Determinism VS Free Will

Status
Not open for further replies.
You would judge me and put me in retard jail even though I didn't have a choice in my facts ending up crooked?

Mind your mouth because I'm not responsible for it. Grow the fuck up. Really.
There's no three ways about it. And if they was a retard jail, which your clearly thick as fuck for even bringing up; I'd drag you there without reconsidering.

And don't EVER quote me again. Are we clear?!
 
Mind your mouth because I'm not responsible for it. Grow the fuck up. Really.
There's no three ways about it. And if they was a retard jail, which your clearly thick as fuck for even bringing up; I'd drag you there without reconsidering.

And don't EVER quote me again. Are we clear?!

I am not sure how to answer that without quoting you, but mostly I am at a loss on what your intent here is. So the answer is no.
 
Last edited:
[MENTION=2240]rawr[/MENTION] Is anyone concerned with quality control, Mr.

This FOOL has sabotaged my damn thread. For no God damn reason.
 
[MENTION=2240]rawr[/MENTION] Is anyone concerned with quality control, Mr.

This FOOL has sabotaged my damn thread. For no God damn reason.

[MENTION=2240]rawr[/MENTION]

I apologize for my portion of this mess and causing you more work. I hope this can be alleviated simply by moving the last 5 or 7 posts into a new thread. I think the original discussion is worth saving but I'd understand if you don't have the time to go in and fix these types of messes all the time. I will stop posting in this thread since it is obvious that I am unwelcome here and I fear that anymore activity will only result in further deviations.
 
You're a F*#kin WeIRdo.

Are you losing control? Did you have any to start with?

Did you choose to lash out childishly at [MENTION=9860]Grayman[/MENTION] with free will? Or is ass-hole-ery determined by the unchanging physical laws of the universe?

(Should I have double-posted that for more impact, or was using the return key instead predestined?).
 
Are you losing control? Did you have any to start with?

Did you choose to lash out childishly at [MENTION=9860]Grayman[/MENTION] with free will? Or is ass-hole-ery determined by the unchanging physical laws of the universe?

(Should I have double-posted that for more impact, or was using the return key instead predestined?).

I just felt like it.

Are you involved?

But I got an infraction for it which is really "weird".
 
Primarily, the question was; do we even have any free will?

But if so, could there be multiple types of free will?

Does free will correlate with a presence of freedom?
If not, how is freedom different from free will?

Are we born with free will?
Or, could the early stages of human life decide the form of free will we possess in adulthood?

Can we deny that our present decisions have an impact on the future possibilities of free will?
Or could free will be independent of of all precedents?

Does free will allows us to construct our state of mind?

Why is it popular to claim free will is an illusion in main stream sciences?
Even tho on the surface, free will seems an obvious fact for many?

Can we grow a tolerance to determinism through free will?

Is free will a part of consciousness?
If not, is the complexity of the trillions of synapses in our brain responsible for free will?

Could we lose free will via disabilities?


In that case, would autism for instance limit our perceptions of free will?

Furthermore, could we even operate without the illusion of free will?

And finally if free will existed could we accumulate a greater free will through life experiences?
 
[MENTION=14282]Clayd[/MENTION] Although I disagree with your methods I understand the point you were making through your actions toward me. If we can act more reasonable toward one another I would like to express my point of view on how free will would exert itself if it did exist. I believe that my opinion strongly relates to the questions you posed.
 
There can never be proof of a spirit causing this jump because a spirit cannot yet be measured. We can only prove that the jump in brain activity is caused by external forces or we can never prove anything at all. Logically the fact that he was there pushing the button because he was asked to is evidence to support that external forces had a play in it.

Finally there is no tricking. The wanting is just the function it uses to cause you to do that thing. You simply named it 'choice'. Choice is doing what you want. In that respect choice does exist. But this reality still defines what you want and therefore you are a product of determinism.

To be clear, I do not suggest that there is no spirit. It is possible that the spirit does not choose but simply observes the sensations of the mind. But there is no accepted evidence that the spirit exists and there is no evidence to support the idea that if a spirit exists that it can alter our reality.

I do have an idea on how to obtain evidence of our metta-consciousness but that is for another thread.


