Free Will Is An Illusion

[SGOS]

http://exploringthemind.com/the-mind/brain-scans-can-reveal-your-decisions-7-seconds-before-you-decide

Probably true, because your brain is processing a lot of information even in simple problems.  Things may not yet be conscious, but as things get sorted out, the unconscious is probably ahead of the conscious and becoming aware of what seems like a best course of action before it reaches the conscious level.

I'm not sure this means that free will is an illusion, however.  It's just the way the brain functions during problem solving.

[gomtuu77]

If it were true that free will is just an illusion then all laws and standards of behavior are just nonsense.  They have no more meaning than the variable direction of the wind or the scat of a rat.

[GurrenLagann]

If it were true that free will is just an illusion then all laws and standards of behavior are just nonsense.  They have no more meaning than the variable direction of the wind or the scat of a rat.

No. And you forget that, all things being equal, laws and behavioral standards are of pragmatic benefit if nothing else.

[Colanth]

If it were true that free will is just an illusion then all laws and standards of behavior are just nonsense.  They have no more meaning than the variable direction of the wind or the scat of a rat.

Try using that as a defense to a criminal charge, though.

No. And you forget that, all things being equal, laws and behavioral standards are of pragmatic benefit if nothing else.

If everything is pre-ordained (no free will), pragmatism is an illusion.

[NatsuTerran]

Really strange to me how people take evidence from brain science and don't see how it directly contradicts free will, and even think free will is compatible with the science. Free will has always been known as being able to make a decision that has absolutely no external factors other than "you" determining the outcome. It all rests on what the definition of "you" is. Free means that only "you" and no other variables have a part in determining the outcome. It's strange to me when people say "So your brain has a complex formula for making decisions based on nature and nurture, but you still have free will." It's like saying "Your eye color has a formula for being green, blue, or brown, but you still can decide which one it will be."

If you define "you" as simply your brain and how it happened to turn out, then "you choose your choices" becomes correct in a meaningless way, because your brain is doing what it wants to do, and because you are doing what you want to do, you have nothing to complain about. But I don't view the word "you" as your brain, I view "you" as an entity that has a sense of well-being vs. harm, and all individuality is shedded. An important distinction because you don't choose the variables that influence your individuality, so the sentence *you don't choose what you become* has meaning now once we view "you" as not your brain but your "pre-brain," with values based on purely objective principles: well-being vs. harm.

Free will has always been explained to me as being able to choose something completely regardless of external variables. For instance, it doesn't matter that you were raised to be violent by your parents, you can freely choose to not be violent. It's a dogmatic statement without any evidence, and there's plenty of psychological evidence that every thought and behavior has a catalyst(s) that reside outside of the individual. Someone brought up free will of morality and free will of choices, but there cannot be a distinction whatsoever as your moral choices are clearly culturally adopted, much like any other decision in the brain.

[Solitary]

Animals don't have free will because God only gave it to us, so how can we judge an animal that kills a human? Because he is still responsible for doing even if he doesn't have freewill. Freewill has nothing to do with morality. If you really have freewill then you should be able to make any decision you want good or bad. Right? Solitary

[Aroura33]

I watched Sam Harris presentation on Determinism at the "Dangerous Ideas" symposium, and he said it is the most controversial subject he has ever discussed.  He says more people get upset at him than when he discusses atheism.  I do understand why.  Regardless of which way you see it, his arguments are worth a watch.

[youtube:3kgubuyu]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_FanhvXO9Pk[/youtube:3kgubuyu]

//http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_FanhvXO9Pk

[Colanth]

Really strange to me how people take evidence from brain science and don't see how it directly contradicts free will, and even think free will is compatible with the science. Free will has always been known as being able to make a decision that has absolutely no external factors other than "you" determining the outcome. It all rests on what the definition of "you" is. Free means that only "you" and no other variables have a part in determining the outcome.

