Does the mind have free will?

[whynaut]

I have been noodling with the idea of free will and, I think, I have found a test that would prove it (at the very least prove it to me). The argument against free will is that outside circumstances shape our minds and therefore our decisions. For instance, if I ate some candy today then the reason why I did it was because I perhaps had something salty earlier or the biology in my mouth made me crave something sweet. According to the theory, I never had a real "choice" whether or not I ate the candy. The argument for free will is that I did always retain the choice, and I could have just as validly eaten a cracker or a hamburger instead.

Anyway, this is what would prove free will to me. I would need to see a person intentionally make a bad decision. Think about it. People are always drawn to make "good" decisions i.e. "I choose to take a shower rather than not or I will smell bad'." Even when a decision is detrimental to a person, it still is for a good reason. The junkie smokes crack because though it may kill his body or drive away his friends, the act still makes him feel good. But what I am talking about is a decision that has absolutely no benefit to it whatsoever. I want to see someone shoot themselves in the foot or burn a hundred dollar bill. Because if someone intentionally made a bad choice then that would prove that human beings are not forced to act one way or the other; that we are not strung along by or biology or by circumstance. If we literally choose something for no other reason then that we have a choice, that would be the proof to me that human beings have free will.

Unfortunately, the test would become void for anyone who reads this post because if one of us tested this we would have a good reason, and that would be to prove there is free will.

But keep your eyes open folks. If anyone has an example of this kind of real choice, I would love to hear about it. It would literally blow my mind to everything I believe about philosophy.  

[Arson Hiroha]

Hmm, well I think a lot of this traces back to the very essence of the human mind. It weighs the benefits of different options, then chooses the most beneficial. In my opinion, the only arguement that can be made agaisnt free will is that the mind is part of my biology, and is determined by genes, and thus my biology and genes, along with the situation, determine my actions. However, the very definition of free will is the ability to make decisions by your own reasoning. Thus, you indeed have free will. However, to make decisions you must always have reason to make them.

To find someone making a decision that doesn't have any value to them would probably be impossible. There is always some kind of incentive. If I give to a homeless person, I do it to feel good and appear generous, or entertain my own morality. On the other hand, if a dictator forces me to remain silent about my political views, I remain silent because it benefits me not to be beaten in the streets. Someone who commits suicide even thinks that death benefits them (as absurd as the idea may sound). Thus, even when compelled by an outside force, you still have free will in that sense.

For example, take this dialogue:

"Give me a dollar or I'll punch you in the face."

"So I have to give you a dollar?"

"No, you could get punched in the face. Whichever you choose."

On one hand, he is benefited by keeping his dollar. On the other hand, he is benefited by not being punched. Freedom of choice, by that definition, is always there.  

[Niniva]

@Arson:

You examples are keenly flawed in that....no matter if it "appears" as though they have free will or not, it very well may be that the man would never have had a choice of being punched or giving a dollar had he not walked up to here, or gotten out of bed this morning.

In point of fact there are deterministic things that take palce within the mind itself that cause our actions. For example what if said person happens to have an extreme affinity for pain? He loves to get hurt, can't explain why, he just does, it arouses him, heightens his enjoyment...and so the idea of getting punched in the face begins hormonal secretions, raising his adrenaline level, thus swaying his mind to think he would rather be punched than give the man a mere dollar.

And so....he chooses to be punched. But was the choice really his? Or was the hormone the thing that determined his action? In the heat of a decision it is theorized that no matter what the outcome of the decision may be, whatever outcome occurred simply occured because it had the greater set of causes (most of which you will never know existed).

Some say the mind is free to desire things....while others say that those desires are merely maternal instincts based on what we've been taught or swayed to desire from past experiences. For example, my mother hates Burger King. If you asked her why she hates Burger King her answer is simple. "Because I ate there once and it made me sick and I threw up" now this isn't very rational but that experience causes her to this day to never ever eat at Burger King. Does she choose to not eat at Burger King? It would be very hard for you to explain to me how she now...after her experience has ingrained in her this memory of throwing up from Burger King and creating this emotionalistic distaste for Burger King because of it....actually has a choice in the matter. What actually causes her to not want to eat Burger King?

