35 of 70
35
Do non-human animals have free will?
Posted: 14 March 2013 12:19 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 511 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4521
Joined  2007-08-31
VYAZMA - 13 March 2013 02:21 PM

We have all defined “free-will” as being able to do what you want.

No, you all did not. It should be clear by now that there is no contradiction between determinism and ‘being able to do what you want’. If you think there is then you have added something to this, namely ‘being able to want what you want’, more precise, that what you want is not determined. And that is what libertarian free will is.

VYAZMA - 13 March 2013 02:21 PM

And the collective is just as causally determined as the criminal. Or the hero. Or the lawyer. Or the judge. Or the victim. Or the criminal.

Yes. Sure. Everything, the whole stuff of it. But if you want to understand how this whole social machine is working, you cannot do without reference to ‘soft terms’ like wishes, beliefs, responsibility, free will, etc etc.

Imagine on another planet silicon based life has evolved until the same level as on ours. There are beings that replicate and that want to survive, are conscious of this, are conscious of their environment, can anticipate the future, everything what we are and can. They build up also a judicial system. Now: the low level causal explanation will be completely different from ours. Their low level causal explanations involves silicon chemistry, not carbon based. However on higher level the causal explanation is the same: wishes and beliefs cause actions. So it is obvious: if you understand the low level mechanisms, you have understood nothing yet.

If you study complex structures, you need a science of these structures that abstract from the layers in which they are implemented. Naturalism requires that every single structure can be implemented in lower level structures, of course, but the science of the complex structure can do without. Why, became Darwinism science only when the molecular basis of heredity was discovered? Or was it already a science before?

[ Edited: 14 March 2013 12:36 AM by GdB ]
 Signature 

GdB

“The light is on, but there is nobody at home”

Profile
 
 
Posted: 14 March 2013 01:47 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 512 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4576
Joined  2008-08-14

GdB-

No, you all did not. It should be clear by now that there is no contradiction between determinism and ‘being able to do what you want’. If you think there is then you have added something to this, namely ‘being able to want what you want’, more precise, that what you want is not determined. And that is what libertarian free will is.

I don’t make a distinction between being able to do what you want and being able to want what you want.   Splitting these hairs is redundant.
Again a waste of time.  Semantics. 

Yes. Sure. Everything, the whole stuff of it. But if you want to understand how this whole social machine is working, you cannot do without reference to ‘soft terms’ like wishes, beliefs, responsibility, free will, etc etc.

So again…this is the most convoluted, drawn out method for explaining that language contains the terms: wishes, free will, wants, responsibility etc..
And that it is ok to use these terms to communicate.

Imagine on another planet silicon based life has evolved until the same level as on ours. There are beings that replicate and that want to survive, are conscious of this, are conscious of their environment, can anticipate the future, everything what we are and can. They build up also a judicial syste….......

No thanks.  I’m finished with imagining and confusing analogies.
You have taken 100s of pages to tell us that it is ok to use terms like free will, wants, responsibilities, choices etc…

 Signature 

Row row row your boat gently down the stream.  Merrily Merrily merrily merrily life is but a dream!

Profile
 
 
Posted: 14 March 2013 02:12 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 513 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4521
Joined  2007-08-31
VYAZMA - 14 March 2013 01:47 AM

I don’t make a distinction between being able to do what you want and being able to want what you want.  

Yep. And that is the reason we have hundreds of pages of useless discussions. You use concepts in a non-precise way.

How can you evaluate if the compatibilist notion of free will is correct if you do not distinguish between natural processes causing our wishes and beliefs, and our wishes and beliefs causing our actions? The latter means we have free will, both together mean we are determined.

VYAZMA - 14 March 2013 01:47 AM

So again…this is the most convoluted, drawn out method for explaining that language contains the terms: wishes, free will, wants, responsibility etc..
And that it is ok to use these terms to communicate.

Yes. And these communications work, because they conform to structures that exist in reality. They are part of the causal fabric of our existence.

VYAZMA - 14 March 2013 01:47 AM

You have taken 100s of pages to tell us that it is ok to use terms like free will, wants, responsibilities, choices etc…

Yes. And that the opinion of neurologists that we have no free will, and we therefore should reform our judicial system; that we should treat criminals, instead of punishing them, has no basis.

[ Edited: 14 March 2013 03:38 AM by GdB ]
 Signature 

GdB

“The light is on, but there is nobody at home”

Profile
 
 
Posted: 14 March 2013 04:59 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 514 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4576
Joined  2008-08-14
VYAZMA - 14 March 2013 01:47 AM

So again…this is the most convoluted, drawn out method for explaining that language contains the terms: wishes, free will, wants, responsibility etc..
And that it is ok to use these terms to communicate.

Gdb-
Yes. And these communications work, because they conform to structures that exist in reality. They are part of the causal fabric of our existence.

Yes of course.  We use these terms in language, which is part of the causal fabric, to describe our perceptions of reality.
These terms are very convenient for describing our perception of how we behave and why we behave.
They are very convenient for describing why someone would be punished for example.

 Signature 

Row row row your boat gently down the stream.  Merrily Merrily merrily merrily life is but a dream!