There is far more evidence than you think.
The evidence for PSI activity alone is very compelling and is held to much stricter standards than many non-controversial experiments.

Not only from the PEAR Lab at Princeton - [video=vimeo;4359545]https://vimeo.com/4359545[/video]


But elsewhere (I can supply you with more if you wish) -

Selected Peer-Reviewed Publications on Psi Research

The following is a selected list of downloadable peer-reviewed journal articles reporting studies of psychic phenomena, mostly published in the 21[SUP]st[/SUP] century.

There are also some important papers of historical interest and other resources.
A comprehensive list would run into thousands of articles.

Click on the title of an article to download it.
The international professional organization for scientists and scholars interested in psi phenomena is theParapsychological Association, an elected affiliate (since 1969) of the AAAS, the largest general scientific organization in the world.

Commonly repeated critiques about psi, such as “these phenomena are impossible,” or “there’s no valid scientific evidence,” or “the results are all due to fraud,” have been soundly rejected for many decades.

Such critiques persist due to ignorance of the relevant literature and to entrenched, incorrect beliefs.
Legitimate debates today no longer focus on existential questions but on development of adequate theoretical explanations, advancements in methodology, the “source” of psi, and issues about effect size heterogeneity and robustness of replication.

This page is maintained by Dean Radin. Updated April 18, 2014.

Healing at a Distance


Astin et al (2000). The Efficacy of “Distant Healing”: A Systematic Review of Randomized Trials

Leibovici (2001). Effects of remote, retroactive intercessory prayer on outcomes in patients with bloodstream infection: randomised controlled trial

Krucoff et al (2001).Integrative noetic therapies as adjuncts to percutaneous intervention during unstable coronary syndromes: Monitoring and Actualization of Noetic Training (MANTRA) feasibility pilot

Radin et al (2004). Possible effects of healing intention on cell cultures and truly random events.

Krucoff et al (2005). Music, imagery, touch, and prayer as adjuncts to interventional cardiac care: the Monitoring and Actualisation of Noetic Trainings (MANTRA) IIrandomised study

Benson et al (2006). Study of the therapeutic effects of intercessory prayer (STEP) in cardiac bypass patients

Masters & Spielmans (2007). Prayer and Health: Review, Meta-Analysis, and Research Agenda

Radin et al (2008). Compassionate intention as a therapeutic intervention by partners of cancer patients: Effects of distant intention on the patients’ autonomic nervous system.

Schlitz et al (2012). Distant healing of surgical wounds: An exploratory study
.

Physiological correlations at a distance


Duane & Behrendt (1965). Extrasensory electroencephalographic induction between identical twins.

Grinberg-Zylberbaum et al (1994). The Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Paradox in the Brain: The transferred potential


Wiseman & Schlitz (1997). Experimenter effects and the remote detection of staring.


Standish et al (2003). Evidence of correlated functional magnetic resonance imaging signals between distant human brains.


Wackermann et al (2003). Correlations between brain electrical activities of two spatially separated human subjects


Schmidt et al (2004). Distant intentionality and the feeling of being stared at: Two meta-analyses


Radin (2004). Event related EEG correlations between isolated human subjects.


Standish et al (2004). Electroencephalographic evidence of correlated event-related signals between the brains of spatially and sensory isolated human subjects


Richards et al (2005). Replicable functional magnetic resonance imaging evidence of correlated brain signals between physically and sensory isolated subjects.


Achterberg et al (2005). Evidence for correlations between distant intentionality and brain function in recipients: A functional magnetic resonance imaging analysis


Radin (2005). The sense of being stared at: A preliminary meta-analysis.


Radin & Schlitz (2005). Gut feelings, intuition, and emotions: An exploratory study.


Schlitz et al (2006). Of two minds: Skeptic-proponent collaboration within parapsychology.


Moulton & Kosslyn (2008). Using neuroimaging to resolve the psi debate
.

Ambach (2008). Correlations between the EEGs of two spatially separated subjects − a replication study
.

Hinterberger (2010). Searching for neuronal markers of psi: A summary of three studies measuring electrophysiology in distant participants
.

