
But you don’t want my answer. You want an unproductive discussion about a jew’s pop philosophy rag

Either I choose to believe in it or I never had any power not to.

>>16412516
by infecting you with memes

>>16412197
I believe in magic.

>>16412858
False

>>16414469
Yikes

>>16413147
why?

>>16412923
>>16412999
>>16413010
>>16413021
>>16413037
Welcome to /v/

>>16412517
>I control my brain

>>16412537
>>16412588
>>16412588
>Trust me, there are counterarguments that i examined but won't let you examine, u r just an NPC
>based

Are free will and determinism incompatible? Let's say you are an undecided voter and in the days before the 2020 presidential election you are unknowingly kidnapped by a mad scientist while you sleep. During the night, this mad scientist implants a chip in your brain that can be controlled remotely by him. What it does is quite simple: if you go to the voting booth and reach out to vote for President Trump, the scientist will turn on the chip, which will then override your brain and make you vote for Biden instead. However, on that day you reach out to vote for Biden; the scientist never turns on the chip. Clearly it is impossible to vote for Trump in this scenario, barring some error in the chip's function or the scientist's awareness. Yet you weren't forced to vote for Biden either. What to make of this? If by "free will" you more accurately mean "an abundance of possibility," then free will does not exist. But if by "free will" one instead mean "a lack of external coercion," then this may exist since it is not incompatible with determinism.

>>16415834
Then you're a compatibilist.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compatibilism#Criticism

>>16412197
Of course.

no, if i had free will i'd get myself together and do something with my life but instead i spend all day shitposting, Allah wills it

>>16412226
Underrated.

>>16412226
based.

>>16414469
Good lad
https://courses.aynrand.org/people/edwin-a-locke/

>>16412559
If you have free will, then stop being a faggot.

If you're looking at it purely based off the current body of scientific knowledge on the subject, then no we don't have freewill. All you are is just an observer who justifies your thoughts/actions.

However, we simply do not know enough about how the brain functions to come to any solid conclusion on the subject. For all we know orchestrated objective reduction theory is true and through quantum mechanics going around causality we actually do have free will. Personally I like to think I have free will when I do something well and don't have free will when I fuck something up.

>>16412340
>I don't know what people mean when they say "free will."
Don't worry, they don't know either

>>16412231

this sentence is basically the premise of his entire book repeated constantly, and exactly why it's retarded and really not even worth reading

>1. the universe has the exact same quantity of material in it as it did at the beginning of creation, and will always retain that same amount
>2. this makes every moment a new iteration of the universe, since each moment is 'new', constraints of place, body, and 'time' are irrelevant. since they are always there lurking in the background, they might as well not be there
>3. in his book all of his arguments are emotional, and are lamenting the children and other innocents harmed by criminals, and he bases this on the idea that because the criminals had 'bad genes' or 'bad previous experiences', they couldn't have done anything else. buthe never gets into a theoretical reason as to why free will doesn't exist
>4. as humans we have self awareness, and if you are aware of any of the facts that i presented above, that means that you can make a choice of whatever constraints the universe presents you with, at any given time.
>5. so a flying insect may have no choice to land and start eating a carcass, a drunk human with poor self control may have the same level of choice as an insect, but someone who makes it a goal to keep their awareness high at all times, and remove their awareness from the bodily passions as much as possible does have free will

>>16412197
I believe in free won't

if you still believe in free will after watching this video then you're just not ready to accept the truth yet

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aAnlBW5INYg

What you do - is also a doing of your environment. Your behavior is its behavior - as much as its behavior is your behavior. Its mutual. We could say it's transactional. You are not a puppet which your environment pushes around, nor is the environment a puppet which you push around. They go together, they ACT together. t. Alan Watts

>>16417544
I watched it and the arguments are so bad that only a moron would be convinced by them. Do you know your IQ? It would be interesting to find out.

>>16412197
Depends how you define it. Can people at any time freely choose to do anything? No. Is there within certain parameters (facticity of body and origin, cultural and historical context, language) the opportunity to express a style of being that is uniquely your own? Yes.

People get hung up on a kind of Sartrean metaphysical freedom where practically everything is a choice and your direct responsibility, or equally retarded metaphors about how the human is some kind of complicated input/output device that can someday be fully described and thus fully predicted. The probable truth is neither so great nor grim. We're mired in an ambiguity where its difficult to say precisely how much freedom we have, but to suppose that it is total or zero is to refuse to deal with the actual complexity of the question.

Merleau-Ponty is very underrated on this question.

>>16412484
Sure, at the quantum level. At the human level it has no impact - if you jump, you'll fall and if you light a match it will burn. And even if it was not so, it doesn't mean you have a say. Indeterminism does not entail free will.

I must, it is my church's dogma.

>>16417404
Is the pick unrelated.
Also how old is the abo?

>>16417421
Well he is trying to sell his book to confrontational theist midwits.

/lit/ isn't my home board and I read about one book a year. Can somebody more well-read than me confirm my inkling that the question in the OP is teen pseud tier bullshit?

>>16412197
This question was of great interest to me when I was 12 years old

>>16419657
Why is /lit/ so full of absolute retards? I think I'm going back to /int/