Profile
 
 
Posted: 14 March 2013 05:20 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 515 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4521
Joined  2007-08-31
VYAZMA - 14 March 2013 04:59 AM

Yes of course.  We use these terms in language, which is part of the causal fabric, to describe our perceptions of reality.
These terms are very convenient for describing our perception of how we behave and why we behave.
They are very convenient for describing why someone would be punished for example.

Yes. Again! We seem to agree now on everything. Something must be wrong…

But one addition: how we perceive reality belongs to the causal factors of our existence. That is important to see: even our philosophising is part of the determined world. And there is no contradiction with the fact that all this is implemented in brains, neurons, molecules and atoms.

 Signature 

GdB

“The light is on, but there is nobody at home”

Profile
 
 
Posted: 14 March 2013 07:33 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 516 ]
Jr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  97
Joined  2012-12-01

What is a implementor

Profile
 
 
Posted: 14 March 2013 11:41 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 517 ]
Jr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  97
Joined  2012-12-01

“[quote autho/r=“Lois” date=“1351678579”]If so, how does that work?
Is there any difference between human and non-human free will?
If not, how do they manage to survive?[quote”  (first post of this topic)

Are the nervous systems for Animals and Humans different?

Are Human and Human Being nervous systems different?

Can Knowledge of Animals and Humans be for understanding Being?

Can knowledge and understanding lead to a willed existence of some kind?

What do we do with Qualia from Neronal Ocillations

And Light Wave-Particle Duality from Relativity?

Also, today CERN announced “the particle “Linked” to the “Mechanism” that “Gives” Mass to Elementary Particles”—ref: NPR 3/14/2013—- how linked—what mechanism—who gives?

[ Edited: 15 March 2013 09:33 AM by arnoldg ]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 02 April 2013 02:07 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 518 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4576
Joined  2008-08-14

GdB-But one addition: how we perceive reality belongs to the causal factors of our existence. That is important to see: even our philosophising is part of the determined world. And there is no contradiction with the fact that all this is implemented in brains, neurons, molecules and atoms.

...uhhhmmnn….causal factors of our existence?...
Yes our philosophizing is part of the determined world.  I don’t see any contradictions so far…
What contradictions might be made?
“That is important to see…”
What is the need for this one addition?  Why do I get the feeling this is a caveat?  And not an agreement.
And I don’t understand the caveat…as usual.

 Signature 

Row row row your boat gently down the stream.  Merrily Merrily merrily merrily life is but a dream!

Profile
 
 
Posted: 02 April 2013 11:09 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 519 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4521
Joined  2007-08-31

VYAZMA,

I am saying nothing more than that our perceptions are also part of the causal fabric of the universe. They are caused, of course, but they also cause other events. The latter means that they can take part in free actions, they are causal factors for our actions.

On the other hand, they are implemented in matter, i.e. they are complex material structures. This means perceptions, wishes and beliefs can principally always translated to the workings of simpler matter. But the essence of what perceptions, wishes and beliefs are cannot be found at that level.

Sorry, I need a comparison again, before you think I am introducing souls again. Take traffic. You do not understand what traffic is if you know how a combustion engine works. It is obvious that we need something for vehicles to get them moving, but it could also be steam engines, or Stirling motors. So even if traffic is implemented by complex material structures, the essence of traffic is at a higher level, and can be object of a science in itself (e.g. queueing theory), where we take e.g. traffic streams as real objects or events and we can abstract from the lower material layer, where too much traffic can be a cause for a traffic jam. Both the traffic and the jam are real objects, but of course they do not exist as independent entities.

So in short:
- our wishes and beliefs are determined
- our wishes and beliefs cause our actions
- our wishes and beliefs are implemented in complex material structures (brains)
- our wishes and beliefs could possibly be implemented in other complex material structures (maybe computers?)
- Therefore the essence of our wishes and beliefs lies not its physical implementation

 Signature 

GdB

“The light is on, but there is nobody at home”

Profile
 
 
Posted: 03 April 2013 02:49 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 520 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  9301
Joined  2006-08-29

Yes, engine is to traffic what free will is to freedom to act. It’s apples and oranges. It’s actually pretty obvious, until some people decide to relabel traffic as “combustion engines at work.”  grin

Profile
 
 
Posted: 03 April 2013 08:48 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 521 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4576
Joined  2008-08-14

GdB-I am saying nothing more than that our perceptions are also part of the causal fabric of the universe. They are caused, of course, but they also cause other events. The latter means that they can take part in free actions, they are causal factors for our actions.

So a boulder rolling down a hill is taking part in free actions. Something caused it to roll down the hill.  If a car gets hit at the bottom of the hill we can say that the boulder did it.  Or we can say the ice melted and freed the boulder-causing it to roll.
You can say that the boulder doesn’t think!  But if our perceptions are caused(like you say 2 lines up-and I agree.), how are we different than the boulder? Are we thinking like we perceive we are thinking?  I say no. Obviously no.  Or else we are actually thinking exactly like we perceive we are thinking.
Something caused the “ice to melt in my thought process, which made me decide to roll down a hill”.  How is that different than the boulder?