Schmidt (2012). Can we help just by good intentions? A meta-analysis of experiments on distant intention effects


Jensen & Parker (2012). Entangled in the womb? A pilot study on the possible physiological connectedness between identical twins with different embryonic backgrounds
.

Parker & Jensen (2013). Further possible physiological connectedness between identical twins: The London study
.

Telepathy & ESP

Targ & Puthoff (1974). Information transmission under conditions of sensory shielding.

Puthoff & Targ (1976). A perceptual channel for information transfer over kilometer distance: Historical perspective and recent research


Eisenberg & Donderi (1979). Telepathic transfer of emotional information in humans
.

Bem & Honorton (1994). Does psi exist?


Hyman (1994). Anomaly or artifact? Comments on Bem and Honorton


Bem (1994). Response to Hyman


Milton & Wiseman (1999). Does Psi Exist? Lack of Replication of an Anomalous Process of Information Transfer


Sheldrake & Smart (2000). Testing a return-anticipating dog, Kane
.

Sheldrake & Smart (2000). A dog that seems to know when his owner to coming home: Videotaped experiments and
observations
.

Storm & Ertel (2001). Does Psi Exist? Comments on Milton and Wiseman's (1999) Meta-Analysis of Ganzfeld Research


Milton & Wiseman (2001). Does Psi Exist? Reply to Storm and Ertel (2001)


Sheldrake & Morgana (2003). Testing a language-using parrot for telepathy
.

Sheldrake & Smart (2003). Videotaped experiments on telephone telepathy
.

Sherwood & Roe (2003). A Review of Dream ESP Studies Conducted Since the Maimonides Dream ESP Programme


Delgado-Romero & Howard (2005). Finding and Correcting Flawed Research Literatures


Hastings (2007). Comment on Delgado-Romero and Howard


Radin (2007). Finding Or Imagining Flawed Research?


Storm et al (2010). Meta-Analysis of Free-Response Studies, 1992—2008: Assessing the Noise Reduction Model in Parapsychology


Storm et al (2010). A Meta-Analysis With Nothing to Hide: Reply to Hyman (2010)


Tressoldi (2011). Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence: the case of non-local perception, a classical and Bayesian review of evidences


Tressoldi et al (2011). Mental Connection at Distance: Useful for Solving Difficult Tasks?


Williams (2011). Revisiting the Ganzfeld ESP Debate: A Basic Review and Assessment


Rouder et al (2013). A Bayes Factor Meta-Analysis of Recent Extrasensory Perception Experiments: Comment on Storm,
Tressoldi, and Di Risio (2010)


Storm et al (2013). Testing the Storm et al. (2010) Meta-Analysis Using Bayesian and Frequentist Approaches: Reply to Rouder et al. (2013)


General Overviews & Critiques

Utts (1996). An assessment of the evidence for psychic functioning

Alcock (2003). Give the null hypothesis a chance


Parker & Brusewitz (2003). A compendium of the evidence for psi


Carter (2010). Heads I lose, tails you win.


McLuhan (no date). Fraud in psi research
.

Survival of Consciousness

van Lommel et al (2001). Near-death experience in survivors of cardiac arrest: a prospective study in the Netherlands

van Lommel (2006). Near-death experience, consciousness, and the brain


Beischel & Schwartz (2007). Anomalous information reception by research mediums demonstrated using a novel triple-blind protocol


Greyson (2010). Seeing dead people not known to have died: “Peak in Darien” experiences


Kelly (2010). Some directions for mediumship research


Kelly & Arcangel (2011). An investigation of mediums who claim to give information about deceased persons


Nahm et al (2011). Terminal lucidity: A review and a case collection.


Facco & Agrillo (2012). Near-death experiences between science and prejudice


Matlock (2012). Bibliography of reincarnation resources online (articles and books, all downloadable)

Precognition & Presentiment

Honorton & Ferrari (1989). “Future telling”: A meta-analysis of forced-choice precognition experiments, 1935-1987

Spottiswoode & May (2003). Skin Conductance Prestimulus Response: Analyses, Artifacts and a Pilot Study


Radin (2004). Electrodermal presentiments of future emotions.


McCraty et al (2004). Electrophysiological Evidence of Intuition: Part 1. The Surprising Role of the Heart


McCraty et al (2004). Electrophysiological Evidence of Intuition: Part 2. A System-Wide Process?


