Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

MaxTheAlmighty t1_itospu1 wrote

Reply to comment by SovArya in /r/philosophy Open Discussion Thread | October 24, 2022 by BernardJOrtcutt

Yeah, stopping a repetivie action, thinking deeply or talking slowly are the only existing free actions.

2

SovArya t1_itosura wrote

Indeed. And to think doing them takes a lot of effort too. I feel like calling them effort will or will of effort, definitely we pay something for this will.

2

MaxTheAlmighty t1_itq2fpe wrote

It means that, for example: When you walk downstairs without thinking about the movements of your legs, you do it without wanting to basically. But when you realize that your legs are mindlessly walking downstairs, you realize how scary that lack of will was. Or, another simplier example: When you realize you are breathing, you start to breath wanting to do that.

2

SovArya t1_itq35pg wrote

Thought experiment.

You have to first think of something to do, then not do it.

How did this fare for you? Or did you try it?

2

MaxTheAlmighty t1_itq3pee wrote

This also proves free will, because you can separate the actions of your body from the actions of your mind. Now, many people say that mind and brain are the same thing, while they aren't at all. For example: an old man who became foolish and ignorant because of Alzheimer's still keeps his tastes, even though he doesn't know what does he like anymore.

2

SovArya t1_itq4i63 wrote

It's hard to practice. We think, then not do. At least for me, for now. I need to work on it.

Atleast based on this experiment. Free will is the act of not doing what you thought to do first. I mean it's the easiest way to stop doing something.

It makes me idle and then pause to think what should I do right now.

2

MaxTheAlmighty t1_itq5qwg wrote

That means that we should not do what we like, therefore going against our free will. Real example: this year i entered High school because i love to study the subjects there (in my country there are different types of High school). But since I should follow my free will, then i should change school and live a sad life with nothing i like. Ok, i realized that the reality Is that the concept of "free will is not real" is an illusion and that free will is real, but since we are really deep in it we can't see it anymore basically. We just discovered that free will is real and the lack of free will is an illusion. We humans are so limited to the point of denying ourselves.

1

SovArya t1_itq6aun wrote

Not wrong. But I think we can have this thought experiment also.

If the thought is something positive, defined as what is good for you, you can let it be. Sure it may not be free will but we don't have to suffer by default.

But if the thought is bad, killing someone with no reason or basis, instead of doing it, we can hold ourself accountable and not do it.

This of course means the idea of good or bad is based on our own personal ideal or nature.

2

MaxTheAlmighty t1_itq6wyz wrote

After all this discussion, i want to admit that in reality i am a catholic christian, and i think that God wants us to make this questions in order to make our faith stronger. I don't know what religion or system of belief do you practice, but i respect your opinion too and please, don't pretend to be smart by calling me an idiot who blindly believes, because i go against blindly believing.

2

SovArya t1_itq87oj wrote

I don't mind. I think religion is not wrong if it teaches us to be accountable.

I see nothing wrong with believing in a God also based on the above.

It also aligns with the idea of free will.

Think of it this way, if you do something and it is good according to your observations, and if you don't stop it; then who ever controls you; is doing good thru you.

And if doing bad, you stop that, then you exercise free will.

Of course this will depend on your perception.

As for the idea of creation, I honestly don't know, but there must be a source. And I'd like to think, I think I've been influenced by reflexivity that, God is that which nothing is greater.

2

MaxTheAlmighty t1_itq8zv1 wrote

I don't think that knowing the future denies the will of humans. I think that God knows the future, but doesn't want to manipulate people and so he allows humans to be free. Even though he knows what Is going to happen, he writes human characters to be free. So, if God wrote a book in which humans are included, he would have wrote, in simple terms: "And so this day X person was born. Leaves empty space in which X can write"

1

SovArya t1_itqa6wc wrote

Some interpret God to be like man. I think this to be wrong.

If God is that which nothing is greater then; such being I can't understand. I can only appreciate what I see and feel and express the free will.

Also believing in that definition; I fear such a being. Simply because said being can do what It will; and I have no say.

A simple example would be, if I am to dumb it down to something I can understand. If an author writes a story, does the written characters have a say?

As for the Bible or holy texts, whether they are factual, I honestly love them for the idea of accountability.

Because of my belief that nothing is 100% certain or knowable; I can't say its not written by people influenced by such a power.

The idea of hope - to be saved; the nearest thing I hold unto this is a saying by Marcus Aurelius and that is - this too shall pass.

If I am to liken myself to characters in the Bible, I honestly feel that - we should be in awe, frightened if such a being exists, and exercise that free will and enjoy the time we are here.

2

MaxTheAlmighty t1_itqagng wrote

I think that the idea of God living on the clouds can be used in art and it's also a cool artistical concept, but that we shouldnt believe that Heaven Is like that: the idea of gods living in the sky comes from the olympian greek mythology, if i am not wrong.

1

SovArya t1_itqb1v4 wrote

You're not wrong. There has been similarities in the stories. It's like there is a template and has been spread and based on the current readers; they make it their own.

