Do we have Free Will (my video)

originally posted by: HarbingerOfShadows
a reply to: Mr Mask

Is how long you took to make it supposed to mean something?
Except that you think this is worthy enough to sink nearly a hour into that is.

Yes...the fact I put a solid work week's worth of time into making each and every video with little returned reward other than the love my vids get...has a lot to do with me ignoring or flipping off the few who care to waste my time commenting here without watching the vid.

Yes.

MM

originally posted by: HarbingerOfShadows
a reply to: Mr Mask

As said by Harris in one of his lectures- "This scientific truth will have more impact on humanity than the theory of evolution ever had".

*ahem*

3. It's not a process that seeks the truth or facts.
The goal of science is to come as close as we can to understanding the cause-effect realities of the natural world. It's never "truth" or "facts". "Truth" and "facts" can mean different things to different people.

Teaching the Nature of [email protected]

Which really is the problem with Harris and his ilk.
They forward scientism.

Scientism is a topic of major contention in the philosophy of science and philosophy in general.[3] While often used as a term of abuse, it is also used in a descriptive sense to refer to any philosophy that treats science as the only means of acquiring knowledge (for various definitions of "knowledge"). For this reason, scientism is often associated with logical positivism, which attempted to do away with metaphysics entirely.[7] The role of scientism in modernity is also a point of debate in social theory.[8] Postmodernism in particular sought to critique scientism.

Scientism or implicit scientistic attitudes are often characterized by a conflation of moral and scientific progress, an overzealous application of simplistic reductionist methodology and, especially in the social sciences, the logical fallacy of reification, in which an abstract metric is treated as something "real."

Surely sounds like them:

Analytic philosopher Susan Haack lists what she considers six signs of scientism:
1. Using the words “science,” “scientific,” “scientifically,” “scientist,” etc., honorifically, as generic terms of epistemic praise.
2. Adopting the manners, the trappings, the technical terminology, etc., of the sciences, irrespective of their real usefulness.

3. A preoccupation with demarcation, i.e., with drawing a sharp line between genuine science, the real thing, and “pseudo-scientific” imposters.

4. A corresponding preoccupation with identifying the “scientific method,” presumably to explain how the sciences have been so successful.

5. Looking to the sciences for answers to questions beyond their scope.

6. Denying or denigrating the legitimacy or the worth of other kinds of inquiry besides the scientific, or the value of human activities other than inquiry, such as poetry or art.

Scientism@ Rationalwiki

I find it funny that you are trying to teach me that science does not deal in absolute truths when that is one of the early comments I left in this thread and have made videos also explaining this to the masses.

But thanks for the recap on the basic concept of science.

lol.

MM

Great video and subject as usual MM. It's obvious to me that my subconscious makes my decisions - i've analysed myself enough to know this.

What my conscience does appear to do is to feed back to the subconscience information regarding the effectiveness of the decisions made. The fact that errant behaviour can be corrected seems to support this.

I don't see this as a licence for criminals to absolve responsibility for their crimes. It is just the meaning of 'free will' with respect to the law that needs to change. The fact that the conscience didn't make their decision shouldn't affect the fact that their brain as a whole made the decision.

originally posted by: EasyPleaseMe
Great video and subject as usual MM. It's obvious to me that my subconscious makes my decisions - i've analysed myself enough to know this.

What my conscience does appear to do is to feed back to the subconscience information regarding the effectiveness of the decisions made. The fact that errant behaviour can be corrected seems to support this.

I don't see this as a licence for criminals to absolve responsibility for their crimes. It is just the meaning of 'free will' with respect to the law that needs to change. The fact that the conscience didn't make their decision shouldn't affect the fact that their brain as a whole made the decision.

I also can clearly see my thoughts are handed to me and I am forced to agree with them feeling as if they are my own intuitively at first- but upon closer inspection I can't see my aware consciousness as the inventor of said thoughts.

Thanks for enjoying the video and for admitting what so many can not bring themselves to see or admit- that our thoughts are handed to us from somewhere below our awake mindset.

I also do not see this research as a gateway to allowing criminals no responsibility- and I find it funny so many rush to thinking that is what this research ultimately seeks to show. It can't be father from the truth.

