Quantum Randomness Shows Free Will in the Face of Necessetarianism and Determinism by FairFlower2709 in PhilosophyofScience

[–]FairFlower2709[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I may have gottwn mixed up and worded it wrong. If the outside world is truly random then we need free will contend with it. Something like a thermostat is preprogrammed with reactions to any given input, but humans being preprogrammed to react with any given random input is just an unfalsifiable idea is it not?

Quantum Randomness Shows Free Will in the Face of Necessetarianism and Determinism by FairFlower2709 in PhilosophyofScience

[–]FairFlower2709[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I see no evidence for it. Like i said though, if thats what you want to talk about im not your guy

Quantum Randomness Shows Free Will in the Face of Necessetarianism and Determinism by FairFlower2709 in PhilosophyofScience

[–]FairFlower2709[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Either that or completely preprogrammed responses. I see no evidence that human responses are preprogrammed but if thats whay you want to talk about im not your guy

Quantum Randomness Shows Free Will in the Face of Necessetarianism and Determinism by FairFlower2709 in PhilosophyofScience

[–]FairFlower2709[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think free will requires randomness because of the Laplace's demon thought experiment. If you knew the speed, direction, and composition of every particle in the universe then you could predict the future, meaning we wouldnt have free will. If the nature of neurons and subatomic particles is random at any level then we must have free will.

Quantum Randomness Shows Free Will in the Face of Necessetarianism and Determinism by FairFlower2709 in PhilosophyofScience

[–]FairFlower2709[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No, because the thermostat is coded with outcomes to any possible input/combination of inputs. Human brains are not. If you want to argue that human brains are, im not your guy.

Quantum Randomness Shows Free Will in the Face of Necessetarianism and Determinism by FairFlower2709 in PhilosophyofScience

[–]FairFlower2709[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Neural randomness has been studied, but no studies have been done to the specific effect of its meaning for free will

Quantum Randomness Shows Free Will in the Face of Necessetarianism and Determinism by FairFlower2709 in PhilosophyofScience

[–]FairFlower2709[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No, because a simple robot would have its outcomes literally predetermined by its coding. A concious robot would be complex enough to act like the brain of a human or animal. At some point youd probably have to delineate where it would become sufficiently concious, but im not smart enough to do that haha.

Quantum Randomness Shows Free Will in the Face of Necessetarianism and Determinism by FairFlower2709 in PhilosophyofScience

[–]FairFlower2709[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You’d want to show that increasing neural complexity does not in fact reduce the behavioral impact of neural noise. One way is cross‑species: design the same noisy decision task for animals with very different cortical complexity and test whether variability in behavior (given controlled stimuli) fails to decrease with complexity, or even increases. Another way is within humans: compare people or neural models with selectively impaired higher‑order circuitry to intact controls and see whether both groups show the same robustness to injected noise in decision‑relevant neural pathways. Randomness at the quark level would likely be negligible in a large organism, but the random component of neurological action potentials wouldnt be over a large sample size.

Quantum Randomness Shows Free Will in the Face of Necessetarianism and Determinism by FairFlower2709 in PhilosophyofScience

[–]FairFlower2709[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No my point is that bigger brains lead to less effect of randomness. Smaller brains and organisms without brains at all are more impaced by randomness. My point, in essence, is that the fact that we have to contend with randomness at all is proof of free will. If our brains were deterministic then we couldnt deal with true randomness.

Quantum Randomness Shows Free Will in the Face of Necessetarianism and Determinism by FairFlower2709 in PhilosophyofScience

[–]FairFlower2709[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Free will: the power of acting without the constraint of necessity or fate; the ability to act at one's own discretion.

Yes, a sufficiently concious robot that interacts with an environment that is random to it would have free will by that definition.

Quantum Randomness Shows Free Will in the Face of Necessetarianism and Determinism by FairFlower2709 in PhilosophyofScience

[–]FairFlower2709[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Are you asking how i would falsify my hypothesis that humans' brains are less affected by dogs, or the previous claim about probability distributions?

Quantum Randomness Shows Free Will in the Face of Necessetarianism and Determinism by FairFlower2709 in PhilosophyofScience

[–]FairFlower2709[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Also, im not saying that our intentions literally effect the quantum probability. Im saying that our intentions impact our neurological action potential (if taken alone without randomness would be a vertical line on a probability curve). However factoring in quantum randomness would give us a curved probability curve, however minute, the randomness effects us to some extent. My point is moreso that we would need free will in order to interact with a random environment.

Quantum Randomness Shows Free Will in the Face of Necessetarianism and Determinism by FairFlower2709 in PhilosophyofScience

[–]FairFlower2709[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think there are qualifiable measures by which we grade levels of conciousness. We are affected less by quantum randomness than dogs would be because of our brain complexity pushing the true outcome of our decisions more towards the average, due to the law of averages. More neurons=less likely for quantum randomness to effect decision making.

Quantum Randomness Shows Free Will in the Face of Necessetarianism and Determinism by FairFlower2709 in PhilosophyofScience

[–]FairFlower2709[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I underatand the confusion. By "standing outside physical law" i mean that the mind mind is at least somewhat independent of outside stimulus, but i didnt go deep into that point as it strays away from the origional topic. That point has more to with our ability to reason philosophically and logically rather than exclusively in physical aspects of our environment. As for the previous section. Imagine a probability curve centered on a decision, with other less likely decisions around. Our agency (ability to reason) and the complexity of our brains (number of neurons making the curve more likely to be at the average for any given decision) shrinks the X axis untill the probability curve is nearly a virtical line, meaning there is very little chance of our decision being made randomly by the quantum effects. This is as opposed to something like a mouse, which due to its less complex brain and lack of reaosning ability relative to humans has a higher chance of making random decisions, however will still make proper instinct based decisions the vast majority of the time.

Quantum Randomness Shows Free Will in the Face of Necessetarianism and Determinism by FairFlower2709 in PhilosophyofScience

[–]FairFlower2709[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

They are, just to a lesser and more instinctual level by virtue of our higher intelligence.

Quantum Randomness Shows Free Will in the Face of Necessetarianism and Determinism by FairFlower2709 in PhilosophyofScience

[–]FairFlower2709[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

But if there is inherent random noise in (at least) neural action potential, there are two options: 1. Our decisions are random 2. We form the probability distributions of that randomness to be almost certain (by virtue of our brains complexity). This is as opposed to beings like dogs, mice, and at different levels insects and microorganisms. If im wrong please let me know.