As we are able to think critically, comes progress. Exercise of imagination and the like. And the base format of that is in the stories.

Familiar with the heroes journey?

2

MaxTheAlmighty t1_itqb7xe wrote

No, what Is "the hero's journey"?

1

SovArya t1_itqbg0i wrote

It's the common template of most stories.

Hero is at his place of origin. Evil comes and hardship happens. Hero has to leave home and overcome trials. From those trial, he applies what he learns to beat the evil; when evil is broken, he then can return home a changed man/woman.

Most stories are like that. Imagine star wars 4-6. Or lord of the rings 1-3. Pendragon. King Arthur. Most myths in one way have this formula.

2

MaxTheAlmighty t1_itqbw5k wrote

This story creates a cool concept: we can't pretend to be good if we have never fought evil. And i also dislike the concept that being a good person means NOT doing bad, rather than doing good.

1

SovArya t1_itqcdmw wrote

Yes, not doing bad is the way. Not doing is the exercise. As we did the thought experiment. It is not easy. It's hard. Haha

2

MaxTheAlmighty t1_itqcnsj wrote

We realized that the lack of free will is an illusion the mind of the soul creates to explain the limited brain in the limited body.

2

SovArya t1_itqdj98 wrote

My guess is we simply didn't have the capacity to disprove it before. Now we have experiments capable of checking the chemicals in the brain.

The chemicals makes us do stuff. And stopping that is not automatic.

So the process will be don't move, think before you do. Think before you do.

2

MaxTheAlmighty t1_itqe1r1 wrote

We should accept that we don't have full control on our brain. Maybe God created us this way because It was needed to. Maybe the human mind is just very weak and has difficulty controlling the brain and istincts like anxiety or mosquito hate, but very strong compared to the animal mind (the animal soul probably isn't real).

1

SovArya t1_itqegbq wrote

I think you're not wrong. I also think we can't really function if somethings are not automatic. That's why it's really hard to make a synthetic lifeform.

2

MaxTheAlmighty t1_itqbi31 wrote

Animals don't have the idea of good and bad, they act like if someone was forcing them to do that stuff.

1

SovArya t1_itqc3l6 wrote

They act based on instinct/patterns. As we do too. Except upon exercising the don't.

2

MaxTheAlmighty t1_itqcg20 wrote

Maybe going against istinct is an example of free will?

2

SovArya t1_itqcwnk wrote

Yes, you will have to stop your nature if you truly want to.

Like I have this instinct to slap mosquitos because I once had dengue. So I consider them the enemy. But if at one time I choose not to slap them, that's pretty much against my instincts.

2

MaxTheAlmighty t1_itqd29q wrote

Yeah, i dislike this istinct of mindlessly killing mosquitoes. When i want to slap a mosquito, i try to do It using reason.

1

MaxTheAlmighty t1_itotfza wrote

But i still feel like i am doing my actions randomly and that i am thinking randomly, like if i someone else Is using my mind and he or she Is manipualting my brain cells or voice in order to do that. But following this logic, I AM that Person that Is controling my mind and all this time i acted randomly and impulsively, and i should accept the fact that i will never achieve total control over my brain chemicals.

1

SovArya t1_itotzs6 wrote

Yes, unfortunately that is the case.

2

MaxTheAlmighty t1_itouzt3 wrote

This leads also to another conclusions: the first human on earth had free will, since he was not conditioned by anyone else and had to always think how to build a house in the woods or other activites like hunt or harvesting crops. But at some point he also started to act like this impuslively

2

SovArya t1_itovyuk wrote

It depends on really on how we peg the basis of the first humans. Did they got made by God or by evolution. But I suppose we can only speculate.

As for God per SE, it's also another issue because how do we define God?

Like I would define a God as someone if we are 2nd dimensional beings, a 3+ being. Because it would be like an author writing a book and we have no say or control on what gets written. A definition not like that isnt Godlike.

2

MaxTheAlmighty t1_itoue10 wrote

If you say "ok it's time for confession, i am the Person that manipualted SovArya all this time", you achieve free will for a few minutes.

1

SovArya t1_itowwpq wrote

Interaction based on our senses causing chemicals in our brains causing us to do what we know by automatic or what's wired within us is true; then what you say is not wrong if you caused the environment or interaction prior to the moment you say you manipulated someone.

Scary as that is, it is possible and that's not wrong.

2

MaxTheAlmighty t1_itp4ur0 wrote

Well, if we are mindless machines, as many people believe, why do we have a vague concept of free will?

1

SovArya t1_itpfnrh wrote

A byproduct of evolution. By our ability to mix and match what we experience. I think in a way, the idea came about.

Also based on what we talk, I guess imagination of something new, not just recall; is another free will ability.

2

MaxTheAlmighty t1_itouonn wrote

Then this leads to this conclusion: if God has free will, then he acts in an uncomprehensible way

1

MaxTheAlmighty t1_itotn1u wrote

If we follow this logic, then Stephen Hawking achieved free will, since he was not anymore in charge of his impulsive voice and body

1

SovArya t1_itotx6j wrote

Yes. That's a scary thought.