Thank you so much for the kind comment and kind review. And thanks for thinking deeply on the matter and admitting to yourself and others the most likely of truths- That our conscious minds are not the authors of our choices.

a reply to: Mr Mask

Sounds like the whines a narcissist to me.
But to each their own.

originally posted by: HarbingerOfShadows
a reply to: Mr Mask

Sounds like the whines a narcissist to me.
But to each their own.

Sounds like an off topic post from someone who makes a lot of those around here.

I know the role of science. I obviously presented this concept very well in a manner that got it featured front page on one of the largest websites in the world (Ebaumsworld) and aired on radio. I obviously am doing something with a talent I possess, while often using it to educate or inform people of concepts that are both academic and interesting.

I am also obviously making about 5 bucks per 40 hours I put into this operation.

Narcissistic? lol. More like "entertaining".

Now...feel like maybe adding to the conversation instead of "player hating" the awesome guy who is presenting you an awesome video?

MM

a reply to: Mr Mask

There you go with the money motivation again....

originally posted by: HarbingerOfShadows
a reply to: Mr Mask

There you go with the money motivation again....

You think me saying "I make about 5 bucks per 40 hours work" on these vids is me saying the motivation behind making them is money!?

That is what you gathered from that?!!

No sir. It was me plainly telling you that I make these videos for other reasons than monetary ones. Sigh. Look dude, this video is an audio presentation of a heatedly debated scientific theory within neuroscience today. I spent about 40 hours making this video and shared it with everyone because I get love and respect in return.

I have gotten countless messages saying I am doing a great job. Some from schools, teachers, professors, real scientists, astronomers, etc. Hell even the makers of the video game I am playing in it have tweeted me as doing a great and interesting job.

What do you want from me?

Do something more with your talents and you will get more returns from them. That is my saying. If it applies to you- wonderful...if not...who cares?

Seriously...I don't come here to have my time "wasted". Its valuable and short.

MM

Reminder~~

Bickering is not the topic. Free will is.
I would suggest a better use of free will would be to post to the topic.

You are responsible for your own posts.

originally posted by: DontTreadOnMe

Reminder~~

Bickering is not the topic. Free will is.
I would suggest a better use of free will would be to post to the topic.

You are responsible for your own posts.

Well...I don't believe in free will sir! BUT I will surely obey the electric signals that are telling me to "feel" like I should listen to you on this one.

Thanks man!

PS- Wish I knew if you really thought we had free will or not. Sad face.

MM

originally posted by: Mr Mask

originally posted by: DontTreadOnMe

Reminder~~

Bickering is not the topic. Free will is.
I would suggest a better use of free will would be to post to the topic.

You are responsible for your own posts.

Well...I don't believe in free will sir! BUT I will surely obey the electric signals that are telling me to "feel" like I should listen to you on this one.

Thanks man!

PS- Wish I knew if you really thought we had free will or not. Sad face.

MM

...and?
Here...I'll mouth it for you...
I am RESPONSIBLE for my own posts.
Feel free to disagree, I notice it wasn't addressed.

God, how awkward...a thread titled as a question (without a question mark) Do we have free will...posters sanctioned with a reminder mentioning free will and a point of T&C that mentions responsibility...the irony has made me wet my pants.

Å99

originally posted by: akushla99

originally posted by: Mr Mask

originally posted by: DontTreadOnMe

Reminder~~

Bickering is not the topic. Free will is.
I would suggest a better use of free will would be to post to the topic.

You are responsible for your own posts.

Well...I don't believe in free will sir! BUT I will surely obey the electric signals that are telling me to "feel" like I should listen to you on this one.

Thanks man!

PS- Wish I knew if you really thought we had free will or not. Sad face.

MM

God, how awkward...a thread titled as a question (without a question mark) Do we have free will...posters sanctioned with a reminder mentioning free will and a point of T&C that mentions responsibility...the irony has made me wet my pants.

Å99

You have stated you will not watch the video this thread is about.

I have told you (along with another very bright and respected member of ATS) that your writing style is not easy to understand since to insist on over complicating every sentence into a meandering river of flowery words nobody can easily understand.

Unless you ask me a question that is understandable...not just vague sugar-words from 18th century love stories, I can't (nor understand) answer the questions.

I have actually tried three times. Each time you told me my answers were not good enough. One time even saying my answer was "what you would expect of a 3 yr old talking about his scribbles".