I think we all are aware that we have a thinking part of ourselves that reasons toward answers, but I think we also all are aware that human beings are always subjective and thus have very limited ability to reason into decisions without incorperating personal points of view. Personal points of view are all determined by past experiences...if the way we think is determined by things that have happened in the past then our reasoning is also affected by everything thats ever happened to us and thus can be considered very solidly determined. It could also be theorized that because of these deterministic causes no decision you make is ever not determined and thus you have no free will.

Unless you can think of any thought you've ever had where if I asked you WHY you thought that way, you wouldn't respond by stating REASONS WHY you thought that way. If you thought that way for specific reasons then your thoughts were determined, and thus your decision was determined to occur based on the stronger set of causes....you are not in control of the causes, they mostly occur outside of you and thus your decision would have turned out the way it did no matter what. So it LOOKS like we have no free will.

This is not to say that I don't have my own version of free will, but it is to say that your version is very flawed and actually is more of a display of coersion which any rational human being would consider not free will either.

People DO things based on the rewards...because they are determined to believe something would be better for them in that moment. People's mind's change because circumstances change...people act based on the underlying causes of each situation and those causes may string all the way back to the begining of time, thus making them nearly infinite and impossible to know...since this is true, you cannot say with any confidence that a person's desires are free.

A person find no incentive in any actions unless they have previously experienced this incentive or something similar....thus the desire for a particular incentive is also not free.  

[Arson Hiroha]

Well my simple reply is probably the most difficult you can encounter for that arguement. Indeed, my mind determines the way my life is, however complex it is. Isn't that what free will is? Otherwise, what else is there to be free?

The only true arguement against it is the God-Machine idea; that we are all simply controlled by a higher power like puppets. In that case, no, we don't have free will; however, that would make us extensions of a divine being, and that being serves as our mind. Thus, our mind has free will.  

[Niniva]

Arson Hiroha

Well my simple reply is probably the most difficult you can encounter for that arguement. Indeed, my mind determines the way my life is, however complex it is. Isn't that what free will is? Otherwise, what else is there to be free?

The only true arguement against it is the God-Machine idea; that we are all simply controlled by a higher power like puppets. In that case, no, we don't have free will; however, that would make us extensions of a divine being, and that being serves as our mind. Thus, our mind has free will.

Take your first statement and switch it around and that is what I was saying, I believe you missunderstood me.

The way life is determines our mind, which then determines our actions.

Are you trying to tell me that your mind as an infant which was incapable of true reason was not molded in some fashion? That whoever brought you up taught you nothing? That those things that happened to you taught you nothing? The first time you touched something hot...you knew what you were doing then? And so before you even touched it you knew what hot was and knew not to touch it and yet did it anyway?

The way we think...is determined very very very much by our surroundings, experiences, society, family, and nature. I don't think anyone would contend that point in the least.

So......How is it even possible that your mind determines the way your life is? It would seem more like circumstances outside of your control determine the way your mind is wouldn't it?

Your answer confuses me...but I think that is because you are agreeing with a point that I didn't make.  

[Arson Hiroha]

My response is simply that without your mind, there is nothing to influence. Thus, something must determine how you absorb and use the experiences to begin with. Genes play a large role in this, and another is indeed experiences. Your thoughts are determined by other things as a whole, but any will is the same way. Additionally, a religious person may also argue that a soul is also present determining things.

To say experience determines everything, and completely disregarding the actual composition of the brain, is to say that both a child born with down syndrome and Steven Hawking had the same potential. Though experience is a factor, one of the deciding factors is the brain/mind/soul itself.

Although genetics are also outside your control, I'm afraid it's probably about all you're going to get (save for those who argue that we are also invested with a soul, or divine component).  

[Niniva]

Arson Hiroha

My response is simply that without your mind, there is nothing to influence. Thus, something must determine how you absorb and use the experiences to begin with. Genes play a large role in this, and another is indeed experiences. Your thoughts are determined by other things as a whole, but any will is the same way. Additionally, a religious person may also argue that a soul is also present determining things.

To say experience determines everything, and completely disregarding the actual composition of the brain, is to say that both a child born with down syndrome and Steven Hawking had the same potential. Though experience is a factor, one of the deciding factors is the brain/mind/soul itself.