2

MaxTheAlmighty t1_itp22xs wrote

I mean, he could not control the muscles he controlled previously and had to spend more effort into speech, since he used that machine to speak and his disease made the movements of his tongue more difficult too. as a consequence he had to think more, becoming totally self aware.

1

SovArya t1_itp265x wrote

Your idea isn't wrong. It's just it scares me the level of how we ought to be to exert free will. And what if that's our only option?

It's probably not easy. Or damning hard.

To be fully conscious, the automatic acts disappear. My best guess.

2

MaxTheAlmighty t1_itp2975 wrote

In my opinion, to become more self-aware and achieve free will, we have to sometimes change our routine and focus on our self-improvement and interests. For example: why would you always wear that clothing while you can buy other ones? Why do you always use the same browser while there are other options aviable? Why do you always eat the same meals while you can try new foods?

1

SovArya t1_itp2gi3 wrote

To sharpen the blade. I think you are not wrong.

Feels like a combination of conscious act and automatic acts working with each other and doing their part when needed.

2

MaxTheAlmighty t1_itp2jw2 wrote

Now i want to know your opinion about my discussion.

1

SovArya t1_itp2p4l wrote

My guess is it's like this.

We exert will when we stop something. So when you buy x, and decide not to do it; will exercised. By those circumstances you decided to buy something new, that part may be a bit fully conscious act since it was fueled by the previous. It could be a combination.

2

MaxTheAlmighty t1_itp35je wrote

Yeah, It could be. But i am sure that humans are not walking random generators: if free will isnt real, then we would see people randomly running pointlessly naked across the woods and doing pure nonsense.

2

SovArya t1_itp3p95 wrote

I think you're not wrong in this. Can you link it to the idea of sonder? Because I for one can only perceive based on my own self.

2

MaxTheAlmighty t1_itp4gak wrote

Mine too. I mean, i can't really know if you are a robot, an ai, an alien, a human or someone else.

1

SovArya t1_itp4inm wrote

It sucks knowing that is not wrong. Hehe.

2

MaxTheAlmighty t1_itp4mor wrote

And i can't really know if i am an evil clinically insane criminal that Is actually living an illusion and Is in reality making mafia business or terrorism, right?

1

MaxTheAlmighty t1_itp9643 wrote

I came to the conclusion that our brain Is similar to the holy Roman empire: each part of the brain vaguely recognizes the power of the mind (the mind only directly controls a small part of the brain), but a big part of the brain Is actually highly indipendent.

1

SovArya t1_itpfcc2 wrote

Not wrong. I guess the brain also does all things we know are automatic, heart, breathing, blood flow, etc., Organs. And the part where we try to exert our conscious behavior is left for the dependent one.

Because chemicals interact causing us to do stuff, and we act a few seconds later and all we perceive in a way as present is really the past.

2

MaxTheAlmighty t1_itp4irg wrote

I noticed that my concept of a human without free will is similar to the story of Prometheus

1

SovArya t1_itp4n87 wrote

A higher being molding us?

2

MaxTheAlmighty t1_itp4oxn wrote

I mean, the concept that before acheiving reason and knowledge humans were just AI

1

SovArya t1_itpfrgu wrote

Not wrong. I think what separates use from AI is the ability to imagine and act on those. The ability to think; therefore I am.

2

MaxTheAlmighty t1_itpudd9 wrote

But someone would say that dall-e can do that too. In reality, that AI program just smashes pictures from the internet together.

2

SovArya t1_itpxjeq wrote

Yes, they can mimic, but that will always be based on existing data. The thinking part would be to create something new.

If we can program something that can imagine, then truly, all that we are has been passed.

2

MaxTheAlmighty t1_itpxpn4 wrote

But when we humans create something new, we use real life existing objects . For example, you cannot think of a color your eyes can't see.

2

SovArya t1_itpz9su wrote

This is where experiments come into play. For which can be programmed into something. But the ability to make iterations will be the test.

2

MaxTheAlmighty t1_itpzs56 wrote

After making this discussion, i started to become a bit sad: since a lot of humans have or never realized that their actions aren't fully conscious, does it mean that they are no different from machines? Does It mean that real humans are very rare? Since children often act impulsively and almost randomly, are they still humans? I don't like the idea of humans being for the most part aleatory slaves, people who have no choice but to serve a dice...

1

MaxTheAlmighty t1_itpgfyb wrote

I was saying that also calculators can do that, but calculators in reality work on a "if this combination, then do this" system, unlike humans.

1

SovArya t1_itpgu03 wrote

Yes, the ability to be in specific, to imagine.

If I make a mimic - like human. It must be programmed to do auto random stuffs. I think by so many iterations it can make human like results. But not like humans.

If then else for the functions. Then random act or crunching knowledge to make something new.

Creativity, probably is the highest for our level.

2