I'ma go ahead and move this to off-topic like Ele suggested. It should do better there than it would here.
-----
Saying "You don't make your decisions, the chemical reactions inside of you do." has never made too much sense to me. You are those chemical reactions, the two things you are contrasting are the same thing.
-----
Originally Posted by pouffywall
Or, if you believe in the whole chain reaction type of thing, you might be inclined to believe you don't make decisions at all, and it is simply a previous (highly specific) chemical arrangement that spurred the action, which creates a new (also highly specific) chemical arrangement. In other words, that we humans have no freedom of choice because all we are is a system. A very complicated system, of course, but still one with a set reaction for every action and no leeway.
tl;dr We don't make decisions at all, we just appear to make decisions
Quantum physics and its randomness seems to throw this theory out the window, though. Hey, but I'm just a student who am I to say.
Saying "You don't make your decisions, the chemical reactions inside of you do." has never made too much sense to me. You are those chemical reactions, the two things you are contrasting are the same thing.
Last edited by Zelda; Oct 23, 2015 at 04:51 PM.
Reason: <24 hour edit/bump
Good morning sweet princess
Originally Posted by Zelda
I'ma go ahead and move this to off-topic like Ele suggested. It should do better there than it would here.
-----
Saying "You don't make your decisions, the chemical reactions inside of you do." has never made too much sense to me. You are those chemical reactions, the two things you are contrasting are the same thing.
Well think about it like this...
Try flipping a coin. Was it heads? Was it tails? Now think about the probability of either of those solutions. After the fact, was it still 50/50? If you recreate every little detail of the moment you flipped the coin, between the weight of the coin, the motions of your hand, the air current in the room, the temperature of the air and the coin, what do you think the outcome would be? It would be exactly the same. After the fact, we know that if you replayed that moment 100 different times, you would get the very same result every time. Now, apply this to the human brain. A rather more complicated system than the flipping of a coin, but still an explainable system. If you recreate the exact conditions inside and outside of your brain the moment you make a decision, you should get the exact same result every single time. In theory, at least.
Hence my statement that you only appear to make decisions.
I'll bite. Now, I'm not about to google determinism vs. free will or anything, I'll just offer an observation I made. A decision requires a decision-maker. That means something with agency. Yes, our consciousness is a result of chemistry (meaning we could create robots with souls), everything we think and feel is caused by chemical reactions. But to extrapolate this to mean that we have no control over our actions is like playing an RPG based on code and saying that pressing UP to jump would've happened without me pressing UP in the first place. The underlying system that makes everything run is there, but without the agency to make that choice and press that button, nothing's going to happen. We are ultimately responsible for making the decisions.
Asides from that, nothing is more self-damaging than thinking "Wahhh, I'm not responsible for my shitty life, wahhhh, I have no free will, wahhh". Yes, you are in control. Yes, you are responsible. Now that you know you're responsible you also know that you are also capable of changing it for the better. Existentialism is wanky, depressing bullshit.
Asides from that, nothing is more self-damaging than thinking "Wahhh, I'm not responsible for my shitty life, wahhhh, I have no free will, wahhh". Yes, you are in control. Yes, you are responsible. Now that you know you're responsible you also know that you are also capable of changing it for the better. Existentialism is wanky, depressing bullshit.
Originally Posted by pouffywall
Well think about it like this...
Try flipping a coin. Was it heads? Was it tails? Now think about the probability of either of those solutions. After the fact, was it still 50/50? If you recreate every little detail of the moment you flipped the coin, between the weight of the coin, the motions of your hand, the air current in the room, the temperature of the air and the coin, what do you think the outcome would be? It would be exactly the same. After the fact, we know that if you replayed that moment 100 different times, you would get the very same result every time. Now, apply this to the human brain. A rather more complicated system than the flipping of a coin, but still an explainable system. If you recreate the exact conditions inside and outside of your brain the moment you make a decision, you should get the exact same result every single time. In theory, at least.
Hence my statement that you only appear to make decisions.
The only difference is really what you define as a decision. I define it by what we use it to describe (us making a choice), rather than what we might think its causes are (a direct contradiction of scientific understanding). Just because a system is computable does not mean it can't make decisions. I'm reading a book at the moment which suggests that the brain is non-computable, but I haven't finished it yet and don't understand enough of what I have read to properly apply it to something like this. Basically, look up "The Emperor's New Mind" by Roger Penrose.
Your whole "the whole world is predictable therefore what is life?" shpeel is far from new. I was just as surprised at how unconvinced and unimpressed everyone else was when I made exactly the same argument as you when I was a few years younger, but people just learn to accept such things and move on.
Good morning sweet princess
Originally Posted by Ele
I'll bite. Now, I'm not about to google determinism vs. free will or anything, I'll just offer an observation I made. A decision requires a decision-maker. That means something with agency. Yes, our consciousness is a result of chemistry (meaning we could create robots with souls), everything we think and feel is caused by chemical reactions. But to extrapolate this to mean that we have no control over our actions is like playing an RPG based on code and saying that pressing UP to jump would've happened without me pressing UP in the first place. The underlying system that makes everything run is there, but without the agency to make that choice and press that button, nothing's going to happen. We are ultimately responsible for making the decisions.
Oh don't act like you went out of your way to begrudgingly write a response. This isn't supposed to be some tolling debate (it's even in off-topic, see), I'd rather see this as a friendly discussion. It breaks my heart that you began with, "I'll bite." </3
Anyways, I'll start off with saying I agree with you. I'll explain a little bit more on that later, but I do agree with your theory.
Back to my example with the coin, I noted that the probability of something happening is either 100% or 0%, but we can only know this after the fact. Anyone who's taken a course in probability, or thought a lot about it, has probably learned that, "The more information you know about an event, the better you will be able to predict it accurately." That is, the more you know about the circumstances of any given event, the closer you will be to knowing the exact probability of the outcome of said event. This is true with any natural object in the universe. If you took into account all the properties I mentioned in my last post before flipping the coin, you could, in theory, be able to perfectly predict the outcome, because the outcome is the product of its causes. That makes the initial arrangement in itself the agent.
Using your example with the RPG game, I think it should be safe to assume that the code itself refers to the natural world. What exactly is pushing the button? Well, you refer to it as outside of the natural world and natural system of things, so it must be some sort of metaphysical property. And that would make sense, right? A metaphysical property would be what separates a coin from a human being. What you described doesn't quite refute the theory I initially stated, but is a different theory entirely. A theory that there is some sort of "outside the box" property that has the agency to move things inside the box.
I'm a Christian, so I believe in your theory (or at least the theory implied by your statement, whether you adopt it or not) that there is something a little bit more. The whole chain reaction thing is just an idea I love to toy around with.
Originally Posted by Zelda
Your whole "the whole world is predictable therefore what is life?" shpeel is far from new. I was just as surprised at how unconvinced and unimpressed everyone else was when I made exactly the same argument as you when I was a few years younger, but people just learn to accept such things and move on.
If it were anywhere near new, it wouldn't be in text books, would it? If I recall correctly this idea has been around for 150ish years. At least, that's the farthest back I've heard of it being. It could very well be much much older. I'm not trying to sound edgy or depressed or anything, I actually find the idea really fun and fascinating (and I wanted to see if I could derail the thread).
Last edited by pouffy; Oct 23, 2015 at 07:03 PM.