Although genetics are also outside your control, I'm afraid it's probably about all you're going to get (save for those who argue that we are also invested with a soul, or divine component).

Again I'm not sure you're going back quite far enough. Desires are always based on past experiences. The only desire you can't say that about are when you are experiencing something for the first time but even then...you've had the experience of "experiencing something for the first time" before and thus your actions are dictated very wholely by events in the past.

Explain to me how we have any sort of will at all at birth. Nothing more than animalistic instincts at best. I don't think you can argue that.

A person with Downs Syndrome did have the same potential as Steven Hawking....until the moment when they experienced a brain defect and the potential was not realized. If we were at the begining of time looking down the time line ahead to a future but were unable to affect it, just watch it...we could see the string of events from the begining and which things cause which other things....including WHY that person had downsyndrome and why steven hawking has use of more of his brain potential. Maybe it's genetics, maybe it's certain experiences, maybe it's a bad parent, maybe a terrible act in the past before they were born, or a wonderful moment of grace....or a mother eating the right kinds of things....no matter what it was there are factors that affect the way you are right now that happened before you were even concieved.

A hard determinist would look at you and scratch his head as to how you can even say people have a will that it outside of causality. They would tell you very directly the only reason you have the will that you have is because of your experiences combined with lessons taught by parents or things ingrained in you since birth, such as moral copacity or the difference between right and wrong....even being hugged enough. I'm still not sure you have the correct grasp of what "will" actually is.

The point you are missing here is that I am not saying a person "MAKES THEMSELVES WILL" you are. I am saying a person simply wills things, but that the act of making themself will may very well not be something they are in control of at all.

For example we can hypnotise someone and make them do whatever we want them too when they hear a bell ring and they would never even know the difference.....not only that but they would thoroughly believe they are the one's responsible for willing the action to take place.

As for the soul or the devine...I preffer to leave religion out of any sort of philosophical debate as they are things we couldn't possibly know anything about.....unless the mind and soul are the same exact thing....in which case we would be able to know certain things about the mind and soul but never much about it really since it is a part of this reality that isn't physical (or may not be)  

[Arson Hiroha]

I never said that their behavior does not have causality. Put nicely and neatly into bullets, here are the points I am making:

1. Free will is the ability of the mind to make decisions.

2. Genetics are a main factor in how the mind is composed. You can say this is an experience, and you would be correct; however, that is not something that stops you from having free will. It is still your mind that decides, whether it was predetermined to do so by circumstance or not. To say otherwise would destroy the very definition of free will, and make it something that simply does not exist.

3. Intelligence, as far as I know, is definately influenced by genetics. Down syndrome was a bad example because it was behavioral, but there are many other defects that are purely genetic in nature.

4. For you to have had experienced "the first time" before, there would have had to have been a first time to that. As far as human life is concerned, in terms of that individual's time on this earth, there is a distinct beginning and an end. I am not speaking of the spiritual self here, and by no means am I speaking of human history as a whole.

In short, genetics determine the mind. Genetics also determines your behavior. However, first, as a proxy, your mind has to determine your behavior for them. Although outside experiences other than genetics do play a factor, by no means can you solely place the blame on such things. When you find yourself in a federal court, you can't say "Well your honor, I was not at fault. My genetics and past experiences told me to do it." The Judge would then say "Ok, so you reasoned that you should have robbed a bank. Case closed, off to jail."

Additionally, if I want to be as irritating as I can be and blow the entire arguement to the side, there are things not reducable to experience that only exist in the mind. E.G., mathematics and geographical things like the perfect line. Thus, you have reason independant from past experiences, and you can't get out of court by saying "The World did it."  

[27x]

What I meant was, that our body runs off of reactions. Decompositions and synthyses. Atoms and molicules come together, or break apart.

Knowing this, we can predict reactions. The brain is also made from chemical reactions. Knowing this, is it possible that when a person is born, their body has an exact formula of how it will act for the rest of his or her life?  

[Arson Hiroha]

I_27_04

What I meant was, that our body runs off of reactions. Decompositions and synthyses. Atoms and molicules come together, or break apart.

Knowing this, we can predict reactions. The brain is also made from chemical reactions. Knowing this, is it possible that when a person is born, their body has an exact formula of how it will act for the rest of his or her life?

