Is the future already written?

[luckswallowsall]

Is the unconscious incapable of free will? 

Which definition of free will is used is extremely relevant to this question.

[luckswallowsall]

I would agree that a future will happen, but not that any particular "the" future will happen.

I'd agree with this if we modified your statement slightly to this:

I would agree that the future will happen, but not that any particular possible future will happen.

[GSOgymrat]

Can you separate the unconscious, the thing that makes all the decisions, from the conscious, the "I" that represents a non-thinking automaton that simply acts on orders from the unconscious director?  Is the unconscious incapable of free will?  Or is it capable of making choices?

I don't think we know yet. Very little is known about the nature of consciousness. I read somewhere that humans have made great strides in making machines intelligent but zero in making them conscious. Studies have demonstrated people believe they have knowledge that they don't, for example there was a study where people were confident they knew how a zipper operated but when asked to explain in detail they couldn't. In my opinion, people believe they control their future far more than they do, they don't consider that one little clot of blood in the wrong place and you can never speak again. I think humans go through life believing useful fictions and suspect free will, that *I* make my choices and my future, is one of those fictions.

[Mr.Obvious]

I don't think we know yet. Very little is known about the nature of consciousness. I read somewhere that humans have made great strides in making machines intelligent but zero in making them conscious. Studies have demonstrated people believe they have knowledge that they don't, for example there was a study where people were confident they knew how a zipper operated but when asked to explain in detail they couldn't. In my opinion, people believe they control their future far more than they do, they don't consider that one little clot of blood in the wrong place and you can never speak again. I think humans go through life believing useful fictions and suspect free will, that *I* make my choices and my future, is one of those fictions.

Yes, I agree. At least in how I interpret your words.

It's also always odd to me, that people say they can choose their future, because they make choices in the present.
I always feel like the present was once the future. And that the present is determined by what comes before; all the processes that lead up to exactly 'this' moment, which will in turn, along with all that came before, shape the 'next' moment into it's logical conclusion (continuation?). Of course, this doesn't tend to convince people who feel they have more than an illusion of free will, as I tend to call it. But I hope it makes clear that their reason for believing in a pick-your-own-future still doesn't prove they can alter the future.

[trdsf]

I'd agree with this if we modified your statement slightly to this:

I would agree that the future will happen, but not that any particular possible future will happen.

So we're mostly talking about the same thing but with a difference of semantic opinion. 

I don't think you can call it 'the' future without being able to say what it actually is.  Yes, there is a set of events that will come to pass.  But we cannot say what it is, so from our perspective it must be 'a' future, even if it does all happen.  "The" is definite; "a/an" is indefinite, and the future is definitely indefinite.

[SoldierofFortune]

f~~~ing bulÅŸit.

every sane person has free will. like me.
if i didnt want~i wouldnt write this entry, but i wanted with my freewill and i affected the future. its not prewritten.

[SGOS]

I don't think we know yet. Very little is known about the nature of consciousness.

Absolutely.  How the conscious mind works is one of the big mysteries man has to solve.  I hear talk about advancements in neurosurgery and how they can detect brain activity associated with different emotions in various parts of the brain, and this is usually presented as "great strides" in our understanding.  These are steps, certainly.  We can even say big steps, but that's such a relative comparison that it strikes me like saying the evolution of cyanobacteria guarantees the inevitable evolution of man.  As far as our understanding of human consciousness, I doubt we are even in the comparative dark ages of knowing how this thing works.  And we know even less about the subconscious.

It seems to me we have a tiny bit of a huge puzzle to work with.  Having studies showing that we make choices before we know we've made them and concluding that this means we don't have free will is huge leap of logic, and I think it's probably a non sequitur at that.  Saying our future is predetermined because of this is certainly a non sequitur.  It may be true, but only in the way illogical methods sometimes accidentally arrive a accurate conclusions.

There's still much to know before we actually understand how electrochemical reactions make consciousness and unconsciousness.  I'd make a bet on the accuracy of quantum mechanics quicker than I would about our understanding of consciousness at any level.  And how it all results in a deterministic future I wouldn't place a bet at all.

[Baruch]

I agree with you that the debate revolves around the issue of definition. It's not never defined but it rarely is and that tends to be what causes the most confusion.

One definition of free will is compatible with determinism and another isn't. So no wonder people are going to be confused over whether determinism is true or free will is true if some people don't even have a problem with free will existing regardless of the truth of determinism but others do. Some think that "Free will versus determinism" is fair match up and others doesn't.

And to make matters even more confusing, some people believe that determinism isn't compatible with free will but indeterminism isn't compatible with free will either.

So you've got the people who see it as simply a matter of free will versus determinism.

And then you've got two different groups of people who both think that determinism shouldn't be placed against free will but for opposite reasons. One group thinks that it shouldn't be free will versus determinism because they think that you can still have free will even if determinism is true.... and another group thinks that it shouldn't be free will versus determinism because they think that we still can't have free will even if determinism is false.