Radin & Lobach (2007). Toward understanding the placebo effect: Investigating a possible retrocausal factor.


Radin & Borges (2009). Intuition through time: What does the seer see?


Bem (2011). Feeling the Future: Experimental Evidence for Anomalous Retroactive Influences on Cognition and Affect


Bem et al (2011). Must Psychologists Change the Way They Analyze Their Data?


Bierman (2011). Anomalous Switching of the Bi-Stable Percept of a Necker Cube: A Preliminary Study


Radin et al (2011). Electrocortical activity prior to unpredictable stimuli in meditators and non-meditators.


Radin (2011). Predicting the Unpredictable: 75 Years of Experimental Evidence


Tressoldi et al (2011). Let Your Eyes Predict : Prediction Accuracy of Pupillary Responses to Random Alerting and Neutral Sounds


Galek et al (2012). Correcting the Past: Failures to Replicate Psi


Mossbridge et al (2012). Predictive physiological anticipation preceding seemingly unpredictable stimuli: a meta-analysis


Theory

Josephson & Pallikari-Viras (1991). Biological Utilisation of Quantum NonLocality

May et al (1995). Decision augmentation theory: Towards a model of anomalous mental phenomena


Houtkooper (2002). Arguing for an Observational Theory of Paranormal Phenomena


Bierman (2003). Does Consciousness Collapse the Wave-Packet?


Dunne & Jahn (2005). Consciousness, information, and living systems


Henry (2005). The mental universe


Hiley & Pylkkanen (2005). Can Mind Affect Matter Via Active Information?


Lucadou et al (2007). Synchronistic Phenomena as Entanglement Correlations in Generalized Quantum Theory


Rietdijk (2007). Four-Dimensional Physics, Nonlocal Coherence, and Paranormal Phenomena


Bierman (2010). Consciousness induced restoration of time symmetry (CIRTS ): A psychophysical theoretical perspective


Tressoldi et al (2010). Extrasensory perception and quantum models of cognition.


Tressoldi (2012). Replication unreliability in psychology: elusive phenomena or “elusive” statistical power?


Mind-Matter Interaction

Crookes (1874). Researches in the phenomena of spiritualism

Crookes (1874). Notes of séances with DDH

Medhurst & Goldney (1964). William Crookes and the physical phenomena of mediumship.


Merrifield (1885/1971). Merrifield’s report (on D. D. Home)


Braude (1985). The enigma of Daniel Home
.

Zorab (1971). Were D. D. Home’s ‘spirit hands” ever fraudulently produced?


Jahn (1982). The persistent paradox of psychic phenomena: An engineering perspective.


Inglis (1983). Review of “The spiritualists. The passion for the occult in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries by Ruth Brandon.”


Schmidt (1987). The strange properties of psychokinesis.

Schmidt (1990). Correlation between mental processes and external random events

Radin & Nelson (1989). Evidence for consciousness-related anomalies in random physical systems


Radin & Ferrari (1991). Effects of consciousness on the fall of dice: A meta-analysis


Jahn et al (1997). Correlations of Random Binary Sequences with Pre-Stated Operator Intention: A Review of a 12-Year Program.

Nelson et al (2002). Correlations of continuous random data with major world events.


Crawford et al (2003). Alterations in Random Event Measures Associated with a Healing Practice


Freedman et al (2003). Effects of Frontal Lobe Lesions on Intentionality and Random Physical Phenomena


Bierman (2004). Does consciousness collapse the wave function?


Jahn & Dunne (2005). The PEAR Proposition.

Bosch et al (2006). Examining Psychokinesis: The Interaction of Human Intention With Random Number Generators–A Meta-
Analysis


Radin et al (2006). Reexamining psychokinesis: Commentary on the Bösch, Steinkamp and Boller meta-analysis.

Radin et al (2006). Assessing the Evidence for Mind-Matter Interaction Effects

Radin (2006). Experiments testing models of mind-matter interaction.


Radin. (2008). Testing nonlocal observation as a source of intuitive knowledge.


Nelson & Bancel (2011). Effects of mass consciousness: Changes in random data during global events.