Hmm, possibly, although this formula would include one's surroundings as well. Since there are so many factors, though, it would require a literally complete mathematical understanding of the world. That includes things like the economy, which are widely debated, and obviously the economy can effect someone's life greatly. It decides whether you have food and other amenities/needs.

If such a formula existed, it would also be far beyond human comprehension. It would probably even take centuries just to write down, with a team of thousands of people, regardless of the impossibility of determining it. The only thinking thing that could put together a formula of that size would have to have unimaginable mental capacity. Whether you believe in him or not, I guess you could call it God's Formula, just for its sheer impossibility.

In that sense, we don't have free will. Although, in the end, what is free will? Just the ability to determine something with one's mind. To go any freer than that would be impossible, most likely, and most ideas of free will likely stop there. Basically, it's like saying that all that free will is could be compared to an executive and a superior: Free will is only that the executive decides some things. Even though the boss gives them orders, the executive still carries out orders. In this case, our executive is our own makeup, so it's impossible to obey.

If it can't be determined by something, then free will is impossible. If it can be, then we do have it. From there, it's just an arguement of words I suppose.  

[27x]

Arson Hiroha

I_27_04

What I meant was, that our body runs off of reactions. Decompositions and synthyses. Atoms and molicules come together, or break apart.

Knowing this, we can predict reactions. The brain is also made from chemical reactions. Knowing this, is it possible that when a person is born, their body has an exact formula of how it will act for the rest of his or her life?

Hmm, possibly, although this formula would include one's surroundings as well. Since there are so many factors, though, it would require a literally complete mathematical understanding of the world. That includes things like the economy, which are widely debated, and obviously the economy can effect someone's life greatly. It decides whether you have food and other amenities/needs.

If such a formula existed, it would also be far beyond human comprehension. It would probably even take centuries just to write down, with a team of thousands of people, regardless of the impossibility of determining it. The only thinking thing that could put together a formula of that size would have to have unimaginable mental capacity. Whether you believe in him or not, I guess you could call it God's Formula, just for its sheer impossibility.

In that sense, we don't have free will. Although, in the end, what is free will? Just the ability to determine something with one's mind. To go any freer than that would be impossible, most likely, and most ideas of free will likely stop there. Basically, it's like saying that all that free will is could be compared to an executive and a superior: Free will is only that the executive decides some things. Even though the boss gives them orders, the executive still carries out orders. In this case, our executive is our own makeup, so it's impossible to obey.

If it can't be determined by something, then free will is impossible. If it can be, then we do have it. From there, it's just an arguement of words I suppose.

Well if a coconut was grown at a certin time, then it will eventually fall, and that is simply a decomposition that detaches the coconut from the tree, a predictable chemical reaction. The wind moving, blowing the sea is simply physics which has an exact formula. The creatures within the sea are reacting to the sea, and all their movement combined is making a slight difference to the waves. Therefore a living thing can change the outer enviorment. This means that origionally, everything was reacting to it'sself on it's own, then a living thing, with an exact formula to how it would react to A, caused B. B couldn't have happened without A, but A was going to happen because of C. B, later on, had an effect on X, which changed another living beings initial reaction, but X happened because the first person had to react to A in a certin way.

The enviorment was preset as something, and we changed it. Part of what the enviorment is now is it reacting to it'sself, and another part is the changes we make, but they both where destined to happen, because all of these reactions could be predicted.  

[Arson Hiroha]

I_27_04

Arson Hiroha

I_27_04

What I meant was, that our body runs off of reactions. Decompositions and synthyses. Atoms and molicules come together, or break apart.

Knowing this, we can predict reactions. The brain is also made from chemical reactions. Knowing this, is it possible that when a person is born, their body has an exact formula of how it will act for the rest of his or her life?

Hmm, possibly, although this formula would include one's surroundings as well. Since there are so many factors, though, it would require a literally complete mathematical understanding of the world. That includes things like the economy, which are widely debated, and obviously the economy can effect someone's life greatly. It decides whether you have food and other amenities/needs.

If such a formula existed, it would also be far beyond human comprehension. It would probably even take centuries just to write down, with a team of thousands of people, regardless of the impossibility of determining it. The only thinking thing that could put together a formula of that size would have to have unimaginable mental capacity. Whether you believe in him or not, I guess you could call it God's Formula, just for its sheer impossibility.

