[OT] Plato's Pub and Philosophical Society

[Krsqk]

This is all interesting, but we're still don't have any working definitions. I'll start the ball rolling (and you all can kick it straight back in my face ):

Free will--the ability of an organism to make a decision independently of outside factors, including prior experience, available data, and previous input (training, education, etc). Free will acknowledges the influence of both internal and external factors, but reserves the responsibility of choice to the organism in question.

Determinism--the principle that thought and decision processes are predetermined by prior scientifically explainable physical or chemical processes. Determinism holds that the entire future of the universe was determined at the beginning of time, and the concept of free will is an illusion derived from the complexity of the physical forces involved.

Do those sound like good working definitions? Or should we make some changes/scrap and start over?

[Jack Simth]

Those are decent working definitions for now.

[dogscoff]

quarian: your emergent properties would still result from physical laws. The fact that no human could ever collect enough data to apply those laws and make a prediction is irrelevant. it's stilldetermined.

acording to a determinist...

just for the record, I'm not a determinist. I prefer to believe in the quantum stuff. God does play dice.

Krsqk: Your definitions fit nicely.

[QuarianRex]

Originally posted by Suicide Junkie:
Also, what are you referring to about the speed of light? All of the reports I've seen were basically media-hyped illusions.

I was referring to the fact that the theory of relativity does not apply to anything going past lightspeed. Physical(?) laws after that point would be qualitatively different.

Originally posted by dogscoff:
quarian: your emergent properties would still result from physical laws. The fact that no human could ever collect enough data to apply those laws and make a prediction is irrelevant. it's stilldetermined.

Perhaps, I was pointing out that the sometimes drastic changes that occur with emergent properties would nullify previous predictions based on the prior qualities. For example, projections based on the entropic qualities of quantities of matter are moot when said quantities acquire the anti-entropic qualities of life.

Perhaps this would be a better argument against prophecy. As complex systems grow in complexity they inevitably qualitatively change, thus nullifying existing predictions. Determinism is a little more annoying since it relies on supernatural influence (whether it be a god, a set of laws, etc.) and so is exempt from most rational arguments (it can always claim omniscience).

[Suicide Junkie]

I was referring to the fact that the theory of relativity does not apply to anything going past lightspeed. Physical(?) laws after that point would be qualitatively different

Ok, but I don't see what you're getting at...

[Krsqk]

Perhaps this would be a better argument against prophecy. As complex systems grow in complexity they inevitably qualitatively change, thus nullifying existing predictions. Determinism is a little more annoying since it relies on supernatural influence (whether it be a god, a set of laws, etc.) and so is exempt from most rational arguments (it can always claim omniscience).

Although, that would make prophecy under a free-will system all the more remarkable. BTW, I don't see the existence of the supernatural as contradictory to the operation of free will; they operate in different spheres (although supernatural could override/negate the effects of free will if necessary).

[Kamog]

There seems to be at least two points of view in regards to how our thoughts originate. (1) There is the biochemistry view that says thoughts are a result of chemical reactions in the brain; i.e. the different chemical and electrical processes are what thought is. If this is so, free will would be an illusion. (2) Another view is that we have a soul or spirit which is separate from physical matter. Thoughts originate from this non-physical spirit, and the chemical processes in the brain are a secondary phenomenon caused by the thought. Then free will is possible because thoughts can originate independently of the arrangement of chemicals and atoms in the physical brain.

Even if quantum mechanics allow random processes to occur, that does not necessarily mean that we can have free will. If the reactions in the brain occur randomly, then we don't have a choice as to what the outcome is, and therefore we are not in control. Our thoughts would be a consequence of random quantum fluctuations, not a result of free will.