Free Will an Illusion?

Post Reply New Topic

Considering the endless discussions on this site alone, not to consider the whole field of philosophy, to assume that humans know why they exist and what they are is outrageously ludicrous.

Regardless of how you arrive at the decision, you only came to that specific decision because of a chain of events and experiences which changed how you thought and felt about things leading up to that decision. Ultimately its your past experiences and thoughts which will determine any new decisions you make.

There are those who say that civilization is an illusion.

What if you woke up tomorrow as a primitive or free man?

A caveman says "me want, me take". A caveman says "I don't like you. I kill you"

Seriously. Why should I obey the "rules" of civilization?

Primitive man understood that he was going to die sooner or later so why not grab all you can while you can?

So why should I accept a low paying job with no future when I could become a gangster and be rolling in money and have "respect" from those around me?

No. It is fact that most of a person's personality is based on their genetics.

Only partly, personality also develops due to experiences throughout life.

Wrong.

I would say that free will is an illusion. The reason being that decisions have to be made. Our lives are one long sequence of decisions that we cannot avoid making. We do not have the option of not making the decision.

And I think our subconsious is responsible for all decisions we make. So we do not even play a part in choosing!

I think free will is only worth considering when a person takes into account possible future outcomes of a decision they are about to make. But the weight they assign to each future scenario is decided by past experience.

I avoid making decisions all the time, even when environmental factors and other pressures are on me to make a decision of some kind. "Free Will" is the action of making a choice, not the fact that you are in the position of having to do so. People are free to consider all possible outcomes of making a given choice, and they can make that choice (whatever it is) based on perceived ramifications. Regardless, the right not to choose is still a choice. (There's a Rush tune suddenly looping in my head right now...).

A hypothetical situation: Let's say my house is on fire and my husband and one of my kids is trapped inside in different parts of the house. The fire department is still 20 minutes from arrival on-scene, and the house is almost fully involved, so I only have a minute or two to run inside. I can save only one of them. Whom would I save? The choices can be broken down as follows:

1. Save my husband
2. Save my child
3. Run inside and burn up with them (suicide) or,
4. Do nothing and watch the house burn down with both of them inside (Cowardice? Murder?).

The fact that we can choose any of the above is proof of Free Will. You just choose your best possible outcome depending on what's most important to you.



How do you figure that your subconscious is responsible for decision-making when the act of making a decision is a Conscious act? Instinct plays a part in our decision-making process, yes, but we also make snap decisions based on available data at the time the decision must be made. Paper or plastic? Kill poor innocent trees or pollute the Earth with non-biodegradable petroleum products? It all depends on your personality, ideology, personal experiences from the past, emotional attachments and basic instinct. Sometimes, we make a decision when the outcomes aren't known and can't possibly be known. In this case, we make a choice by maximizing probabilities or plain old gut instinct. However you do it, you still have a choice, even if you choose not to make a choice at all. As long as "choice" is in play, you have Free Will. It's when all choices are taken away from you that you then lack free will. Free Will as an illusion is when you are misled by other people into thinking you have a choice when you really do not.

E333

+1


+1

Abstract
This is no different than for one to have the free will to choose to become , lets say 'a concert pianist'.
The world is full of self delusion and a lot of people do think " Oh , I could of been a contender- if I wanted to", or If I wanted to -" I could become a concert pianist".
If I just decided to take the lessons ,then.................. >>>>>>>>>>>

They didn't decide not to become a 'concert pianist '; they were incapable of deciding to become a concert pianist.
Their subconscious mind was incapable of the 'decision.'

I'm not saying it is beyond "our" grasp. Clearly it is not beyond a concert pianist's grasp. But if anyone could do it, I would disagree. I don't believe I could do it, if for no other reason than that I'm uninterested in it.
And I can't "decide" to be interested in it, any more than I can "decide" to dislike blueberries.

My argument is based on the idea of learning who we are in life. Our desires, preferences, likes, dislikes, motivations etc are either genetically predetermined or learned from our experience in life. Particularly during childhood we will learn most of what we would call our character or personality. Then all decisions in life are based on these. So saying you could not be a concert pianist because you don't want to is the same as: I don't want to become a concert pianist because I have not learnt or am otherwise equiped with the desire to become one. So because desire is absent we don't decide to become a concert pianist. But the desicion was made for us not by us.

As it stands, I think a lot of the "free will" issue is about some ability to make decisions that physical reality does not already dictate to happen, that is to say that there is a mysterious being in our heads that does things. The problem is that there probably is no such magic man to do X, Y, and Z whether he "pleases", rather it is more likely that the our mental organization is set up in a manner where there is no apparent reduction of its language into a non-mental form. This does not mean that our magic man exists, and he probably doesn't, we just have a roadblock to recognizing that while the two languages seem different, they are more similar than we normally think.

My argument is based on the idea of learning who we are in life. Our desires, preferences, likes, dislikes, motivations etc are either genetically predetermined or learned from our experience in life. Particularly during childhood we will learn most of what we would call our character or personality. Then all decisions in life are based on these. So saying you could not be a concert pianist because you don't want to is the same as: I don't want to become a concert pianist because I have not learnt or am otherwise equiped with the desire to become one. So because desire is absent we don't decide to become a concert pianist. But the desicion was made for us not by us.

In your example I would say 99% of cases would go rushing into the house without thinking and go straight for the child. Even if that meant killing themselves in the process. If you have ever been in an emergency situation, or heard people talk about it, you should know that conscious thinking is suspended and we go into autodrive. Our hormones are making the decision. Our brains have received input that is so distressing that it has overruled our conscious brain and triggered instinct.

How do you figure that your subconscious is responsible for decision-making when the act of making a decision is a Conscious

Free Will as an illusion is when you are misled by other people into thinking you have a choice when you really do not.

E333[/quote]

Sorry, yeah although we consciously make the decision, the process of making the decision is hidden from us. That is in the subconscious.

Free Will as an illusion is when you are misled into thinking you have a choice by a highly evolved brain.

Another words 'we become conscious that we have decided '.

Interesting thread

Yeah its what I mean. Or I would rather say - "We become aware that the decision has been made".