In that sense, we don't have free will. Although, in the end, what is free will? Just the ability to determine something with one's mind. To go any freer than that would be impossible, most likely, and most ideas of free will likely stop there. Basically, it's like saying that all that free will is could be compared to an executive and a superior: Free will is only that the executive decides some things. Even though the boss gives them orders, the executive still carries out orders. In this case, our executive is our own makeup, so it's impossible to obey.

If it can't be determined by something, then free will is impossible. If it can be, then we do have it. From there, it's just an arguement of words I suppose.

Well if a coconut was grown at a certin time, then it will eventually fall, and that is simply a decomposition that detaches the coconut from the tree, a predictable chemical reaction. The wind moving, blowing the sea is simply physics which has an exact formula. The creatures within the sea are reacting to the sea, and all their movement combined is making a slight difference to the waves. Therefore a living thing can change the outer enviorment. This means that origionally, everything was reacting to it'sself on it's own, then a living thing, with an exact formula to how it would react to A, caused B. B couldn't have happened without A, but A was going to happen because of C. B, later on, had an effect on X, which changed another living beings initial reaction, but X happened because the first person had to react to A in a certin way.

The enviorment was preset as something, and we changed it. Part of what the enviorment is now is it reacting to it'sself, and another part is the changes we make, but they both where destined to happen, because all of these reactions could be predicted.

I believe I agree with you, unless I'm reading incorrectly. It is possible, to an extent, that the earth could have a formula about it, but its complexity would be at an insane level- something a league of Einsteins couldn't comprehend. We can point out the major factors, but we can't formulate all of their causes and what they cause because of the sheer amount of variables.

It kindof goes back to a modified form of chaos theory, where a hurricane in Japan could be caused by something as minute as the wings of a butterfly. Microbes, radiation from the sun, the earth's rotation would all have some effect, even though minute, on the growth of the coconut. Or, for example, a disease could sweep in and kill the tree before the coconut had the chance to grow. Thus we need all of the factors that prevent the disease.

To go to the extreme, an alien could swoop in and take the coconut before it falls, then fly off to the corners of the galaxy never to be seen again. OF course, there are other factors that make this improbable. Whatever factors those are, there has to be factors to cause those, so on and so forth.

However, we can do a rough probability, although that's not the same as predicting something.  

[27x]

That's the part you misread.

Firstly, take this into mind.

We can not know all of the formulas for everything that happens, therefore, they do not exist.

A flawed statement. There are too many to know, however, quantity has no effect on the existance of that.

As for the disease which kills the coconut tree, that is simply the effect of another cause. Knowing this, if the world started over in the same place, who is to say that the exact same thigns wouldn't happen. All the minor things that effect everything else, does not prove my theory wrong. They are actually the basis of my theory, because they are caused by other minute things, which are caused by other minute things. This all goes back to the first things that ever existed, which, when in effect, simply MUST become what it is now.

However I may be wrong.  

[Arson Hiroha]

I_27_04

That's the part you misread.

Firstly, take this into mind.

We can not know all of the formulas for everything that happens, therefore, they do not exist.

A flawed statement. There are too many to know, however, quantity has no effect on the existance of that.

As for the disease which kills the coconut tree, that is simply the effect of another cause. Knowing this, if the world started over in the same place, who is to say that the exact same thigns wouldn't happen. All the minor things that effect everything else, does not prove my theory wrong. They are actually the basis of my theory, because they are caused by other minute things, which are caused by other minute things. This all goes back to the first things that ever existed, which, when in effect, simply MUST become what it is now.

However I may be wrong.

Ah, of course they exist. My only point is that we would never be able to comprehend it, so it's not useful to us in the extent that we can predict everything.

Thus, if I'm correct in believing so, we do agree. Basically, everything has causation. Thus, everything can be predicted if you follow the trail of causation. However, it is incredibly difficult to pinpoint every cause for something, hence my earlier phrase "God's Formula" , in that one would need the intellect of a God to figure it out. However, that doesn't mean that God was the original cause, or even exists. That's a question for another day, and one I don't intend to delve into.