Radin et al (2012). Consciousness and the double-slit interference pattern: Six experiments


Shiah & Radin (2013). Metaphysics of the tea ceremony: A randomized trial investigating the roles of intention and belief on mood while drinking tea
.

Radin et al (2013). Psychophysical interactions with a double-slit interference pattern


Potential Applications

Carpenter (2011). Laboratory psi effects may be put to practical use: Two pilot studies

Schwartz (1980/2000). Location and reconstruction of a Byzantine structure … [by remote viewing]

Some recommended books


Radin (1997). The Conscious Universe: The Scientific Truth of Psychic Phenomena

Radin (2006). Entangled Minds: Extrasensory Experiences in a Quantum Reality

Irwin & Watt (2007). An Introduction to Parapsychology

Mayer (2008). Extraordinary Knowing: Science, Skepticism, and the Inexplicable Powers of the Human Mind

Kelly et al (2009). Irreducible Mind: Toward a Psychology for the 21st Century

Tart (2009). The End of Materialism: How Evidence of the Paranormal Is Bringing Science and Spirit Together

Carter (2010). Science and the Near-Death Experience: How Consciousness Survives Death

Van Lommel (2011). Consciousness Beyond Life: The Science of the Near-Death Experience

Sheldrake (1999; new edition 2011) Dogs That Know When Their Owners Are Coming Home, And Other Unexplained Powers of Animals

Alexander (2012). Proof of Heaven: A Neurosurgeon's Journey into the Afterlife

Carpenter (2012). First Sight: ESP and Parapsychology in Everyday Life

Carter (2012). Science and Psychic Phenomena: The Fall of the House of Skeptics

Targ (2012). The Reality of ESP: A Physicist's Proof of Psychic Abilities

Sheldrake (2003; new edition 2013) The Sense of Being Stared At, And Other Aspects of the Extended Mind

Radin (2013). Supernormal: Science, Yoga, and the Evidence for Extraordinary Psychic Abilities

Websites with access to more articles

Daryl Bem: Click here

Brian Josephson: Click here

Edwin May: Click here

Stephan Schwartz, Click here

Rupert Sheldrake: Click here

James Spottiswoode: Click here

Charles Tart: Click here

Russell Targ: Click here

Patrizio Tressoldi: Click here

Jessica Utts: Click here

Richard Wiseman: Click here

Journal of Scientific Exploration: Click here

Princeton Engineering Anomalies Research (PEAR) Laboratory: Click here or here.

Division of Perceptual Studies, University of Virginia: Click here

Esalen Center for Theory and Research: Click here


Videos

Greyson (2008). Consciousness Without Brain Activity: Near Death Experiences (United Nations)

Radin (2008), Science and the taboo of psi (Google TechTalk)

Sheldrake (2008) The extended mind (Google Tech Talk)
… more to be added …

 
[MENTION=14282]Clayd[/MENTION] Although I disagree with your methods I understand the point you were making through your actions toward me. If we can act more reasonable toward one another I would like to express my point of view on how free will would exert itself if it did exist. I believe that my opinion strongly relates to the questions you posed.

I can't be mad at you for that approach.

I'm aware I also said stuff that was unreasonable.
Your welcome to share your points of view and please feel free to do so :]
 
I enjoyed reading that, very insightful.

I mean, I could see how some may view it as transparent but IMHO I believe that those are the building blocks of understanding the main criteria to differentiate what is actually valid from what's secondary, from what's invalid.

The key that resonated with me which you mentioned and which we fail to mention when we speak of determinism is the functions at a subconscious level, which we clearly have no awareness of.
Freud would continuously describe the mind as an iceberg with the conscious mind being the small portion visible tho entire construct was more complex.

