Path: csiph.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail From: Snit Newsgroups: sci.physics,comp.os.linux.advocacy Subject: Re: Worshiping Ignorance. Date: Sat, 9 Jun 2018 14:53:28 -0700 Lines: 55 Message-ID: References: <1NgSC.215303$o43.200375@fx33.iad> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: individual.net wP5NZ/o2pj+1LfJJIJsCaATvtFrIh7vhNRn2Xg+Mdl5MU+Cfru Cancel-Lock: sha1:J8nOfq9wLdjuvNoGMFsWWJSqfn0= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.13; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.8.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US Xref: csiph.com sci.physics:689749 comp.os.linux.advocacy:454583 On 6/9/18 2:37 PM, vallor wrote: ... >> How do you know if you have free will? > > If you have to ask that question, then you don't have it. So just a feeling. Fair enough. But you cannot know if this feeling is true. > I would leave it at that, but perhaps you are making a serious inquiry. Well, I have had these types of discussions many times. I know there is no real answer... but curious what folks say. Maybe they will surprise me. :) > In that case, I suggest you consider points made by some modern > philosophers. > > This is very much wrapped up in the "hard" problem of consciousness, and > without an appreciation of that, you can find yourself stuck in long- > refuted 19th century determinism. > > One point is that the universe has already demonstrated it has non- > deterministic processes, so there is the very real possibility that > consciousness is also non-deterministic. > > Another one is that if free will is an illusion[*], it's very hard to > shake off. That I agree with. Well, sort of. What even do we mean by free will? Not determined? If so then is it random? If not either what else is there (other than a combination)? > If these ideas truly interest you, I suggest watching Dr. Searle's Google > talk, found here: > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vCyKNtocdZE I have read some of his work... and am familiar with the "Chinese Room" argument (and the weaknesses of it, or at least some). Overall I would side more with Dennett... though I have disagreed with him as well. > Good luck, and may the force be with you. :) -- Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow superior by attacking the messenger. They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.