It seems like we do have a strange construction of fate. It's like the universe is playing crossing cups with us: we are pre-determined to do something, but we have no idea what it is. Thus, our only course of action is to move along the path we want fate to take, because that is the path fate wants us to take.  

[Purete]

Niniva

Quote:

God free will paradox:
Most religeons say that god is all knowing, and gives us free will.

IF he gives us free will we have it. If he is all knowing, and can't be wrong, then by knowing what we are going to do, we must do it, or it would prove him wrong, which is impossible.

I actually bring this arguement up to my Christian friends who don't think about what they say before they say it. The question of God's foreknowledge first brought to bear in Boethius in 300ish AD. His conclusions are distastefully unsatisfying to me as they attempt to say that God doesn't know the future as there is no "future" to God and so God doesn't "know" anything in the future....there is only now to him, and so he simply just knows whats happening in any single moment because all moments are happening in the "now" for God.

To which I say, "Fine...but what does that have to do with us here? It matters absolutely none at all how God experiences time, or IF he even does. He promised we had free will and reguardless of how HE experiences time and "knows" things WE experience it the way WE do, NOT the way he does and so therefore free will for US cannot happen on God's timeframe, nor can we say anything meaningful about God's timeframe as we don't experience it. So everything you have said Sir Boethius is either not adressing the problem at had or is totally irrelevant. What we would like to know....is how WE have free will IF God knows the future for US....not how God CAN know the future. One has nothing to do with the other. I don't care HOW God knows it...I just care what the implications are."

With that being said, if God "knows" the future, and the definition of "knowledge" is that it is absolute Truth in the sense that he could not "know" it for certain unless it were true and so if God "knows" the future then it must take place and we cannot avoid it.

So how do we solve this problem if we want both to be a theist and preserve free will?

Simple. Under the rules of omnicience the definition in Philosophical terms is not that God knows literally everything.....it's that God knows everything THAT CAN BE KNOWN. If the future has not happened and is not predetermined then God could not know it. What he can know is "every possible outcome" of every decision and thus can acurately predict which way we will go.

In the sense that a Taxi driver knows every turn and side street in New York City or L.A., if you get in his cab and say "Take me to broadway and 22nd" he will say "Well which way you wanna go? Touristy, fastest, or one step at a time?" (they won't really say that I know but lets just say they did) You say, "Lets just see where we wind up after this light." At the light the taxi driver says "Alright we're at 32nd and Jackson, to the right is 34th, to the left 30th, straight ahead we'll hit 43rd and if you wanna turn around we'll hit France St. Which way?" and you say, well if we turn right what's after 34th?" He says "Well you can turn right there and hit France St again, keep going on down to 36th, turn left and head to 43rd or take the on ramp to the freeway."

So no matter which way you tell him to turn he always knows which choices are in front of you and what their possible outcomes are, but what God does not know, and could not possibly know because it does not exist, is which way you will choose to go. He knows the final destination, and he knows every single decision you could potentially be faced with allong the way but he does not know which streets you will turn down.

That is the advantage of devine knowledge. Are there some things God does not know? Yes, just like there are some actions God cannot take (those which contredict themselves). God cannot possibly know something that cannot be known. Just as God cannot possibly do something that cannot be done. This is St. Thomas Aquinas in the early 14th century. Excellent thinker, perhaps the greatest advancements in philosophy since aristotle came from that man.

Don't you imagine that if there were an all powerful, omniscient, creator of the universe, ultimate being, fully capable of knowing every bit of the future, He would also have the power to withhold such knowledge from Himself?

We have to have free will in order for Christianity to function properly. God wouldn't want us to choose the right thing just because it's in the cards. Do you want to make someone say, "I love you," or do you want them to choose to say, "I love you?" God had to allow us to be genuine.

The Bible does directly say that He knows every day of our lives before we are born, and I don't doubt it. But a being which is all powerful, ALL powerful...shouldn't He have the ability to shield His eyes from some knowledge of the future, for His own sake?

It's a hard concept to grasp, since we are acquainted only to thinking within human boundaries, with human minds. Shouldn't an all powerful being be able to do, well...anything? Even if it means keeping something He already knows from Himself, so that He doesn't see the outcome either, until it happens?

Just a thought. Only a thought.