Free will is the freedom to DECIDE to do anything, it's not the ability to DO what you decide to do.  I can freely decide to jump off a 1,000 foot cliff, onto sharp rocks at the bottom, and survive.  That's free will, whether I actually survive or not.  Lack of free will would mean that whether I jump off the cliff is preordained, or that someone else decides whether I can jump or not.  Not being able to decide what happens to me isn't lack of free will, it's lack of total control of the universe.

[NatsuTerran]

I disagree with that idea of Free will. That's just saying your brain made a choice and it wasn't controlled by any other factors other than your own brain (i.e., at gunpoint), regardless of what shaped your brain. Free will, ever since I was a kid, was always taught to be the one and only thing that keeps God moral. If God sends anyone to hell then he is immoral because he could easily make a perfect world for himself and everyone. Christians try to fight this with the concept of Free will, they claim that if you go to hell it's because you freely *could* have chosen to believe otherwise, and that this free will is why God is justified in sending you to hell. I have never seen the term free will used outside of the context of free will in terms of deciding freely, outside of what your parents taught you or how your genes work, what to actually believe.

I think it's pretty straightforward that free will can't exist in that sense, does anyone really choose their wants or values, or do we just feel the reaction? And all of our thoughts and behaviors are settled in our brain by competing wants and values, however those were implanted into us. But by your definition of free will, simply being "able" to do one thing or another seems completely trivial and doesn't really need a term to describe it. We don't have terms for the possibility of anything else happening, just the results. And besides, there's always the simple word "choice."

[gomtuu77]

If it were true that free will is just an illusion then all laws and standards of behavior are just nonsense.  They have no more meaning than the variable direction of the wind or the scat of a rat.

No. And you forget that, all things being equal, laws and behavioral standards are of pragmatic benefit if nothing else.

If there is no free will, then the word "benefit" is basically meaningless.  If there is no free will, in which case there is no good, bad, right, or wrong; why would the complete extinction of humanity be any better or worse than its successful population into the future?  Our presence or lack of presence would just be a brute fact of reality not anything meaningful that could be denoted by the word "benefit".

[GSOgymrat]

I recently read Sam Harris' book "Free Will" and he makes a pretty convincing argument against free will. The more studies I read on neuroscience the more I realize we are less cognizant of our actions than most people believe.

[Lucid]

I don't see Free Will as a prerequisite to the existence of god , determinism does create an awkward question for Ex-Nilo religions tho if you have to ask the question if everything is determined and god created everything from nothing then all sin would be a result of his action. which would be inconsistent with a benevolent supreme being.

[Colanth]

I disagree with that idea of Free will. That's just saying your brain made a choice and it wasn't controlled by any other factors other than your own brain (i.e., at gunpoint), regardless of what shaped your brain.

Yes, as opposed to the idea that there's an omniscient creator (who would know, before he created the universe, every decision that you would make once he created you).  That's the whole discussion of free will.

[Solitary]

When most people think of determinism they think of A causes B when it's more like infinity causes B. I can understand that we have will power, but where does the idea of freedom come into the picture unless it is a choice that is random and then it is from our feelings? There was a man who was a normal older man that got a brain tumor and all of a sudden he was attracted to little girls, it bothered him so much he tried to commit suicide.

 They did an MRI on his brain and found the tumor. After it was removed he never felt the same way again.  Every single person I have known that got in trouble breaking the law, or was immoral by societies standards, was either on alcohol or drugs like crack or meth. This is why I question psychologist or psychiatrist that just have opinions without checking their diagnosis with a neurologist. Solitary

[Colanth]

If there is no free will, then the word "benefit" is basically meaningless.

If there's no free will, then everything is meaningless, since we're just characters in a story that's already been written.

If there is no free will, in which case there is no good, bad, right, or wrong; why would the complete extinction of humanity be any better or worse than its successful population into the future?

Because it would be more interesting to the audience?

Our presence or lack of presence would just be a brute fact of reality not anything meaningful that could be denoted by the word "benefit".

That's how works of fiction are. And if there's no free will, we're all just parts of a work of fiction.