In many philosophical arguments, it is frogs arguing with canaries.  The frogs can't fly and the canaries can't swim.  They are in different "magisteria".  See Stephen Jay Gould.

Which is to say, one is arguing about contingent things, not tautology or contradiction.  And the only way out of that is empiricism.  But if the two parties are sufficiently different, then their "magisteria" are more or less non-overlapping.

PS ... my "magisteria" is relatively non-overlapping with other posters, because I am a heretic theist.

[Baruch]

I'm going with C) free will isn't possible with or without determinism. Neuroscience is providing evidence that the sense of a continuous self, the "I", is illusory. Individuals don't have the ability to choose other than they do, regardless of whether the future is fixed or not, because there is no singular "I" making the decision. Split-brain studies seem to indicate individuals can be making decisions her or she is not aware of and making choices before conscious awareness. I also find it more parsimonious that past, present, and future all exist and our perception of time is contingent on our brain's ability to process sensory information rather than there being multiple futures constantly generated from every action that happens everywhere.

Buddhists knew that "I" is an illusion over 2000 years ago.  Are you Deepak?

[Baruch]

Can you separate the unconscious, the thing that makes all the decisions, from the conscious, the "I" that represents a non-thinking automaton that simply acts on orders from the unconscious director?  Is the unconscious incapable of free will?  Or is it capable of making choices?

And is the unconscious is some way collective ala Carl Jung or Jordan Peterson?

[Baruch]

I like Athenian democracy for a rel change not easily done elsewhere., but there could be others rather unique in history.  'Guns, Germs, and Steel' by Jared Diamond makes some good arguments.   Like wheat...

Athens wasn't the only democracy.  Just the most famous one ... and they all fell; to Sparta, to Persia, to Macedon, to Rome.

[Baruch]

If indeterminism is true then there are many possible futures. So any particular possible future is not already written.

If determinism is true there is only one possible future... and that future is therefore written.

But whether determinism is true or false... the future is written. Because the future refers to whatever will happen. If there are many possible futures, and it isn't determined which will happen, then whichever future does happen is the future. That future must happen. So the future is always already written no matter what.

QM says that determinism is more or less false.  RT says that measurements are more or less relative.  Is that you Sir Isaac?

[Baruch]

If indeterminism is true then there are many possible futures. So any particular possible future is not already written.

If determinism is true there is only one possible future... and that future is therefore written.

But whether determinism is true or false... the future is written. Because the future refers to whatever will happen. If there are many possible futures, and it isn't determined which will happen, then whichever future does happen is the future. That future must happen. So the future is always already written no matter what.

You may not realize this.  But Cavebear is right.  Your statement is theological, except you don't have the intellectual history to realize this.  The absolute is inherently monotheistic ... that is why it shows up so much in monotheist theology.  It is a consequence of a posited omniscient Being.

Congratulations to all posters in the string today ... best string in many months.  Actual cogitation in action.

[SGOS]

Yes, I agree. At least in how I interpret your words.
It's also always odd to me, that people say they can choose their future, because they make choices in the present.

Making choices in the present (free will) doesn't determine your future.  There are unanticipated forces constantly working against your plans.  Some come from within like unconscious self defeating behaviors, while others come from outside and are completely beyond your control.  But what evidence is there to support the inability to act freely?  There might be such forces, especially in the case of an unseen guiding hand, but unseen guiding hands or predetermined outcomes have no evidence to support their existence.  You can't just determine predestination with a wave of your hand.  On the other hand you can't wave it away either.

[SGOS]

To be honest, I have considered the possibility that I have no free will, not that this necessarily means I can't make choices.  My father suffered from depression, something beyond his control it would seem and not necessarily a choice of his own, and because of this, I considered the possibility that I might lose control over my mind, and that I might suddenly do something horribly bad, something I didn't want to do, but that some force beyond my control whether it be the will of Satan, a chemical imbalance, or just some "hidden from conscious" psychotic need might take control of my body causing me to run amok with knife in hand indiscriminately murdering strangers and loved ones.

I put such worries aside, and I no longer consider such possibilities.  Satan, voices in my head (which I have not yet experienced), or the inability to control my body because of unseen forces fall in the category of insane beliefs, smacking of religious rationalizations.  Even minor self defeating choices of less extreme proportion exist in all of us, but these are also learning experiences.  Be a fool and ignore them, or change your behavior and your outlook on life and move on.

At any rate, I now reject all notions that I have no control.  I don't have full control, and I can accept that, but to say that I have none means I have no responsibility for anything, and I find the belief that my life might be that meaningless much too depressing to worry about.  My choices as a human are mine to make, and I owe no creator a debit of gratitude for giving me free will.  Nor do I excuse my mistakes  because the Devil made me do it.  That stuff goes in my hogwash bin, which is located in some recess of my brain where neurosurgeons have yet to look. However, I know where to find them, and I can retrieve them from time to time, examine them, and put them back in the hogwash bin when I'm done.