You know, I have assisted with many brain surgeries amongst others and can tell you it is a fascinating thing!
It has so many tiny blood vessels that you can actually see the cells flowing through some of them under the surgical microscope…the whole thing pulses with the heartbeat.
I’ve also seen many miraculous outcomes transpire where you would have never thought a person could live though such a thing much less be relatively normal.
I also used to be a supervisor at the Center for Neuro Skills in Ca some time back and worked with many brain injured people…several were cops who had been shot in the head.
It was a difficult job for someone as empathetic as an INFJ…there were people there who told me with their eyes that they would rather not be alive as they were trapped in atrophied, paralyzed bodies. That one in a million where one of them just regains his abilities he/she had before never materialized while I worked there.
Still, it is an interesting thing to work with someone who’s brain malfunctions because of an injury.
We had a fellow named “Sarge”, he was a former cop, didn’t really understand where the hell he was, didn’t remember most things past 5 minutes…but anything you related to being a cop he would do, he would remember…so you would say to him for example “Sarge, we gotta go shave so we can look presentable in our uniform”…whereas if you told him it was time to shave he’d tell you to “go to hell” hahaha.
Anyhow, I’ve always been interesting in the brain and neurobiology/chemistry since I was about 13.
I remember I checked out a book, and tbh, I didn’t understand it all at the time, but was fascinated by it nonetheless, and I even formed a hypothesis that reaching the state of “enlightenment” in meditative practice was the subsequent build up and natural overdose of our own neurochemicals.
I think it’s still a sound argument, but it would be testable to a point.

You speak of subconscious activities that our brain’s participate in…it’s amazing really how much goes on that we just don’t even register, even when you try and ponder all that is happening it seems endless really.
We take for granted that this reality is created for us by our brain..or mind…or both(?).
We don’t stop to think that there really is no color, only wavelengths of light intercepted by special cells and interpreted as this or that color by the brain/mind. (the picture doesn’t even come into our eyes right side up, the brain flips it)
The same goes for sound…more waves in the ether.
The sensation of touch, of smell, of taste, of orgasm, created by us.
What is solid? Everything is energy vibrating at different wavelengths, including us.
Why does the human heart and bowels have neurons?
Why does the heart send 3 times as many signals to the brain as it send to the heart?
Where does consciousness within our own body end? Do cells have a basic form of consciousness?
Or as some suggest…as an organism becomes increasingly more complex then consciousness must eventually emerge?
Where is it emerging from?
These are all just questions that are fun to flip around in your head btw…not expecting an answer to them haha.
 
Last edited:
Primarily, the question was; do we even have any free will?

But if so, could there be multiple types of free will?
I'm not sure if there are different types, but there are certainly different situational (and perhaps individual) differences in instances of free will that may be categorized. Further, free will could exist in degrees for a number of reasons. However, I think that the free will itself is a broad enough capacity that it covers such variations.

Does free will correlate with a presence of freedom?
If not, how is freedom different from free will?
Well, I suppose that depends on what you mean by freedom. Here are some example sentences that demonstrate the different ways "freedom" can be applied. Freedom of X (object). Freedom to X (capacity). Freedom as X (metaphorical).
Usually in the free will debate, freedom is meant as a capacity. So, I will assume that is what you meant. In this case, freedom is not strictly identical to free will as free will has at least an intentional component to it. Freedom does not necessarily have such a piece.

Are we born with free will?
I suppose that depends on how (and if) free will exists biologically. I think that it does, and I think that we are not born with free will. Only with the capacity. I find rational agency a necessary component of free will.

Or, could the early stages of human life decide the form of free will we possess in adulthood?

Can we deny that our present decisions have an impact on the future possibilities of free will?
Or could free will be independent of of all precedents?
I'm not clear on what you mean here. Possibilities of free will is a bit vague.

Does free will allows us to construct our state of mind?
Hmmm.....This is an odd question. We are in some sense dependent on our state of mind. In fact, I would argue that our state of mind is a necessary component of the self. As such, your question, reframed, becomes "Does free will allow us to construct ourself?". I think the answer to that is yes, in a sense, but it is a weird statement either way. We can self modify, certainly. If there is free will, then that is one possible mechanism of self modification.

Why is it popular to claim free will is an illusion in main stream sciences?
Even tho on the surface, free will seems an obvious fact for many?
I find that many advocates of main stream science, in talking of free will, fail to recognize that the self is a necessary part of free will, and that in reducing the self to its physical parts, then of course free will won't be apparent. That doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. For example, suppose I describe to you the goings on of a complex network of cellular structures that produces HCL, creates mucosal linings, forceful contractions, circulatory interaction, etc. You may be able to talk about this thing as a stomach, but it is not at all clear that you could recognize that this thing actively digests food for some animal. A simpler example would be looking at the pieces of a puffer-type breeder. Working through each individual interaction might make it harder to see the properties of the whole organism.

