Belief in free will is equivalent to believing in Santa Claus

originally posted by: Itisnowagain

originally posted by: spy66
What you do is that you Select from the thoughts that enters Your mind. You have a free will to Select what matters to you from the thoughts that enters.

There is no chooser and no choice - ever!
There is no one 'in there' that can select.

Did you watch the video?

Some how i do feel that i can chose to write my respons to you. Like you chose to respond to my reply. Or did we not have that Choice?

Why show us a video if we really cant think about its content or make a judgment on its content?

I do agree that we dont controll the thoughts that come into Our mind. But when a thought does come. We do have the ability Select among the different thoughts that appear. If we didnt how can you create a reasonable answer to me?

a reply to: spy66

I do agree that we dont controll the thoughts that come into Our mind. But when a thought does come. We do have the ability Select among the different thoughts that appear. If we didnt how can you create a reasonable answer to me?

The difference is that "you" don't have any control over thinking thoughts when they appear. Thoughts control themselves, but because we think we are a thought, we think that we have control. But it's an illusion.

To be or not to be. That is the question.

a reply to: spy66

Some how i do feel that i can chose to write my respons to you. Like you chose to respond to my reply. Or did we not have that Choice?

I have a feeling that you did not watch the video - according to your response.

Why show us a video if we really cant think about its content or make a judgment on its content?

Thoughts about the video would arise if the video was watched.

I do agree that we dont controll the thoughts that come into Our mind. But when a thought does come. We do have the ability Select among the different thoughts that appear. If we didnt how can you create a reasonable answer to me?

Watch the video and listen to what is said - the answers are all there in the video.

After hearing what is said in the video there maybe some thoughts that enter the mind - maybe they will appear on this screen at some point or maybe not. Maybe the video link will never be clicked . Clicked and heard, or not clicked and not heard, is not chosen by anyone - it will happen or it won't.
The video is 7 minutes long by the way - no one is telling anyone anything - it is not knowledge - it is questions and answers - finding out together.

Sometimes, big nobodies, in their nothingness, secretly desire to be a big somebody.

The key I think involves humor, mirth and charm and the ability to laugh at one's self and one's own absurdity by taking one's self (or no self as the case may be) too seriously, and as a result the spontaneity and authenticity loses it's charm.

originally posted by: AnkhMorpork
a reply to: Itisnowagain
I get what you're saying, that everything is an occurrence that's just happening, and that our own experience is just part of that overall occurrence, and thus the idea of a separative self is an illusion of sorts.

The separate self is the idea that there is someone in there choosing or doing the thoughts or actions, someone controlling the brain - separate to the brain. The brain is doing what it does according to dna and conditioning or some random mutation or because there is a tumour growing (people do unusual things like mass murder because of brain tumours - check out Charles Whitman). For there to be 'free will' there would have to be 'someone in there' to have free will and there isn't.
This is why there is so much frustration arising because there is a conditioned belief that 'you' should beable to control yourself - and other apparent people should beable to control themselves. Life is filled with guilt and blame.

Raising awareness is good, but working to annihilate the self, as a free self, isn't helpful I don't think because it's not true that there are no individual persons.

What 'self' is being annihilated? The 'true self' is what there is but the 'separate self' makes believe what isn't - it thinks there could or should be something other than what there is.

a reply to: Andy1144

Its all rooted in duality left right paradigm miming

Genetics 3:22---Behold, the man has become as one of us---to know what is good and evil.
Zero mind is where the power is----and its so quiet there.

a reply to: superluminal11

I think that a somewhat surprised and reverent, awe inspired mind, is by far superior to no mind because of the inexpressible joy and gratitude that arises in the recognition that one has been included in the occurrence of life itself. It's a mind and heart filled with wonderment, and appreciation.

originally posted by: Andy1144
The concept of "free will" is just a fictitious concept without any inherent truth. "Free will" cannot possibly be mapped into any coherent logical reality. Saying it exists is like saying that we're possessed by Pluto the dog. And it surprises me that this fact isn't most commonly accepted within most typical philosophy forums that I've visited. They go on and on for hundreds of pages arguing whether there's free will or not, and honestly it's sort of hilarious. Its as if they're stuck in a subtle cult of confused intellect, masqueraded as a logical assumption.

Seem a bit late to the party, but it's a fascinating topic. First, it's worth making the effort to clarify at the very outset, exactly what you mean by the term "free will" that you wish to discuss (rather than as an edit later ). Such discussions can degenerate quickly without making this point very, very clear.

For many, any decision made free of coercion or other mitigating circumstances would be seen as an exercise of "free will" and that's all they will be interested in. That is the superficial, practical understanding of it and to that extent at least, difficult to disagree with.

Though you seem to be talking about the "Libertarian" philosophical idea of free will. The notion that we are genuinely free to choose, that our choices aren't a result of natural mechanical processes (and thus determined). This type of free will doesn't exist.