On the other hand, they are implemented in matter, i.e. they are complex material structures. This means perceptions, wishes and beliefs can principally always translated to the workings of simpler matter. But the essence of what perceptions, wishes and beliefs are cannot be found at that level.

I disagree.  We already know much of human perception.  Sensory, memory, brain activity nerves etc.  I believe it is complicated-complex material structures like you say 2 lines up. And subject to the exact same causal forces we are in agreement about.

- Therefore the essence of our wishes and beliefs lies not its physical implementation

That’s a leap you are making.  And this is the essence of our disagreement.  I know exactly what you mean by this.  But further debate is fruitless.

 Signature 

Row row row your boat gently down the stream.  Merrily Merrily merrily merrily life is but a dream!

Profile
 
 
Posted: 03 April 2013 09:59 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 522 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4521
Joined  2007-08-31
VYAZMA - 03 April 2013 08:48 AM

So a boulder rolling down a hill is taking part in free actions.

No. It does not anticipate the future, it has no wishes and beliefs. When my wishes and my beliefs cause my actions, that is free will.

One of the errors you are making is that there indeed are certain aspects under which the boulder and we are the same. If the boulder gets in a free fall, it will fall exactly the same way as we do. One other of these aspects in which the boulder and we are the same is that we are both determined. But we can be free because our wishes and beliefs can cause our behaviour, which a boulder just does not have. You are thinking with a sledge hammer.

VYAZMA - 03 April 2013 08:48 AM

We already know much of human perception.  Sensory, memory, brain activity nerves etc.  I believe it is complicated-complex material structures like you say 2 lines up. And subject to the exact same causal forces we are in agreement about.

Yes, we know much: that means we know how the low level entities give rise to higher level phenomena. But ‘give rise’ does not mean ‘cause’, and even less ‘coerce’. But you simply cannot say you understand traffic if you know how the engine of cars work. It doesn’t even matter. Traffic phenomena would be the same if cars would run on Stirling motors. The underlying physics is not important, as long as there is some kind of engine in the cars. Queuing theory was developed in computer science, but it can be applied to traffic too. But computer jobs and cars are definitely not the same. So yes, you have still not understood traffic when you know ‘how cars are implemented’. The only important thing is that they are somehow implemented.

So you next argument beats thin air:

VYAZMA - 03 April 2013 08:48 AM

- Therefore the essence of our wishes and beliefs lies not its physical implementation

That’s a leap you are making.  And this is the essence of our disagreement.  I know exactly what you mean by this.  But further debate is fruitless.

Do you really know? I’ll tell you: I mean artificial intelligence. And that is not what you thought.

 Signature 

GdB

“The light is on, but there is nobody at home”

Profile
 
 
Posted: 03 April 2013 12:10 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 523 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4576
Joined  2008-08-14

GdB-No. It does not anticipate the future, it has no wishes and beliefs. When my wishes and my beliefs cause my actions, that is free will.

You said our wishes and desires were caused.  I thought you said we don’t have free-will? LOL
Do you believe in free-will or not?
How can we have free-will if our perceptions and our wishes and desires are determined?
We perceive the future.  Our perceptions are determined!  You said it yourself!
We don’t exist in the future.  We perceive the future. We have a determined concept of the future.

Do you really know? I’ll tell you: I mean artificial intelligence. And that is not what you thought.

I don’t believe it. LOL  I was going to include the line about the computers.  But I thought that was too irrelevant. But I thought you were trying to make a point with it.
Partly, you are right.  I didn’t think it was artificial intelligence directly.  But I read the line about computers.  And my eyebrows raised.
Are you Psikey Hacking on me here?  Where are you? WTF? Artificial intelligence?
I’ve said you were being disingenuous in the past.  Now I’m wondering….

 Signature 

Row row row your boat gently down the stream.  Merrily Merrily merrily merrily life is but a dream!

Profile
 
 
Posted: 03 April 2013 12:14 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 524 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4576
Joined  2008-08-14

That’s it.  You think wishes and desires are in an ether.  That’s it. 
If you refute this…you lose. End. Game over.

 Signature 

Row row row your boat gently down the stream.  Merrily Merrily merrily merrily life is but a dream!

Profile
 
 
Posted: 03 April 2013 12:23 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 525 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4576
Joined  2008-08-14

I know you are fond of buddhism, or you practice it.  I get your angle about human potential.  And chi. Or whatever.
Ok.  I get it GdB.  This has bled into your scientific reasoning though.
I’m not faulting you for these beliefs.  Go for it.  Whatever makes you happy-do it.  Believe it. 
It’s just not being fair when some are trying to reason out human consciousness etc…and you have a biased angle.
This human potential thing….and all of your opinions on justice and desserts etc..
I’ve raised this point before as you know.  It’s being disingenuous.  You’re apparently smart enough to know this.

[ Edited: 03 April 2013 12:35 PM by VYAZMA ]
 Signature 

Row row row your boat gently down the stream.  Merrily Merrily merrily merrily life is but a dream!

Profile
 
 
   
35 of 70
35
 
‹‹ Destiny..?      Babies are bigots ››