I've told you..I am done trying to decipher your posts.

MM

In order to have completely free will, you have to be completely free of the fear of what people will think of you if you do that action.

Very, very few people can truly say that they really don't care about what other people think. Until you do, your will will always be influenced by others, and you won't be truly free to do whatever you want.

originally posted by: babybunnies
In order to have completely free will, you have to be completely free of the fear of what people will think of you if you do that action.

Very, very few people can truly say that they really don't care about what other people think. Until you do, your will will always be influenced by others, and you won't be truly free to do whatever you want.

True but not what the "no free will debate" is about.

But 100% true nonetheless.

Star for you.

MM

Went hiking (well more like country ambling) and believe it or not your question popped into my head.

Walking along a winding river I thought that even the river had its boundaries. The flow of water around the bend and rocks that constrict and manipulate its course. And I thought, no, nothing has true free will.

Then I thought on a spring melt and a flood when no river bank can contain the rushing, the hum and whitewash, and I thought, when there is force there is free will.

Then thought, I want to go home, take off my boots, make a hot cocoa, drop in a marshmallow, turn on a crappy tv show, empty my brain and think on nothing. My free will.

I tend to not separate us from the universe/dimension we existed in and which is governed by its laws of freedom. ( 3rd dimension)
we have 4 governance :

Time
then 3 spacial:
Forward backwards
Left/right
Up/down

We are constricted OR do we exist within degrees of freedom. Im relating the very nature of our dimension to the emotional human level. I would say every thing is governed by limited freedoms.
The 4th 5th and higher give greater degrees of freedom, perhaps our consciousness gains greater freedoms there....
Now wheres that hot cocoa....

a reply to: zazzafrazz

I sense the world may just be one big Newtonian pool table with a large side helping of chaos to help shake things up in a random sorta way. Like that river water- we flow along the path our physical paths are forced to choose, while the lil fishes flip and slap around to add chaos into the mix.

I don't know any of this for sure. But I truly see that my favorite color is red...can't tell you why. My favorite painter is Monet, no clue as to why that is. Sure I can explain to myself I like red because I think its just the coolest and most striking. Or that Monet is my fav because his loose command of soft colors within his displays of nature- relax me...but why?

In the end, each and every thought I have. What I enjoy. What I dislike. What I find attractive or disgustingly awful...they are all handed to me from somewhere I can't control.

I often think things like "Hate Star Wars...do it...choose to hate Star Wars". Or "Just love your mom a little less. Do it. Choose to". And such a thought is impossible. It can't be done. I am told by my "machine" I adore Star Wars and that my mother is the greatest lady alive.

I agree with the research that is trying to change our perceptions on free will by exposing the secret truth that free will is an illusion.

Hot cocoa is on the way! Catch!

PS- Thanks for bringing me on a nature hike, even if it was only in a small mental way. Still feel like we had a pleasant hike. Hugs homie!

MM

"You have stated you will not watch the video this thread is about." Quote MM

Look, I'm sure you are very talented...but your talent doesn't appear to be the subject of the topic (or perhaps it is?).

"I have actually tried three times. Each time you told me my answrs were not good enough." Quote MM

No...actually, I have restated the question in a number of different ways...and No, never said your answers weren't good enough - sorry...and No, this is what I actually wrote 'Reads very much like a 3 year olds explanation of thier scribbles...' Your subconscious seems to have taken it personally.

Quote me right please.

The first question I asked, which has been restated in several ways, was...

Given that you accept the research (let alone the researchers themselves),
that 'in a nutshell' is suggesting we have no free will:

How is the design, implementation and interpretation of the experiments NOT the product of subconscious' - designing, implementing and interpreting the data through the auspices of non-free will?

...or to put it another way (as I have already)...

How can emminent minds state that all human minds are insane, when the statement comes from an insane mind (by their own admission)?

...or to put it another way (as I already have)...

How does the interpretation of these experiments and research stand outside its own 'suggestion'?

It really is a very simple question...that has nix to do with writing style.

"It is obvious to blind freddie that these illumined men at many stages of their lives made selections of career path that led them to the point of designing (planning) experiments that somehow indicate that they did not." Quote A99

...and lastly, again...

You are responsible for your own posts.
Feel free to disagree...in light of the relationship you have drawn between non-free will and responsibility...

Rubber hits road...

A99