It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by MoonSage
I do think we have free will. Although, most may predestine thier choices by not wanting to accept the repercussions of thier decision. Hence, it is "easier" to just go with the flow than to deal with the outcome.
IMO, free will is there for all, society, as a whole pushes the hand of direction.
Yes... I se this has already been said
Originally posted by TheBandit795
reply to post by applesthateatpeople
Then debunk what I said.
Originally posted by arpgme
reply to post by Nicks87
Originally posted by Nicks87
We all have free will.
I think some people act like we dont so they wont have to take responsibility for their actions or feel guilty when they do something morally corrupt.
Aw.. em.. atheists (coughing)
Not all atheists believe we don't have free-will. Even if free-will didn't exist people would still have been (and will be) getting arrested for their crimes. In fact, if free-will doesn't, exists, it would mean that it was meant for people to be punished for their crimes (as well as thought who escaped).This is just a thought.
Originally posted by applesthateatpeople
Originally posted by TheBandit795
reply to post by applesthateatpeople
Then debunk what I said.
I did.
Originally posted by Nicks87
It wasnt an attack. The mods on this site just like to act tough when they start losing arguments.
Dare I suggest you do us a favor? I'm not sure because that would require a choice and you are incapable of that aye!
Originally posted by NewAgeMan
reply to post by TheBandit795
Were you compelled to make the OP in this thread to tell us that we don't have free will?
Originally posted by slugger9787
If free will is untrue then determinism must be true.
Many scientists and philosophers think that free-will is an illusion. That is, intentions, choices, and decisions are made by subconscious mind, which only lets the conscious mind know what was willed after the fact. This argument was promoted long ago by scholars like Darwin, Huxley, and Einstein. Many modern scholars also hold that position and neuroscientists have even performed experiments since the 80s to prove it.
These experiments supposedly show that the brain makes a subconscious decision before it is realized consciously. In the typical experiment supporting illusory free will, a subject is asked to voluntarily press a button at any time and notice the position of a clock marker when they think they first willed the movement. At the same time, brain activity is monitored over the part of the brain that controls the mechanics of the movement. The startling typical observation is that subjects show brain activity changes before they say they intended to make the movement. In other words the brain supposedly issued the command before the conscious mind had a chance to decide to move. All this happens in less than a second, but various scientists have interpreted this to mean that the subconscious mind made the decision to move and the conscious mind only realized the decision later.
In a paper in the current issue of Advances in Cognitive Psychology (Vol. 6, page 47-65), I challenge the whole series of experiments performed since the 1980s pur-ported to show that intentions, choices, and decisions are made subconsciously, with conscious mind being informed after the fact. These experiments do not test what they are intended to test and are misinterpreted to support the view of illusory free will.
My criticisms focus on three main points: 1) timing of when a free-will event occurred requires introspection, and other research shows that introspective estimates of event timing are not accurate, 2) simple finger movements may be performed without much conscious thought and certainly not representative of the conscious decisions and choices required in high-speed conversation or situations where the subconscious mind cannot know ahead of time what to do, and 3) the brain activity measures have been primitive and incomplete.
In the real world, subconscious and conscious minds interact and share duties. Subconscious mind governs simple or well-learned tasks, like habits or ingrained prejudices, while conscious mind deals with tasks that are complex or novel, like first learning to ride a bike or play sheet music. Most deliberate new learning has to be mediated by free will, because subconscious mind has not yet had a chance to learn.
Originally posted by applesthateatpeople
reply to post by TheBandit795
I said that with a title like "you have no free will" it is you that has explaining to do.
Over at brainblogger there was a post recently (Free Will is NOT An Illusion) which argued against the idea that free will is an illusion. The author argues against the idea that all choices and decisions are made by the subconscious mind, that “the brain makes a subconscious decision before it is realized consciously”. He views this as a misguided notion. He focuses on certain experiments which purport to show the illusion of free will, and argues that they either have faulty methodology or that the data are misinterpreted. On this point I will tend to agree with the author, Dr. Klemm. The experiments he mentions alone are not enough for us to put aside long held notions of free will. Dr. Klemm is also spot on in his statements regarding the difficulty of distinguishing between the processes involved in consciousness and what we call the subconscious, and how these relate to decision making. The problem as I see it, is that Dr. Klemm began his whole line of reasoning from the wrong set of assumptions. These assumptions can be implicitly seen in the conclusion he reaches at the close of the article:
What I see as the fundamental error in this line of reasoning is that it assumes without justification that free will lies in the realm of conscious choices. That a conscious choice IS a free choice. Most sophisticated criticisms of the notion of free will don’t assert that humans lack free will because decisions are unconscious (though this is certainly a piece of the puzzle), but because even the conscious process of decision making, choice, and action are themselves lacking in free will. These theories argue that the conscious experience of making a choice is in fact an epiphenomenon (i.e. – your conscious experience is just along for the ride, a passive observer with no causal influence on resulting action) and that the feeling of will that goes along with your conscious life is just that…a “feeling”.
Bringing it down to a more fine grained level of physical phenomena, where is there room for free will if at root, all behavior is the three dimensional organizational projection of a bunch of atoms, or protons and electrons interacting according to very rigid laws of physics? Each particular atom has no “will” of its own. And yet some very large collection of atoms are supposed be free in some wholly different way? It’s usually at this point where quantum mechanical theories of free will try to sneak in, but besides questions regarding whether quantum mechanical indeterminacy can even have any affect on higher order constructions of matter, indeterminacy itself grants no free will, it simply grants randomness. To explain free will, we have to be able to explain how a person, with beliefs and desires and values can make a decision that is in some way intentionally willed, but yet in an indeterministic* way. In a way that is free in some metaphysical sense. The quantum indeterminacy of microparticles gives us no solace.
Originally posted by TheBandit795
reply to post by applesthateatpeople
You didn't debunk it. Period.
You didn't bring anything to the conversation; anything that debunks or even criticizes the publications from Aarts, Custers, or Bargh I've posted.
You didn't say anything about the "psychological reversal" that I was talking about in this thread, or even the link I posted about it. You made no comment about this, other than a vague "b.s. (by free will)" you didn't explain what you meant.
I said in my OP "At least in the way we define free will: The act of consciously making decisions. That doesn't exist in the way we think it to be. "
The act of consciously making decisions, which means that the conscious mind is completely independent of external factors, including the subconscious mind when we make decisions. That is not the case as you can see in the articles and research studies that I've posted.
When you consider the mind to be the conscious and more (at least the subconscious mind) then we're talking another story.
When you include the subconscious, then yes. I agree that we do have free will. Discard the subconscious (which the vast majority of people do) then we don't have free will.
The act of consciously making decisions, which means that the conscious mind is completely independent of external factors, including the subconscious mind when we make decisions.