Can we grow a tolerance to determinism through free will?
I'm not sure at all what this statement means

Is free will a part of consciousness?
If not, is the complexity of the trillions of synapses in our brain responsible for free will?
Hmmm...Consciousness is an even less developed philosophic notion. I will need you to define what you mean here before I could answer. Intuitively, however, I would say that yes to both the first and second line.

Could we lose free will via disabilities?
If free will is a capacity of rational agency, then certainly some disabilities might rid people of free will. In fact there are some that argue we loose our free will constantly. Consider when you are asleep. Do you have free will in that moment? Is that a weird question to ask?


In that case, would autism for instance limit our perceptions of free will?
It could limit it in that specific person, but I wouldn't say eliminate it.

Furthermore, could we even operate without the illusion of free will?
I take it this question assumes that we don't have free will. In answer, certainly. A computer does an excellent job operating.

And finally if free will existed could we accumulate a greater free will through life experiences?
Going with our naïve definition of free will as rational deliberation of choices, then certainly. Experience makes one more likely to rationally consider a situation (empirical claim). As such, more experiences will make us more likely to at least enact free willed actions in life. However, it's not at all clear that the amount of free willed actions is a direct indicator of the philosophic free will.
 
I'm not sure if there are different types, but there are certainly different situational (and perhaps individual) differences in instances of free will that may be categorized. Further, free will could exist in degrees for a number of reasons. However, I think that the free will itself is a broad enough capacity that it covers such variations.


Well, I suppose that depends on what you mean by freedom. Here are some example sentences that demonstrate the different ways "freedom" can be applied. Freedom of X (object). Freedom to X (capacity). Freedom as X (metaphorical).
Usually in the free will debate, freedom is meant as a capacity. So, I will assume that is what you meant. In this case, freedom is not strictly identical to free will as free will has at least an intentional component to it. Freedom does not necessarily have such a piece.


I suppose that depends on how (and if) free will exists biologically. I think that it does, and I think that we are not born with free will. Only with the capacity. I find rational agency a necessary component of free will.


I'm not clear on what you mean here. Possibilities of free will is a bit vague.


Hmmm.....This is an odd question. We are in some sense dependent on our state of mind. In fact, I would argue that our state of mind is a necessary component of the self. As such, your question, reframed, becomes "Does free will allow us to construct ourself?". I think the answer to that is yes, in a sense, but it is a weird statement either way. We can self modify, certainly. If there is free will, then that is one possible mechanism of self modification.


I find that many advocates of main stream science, in talking of free will, fail to recognize that the self is a necessary part of free will, and that in reducing the self to its physical parts, then of course free will won't be apparent. That doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. For example, suppose I describe to you the goings on of a complex network of cellular structures that produces HCL, creates mucosal linings, forceful contractions, circulatory interaction, etc. You may be able to talk about this thing as a stomach, but it is not at all clear that you could recognize that this thing actively digests food for some animal. A simpler example would be looking at the pieces of a puffer-type breeder. Working through each individual interaction might make it harder to see the properties of the whole organism.


I'm not sure at all what this statement means


Hmmm...Consciousness is an even less developed philosophic notion. I will need you to define what you mean here before I could answer. Intuitively, however, I would say that yes to both the first and second line.


If free will is a capacity of rational agency, then certainly some disabilities might rid people of free will. In fact there are some that argue we loose our free will constantly. Consider when you are asleep. Do you have free will in that moment? Is that a weird question to ask?



It could limit it in that specific person, but I wouldn't say eliminate it.


I take it this question assumes that we don't have free will. In answer, certainly. A computer does an excellent job operating.


Going with our naïve definition of free will as rational deliberation of choices, then certainly. Experience makes one more likely to rationally consider a situation (empirical claim). As such, more experiences will make us more likely to at least enact free willed actions in life. However, it's not at all clear that the amount of free willed actions is a direct indicator of the philosophic free will.

Sorry.

Don't read narrow minded hate posts :p
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top