It looks like fundamentally, underneath it all, the outcomes of our psyche are determined by natural mechanical forces, and we don't really have the ability to genuinely choose from different possibilities. Despite having an overwhelming intuitive feeling of being able to do so. Free will in this sense is an illusion. The greatest illusion might be the "I" itself that we think is running things and that we so strongly identify with. If we resort to some magical "soul" or separate "consciousness" it makes little difference either, if you really think about it.

The analogy is that if you could roll the universe back to any previous point in time and with all variables exactly the same, could you have chosen differently? It's difficult to see how, as every neuron and chemical interaction would be exactly the same also. If we allow randomness to allow a different result, this by definition cannot be reconciled with free will.

Though there still is the ability to change, to appreciate things and so on. Simple machines (computers) have had the ability to improve themselves and their decisions for some time now. People often mistake the type of arguments you are giving for fatalism, which is a different thing. The only change this realisation is likely to result in, is a more compassionate outlook.

I say that free will, in the most fundamental sense does not exist. This includes our every decision we make be it conscious or unconscious. To assume there is a special entity which can make a decision completely free of any circumstance makes absolutely no sense and as said above, is almost equivalent to a cult like belief.
Every decision we make is being made by a very complex process of synapses, electrical signals ect, over which we obviously have no control of. Show me where we're free to make a decision completely free from physical conditions? It's impossible.

Sounds reasonable, agree entirely.

Most people counter the facts by saying, "well whenever I chose to suppress my feelings of hatred and forgive a person, that's proof I have some form of free will"

That's a bit like the "free won't" idea that some academics came up with to explain the Libet experiments. Is there any reason to expect that such contrary impulses didn't arrive by exactly the same processes?

originally posted by: Andy1144

Every decision we make is being made by a very complex process of synapses, electrical signals ect, over which we obviously have no control of.

Thinking that's not free will is a fallacy.

originally posted by: Out6of9Balance

originally posted by: Andy1144

Every decision we make is being made by a very complex process of synapses, electrical signals ect, over which we obviously have no control of.

Thinking that's not free will is a fallacy.

Why?

Have always wondered, if humans have this so called free will, why don't people with schizophrenia, simply use their free will to stop being schizophrenic? People with depression? Instead of suffering, simply use their free will to stop being depressed? People who are psychotic or deluded. Why don't they simply use their free will to stop those thoughts and become normal?

Why do they so often need medications that alter their brain chemistry, if they have free will? It's almost like they have no say in it because their free will is an illusion...go figure.

originally posted by: Cogito, Ergo Sum
Have always wondered, if humans have this so called free will, why don't people with schizophrenia, simply use their free will to stop being schizophrenic? People with depression? Instead of suffering, simply use their free will to stop being depressed? People who are psychotic or deluded. Why don't they simply use their free will to stop those thoughts and become normal?

Why do they so often need medications that alter their brain chemistry, if they have free will? It's almost like they have no say in it because their free will is an illusion...go figure.

Exactly - nicely put!

a reply to: Cogito, Ergo Sum

Yes, that's as sound a growing limbs back using free will.

i personally think free will exists in the sense that everything that can happen has already happened but the decisions your individual conscious self makes unlocks a path through certain timelines which differ from another you and it's not just your actions which determines the chosen timeline but the actions of every conscious being because in many unseen ways every one of us has a connection in many timelines.

you already made every decision possible but you have many different selves which all have separate consciousnesses and only you are aware of the timelines you travel through when you make decisions or others make decisions which you are influenced by in some way.

not sure if i was clear but that's how i think about free will.

Do you consider not having free will a problem or are you satisfied with what you have besides it?

a reply to: Out6of9Balance

Do you consider not having free will a problem or are you satisfied with what you have besides it?

If it is recognised that there is no free will then everything is free. The belief in free will is imprisonment.

a reply to: Itisnowagain

But there's no need for belief in it to make it exist either.

Maybe those who don't believe in it really don't have any.

originally posted by: Out6of9Balance
a reply to: Itisnowagain

But there's no need for belief in it to make it exist either.

Maybe those who don't believe in it really don't have any.

The belief in free will does not make it true!

a reply to: Andy1144
Andy, I'm enjoying your thread and I'm grateful for reading an interesting discussion.

I'm too ignorant to contribute, but too arrogant to leave the fan unhit.

Imagine this idea. If one don't even accept the concept of having a '"big" free will, what are the chances for him to ever touch it? An experience starts only after acceptance, otherwise one is dominated/ruled/managed by other's free will.

Here's an analogy. The vast majority of people are hired for salaries to perform duties in someone's business. They do not even think of themselves as of entrepreneurs. They don't really consider this concept, they just don't accept it (therefore, they will always be ruled/managed by the ones who did accept this concept for themselves). Though if they would, their way of thinking and living could change rapidly and dramatically.

So, the acceptance is a big deal. Sometimes, nothing will come without it. Maybe the same idea works for the "big" free will, too.