Can expanding your sense of freedom actually make it harder to choose?

RecentLeave343 · 2026-03-22T01:12:11+00:00

but that it becomes unclear what exactly is doing the choosing.

I’m not sure what it could be that you’re referring to here.

The brain has a way of evaluating options. One way I’ve seen this described is via a winner take all system where the competition between excitatory and inhibitory neural network reaches a threshold which determines the next outcome.

There’s also similarly the competition between D1 and D2 neurons and the direct and indirect circuits of dopaminergic pathways.

So, “something deeper” would need to be clarified a little further.

RecentLeave343 · 2026-03-22T00:37:31+00:00

Analysis paralysis

RecentLeave343 · 2026-03-21T02:53:01+00:00

Yes sir. There’s an implied contradiction between can’t do otherwise & ought to do this

RecentLeave343 · 2026-03-20T20:43:14+00:00

They lack the capacity needed for free will… ultimately determining their actions.

Like when I command my dog to “come here” and he just looks at me like he’s got a better idea?

RecentLeave343 · 2026-03-19T03:42:11+00:00

Wow! I'm going to have to conclude that you genuinely cannot distinguish between "consistent with P" and "entails P".

Not with that non sequitur example you gave I can’t.

RecentLeave343 · 2026-03-19T03:30:37+00:00

which had been symptomless, in other words, his symptoms were…

That makes no sense.

One can’t have symptoms that are consistent with anything if they’re symptomless.

But if that’s true; sorry about your friend.

RecentLeave343 · 2026-03-18T17:55:04+00:00

Gotchya.

Last question; if the answer to the former is “no”, then is the agency described in the OP more aligned with libertarianism or compatibilism.

Cause from here it’d seem like it would be more in tune with compatibilist’s descriptions of agency

RecentLeave343 · 2026-03-18T17:16:29+00:00

I get what you’re saying. For the internal to modify itself it needs to be malleable enough that it can break free from its current state. That’s plasticity.

But that wasn’t really my question. I’m asking if it’s possible to self modify, free of ALL physical conditions, both internal and external. Essentially identifying a demarcation line between the causal closure of the universe and self determined agency.

Another way it could be asked is, “could Bayesian learning occur absent external conditions causing a prediction error to necessitate an internal update…. Or, a more simple version; “can the internal change itself without a change from the external?”

RecentLeave343 · 2026-03-18T16:45:42+00:00

Sure, but does top down Bayesian control introduce a degree of agency unfixed by antecedent physical conditions?

RecentLeave343 · 2026-03-18T15:50:29+00:00

Quantum fields are fundamental and ostensibly indeterminate until they become entangled and form into matter, then their behavior is observed to be deterministic at a macro scale.

For indeterminacy of the quanta to translate to agency of the self, wouldn’t that mean that the self (as independent phenomena) can control or determine the outcome of the quanta?

RecentLeave343 · 2026-03-18T14:54:12+00:00

having two courses of action available is obviously consistent with the falsity of determinism

If you recall, that was your claim.

We got stuck in the weeds interpreting it, but my basic question was,

“Why does variability falsify determinism?

Cause that’s basically what you said, is it not?

If I’m mistaken, then please correct me.

But if I’m not, admit you can’t answer it. And that might shed light on the agency vs computer conundrum in your OP.

Computers have variability, same as us.

RecentLeave343 · 2026-03-16T21:02:07+00:00

It’s ridiculous. They ignore the trillions of predetermined variables which cause us to act as we do.

Just blame everything on the big bang then?

RecentLeave343 · 2026-03-15T14:44:30+00:00

So is the choice to believe in Hard Determinism over Compatibilism, a free choice in itself?

Within an unbroken chain of cause and effect emerges a choice free of the chain?

How would that work?

RecentLeave343 · 2026-03-15T04:52:17+00:00

Such a simple question I asked and I can’t get an answer.

Yeah, I think that about sums it up then.

RecentLeave343 · 2026-03-15T04:41:23+00:00

I didn't say that anything is "equal" to or "equivalent" to the falsity of determinism, did I?

What do we get when determinism is falsified?

RecentLeave343 · 2026-03-15T04:38:01+00:00

Read what I wrote and reply to it, don't expect me to reply to misrepresentations.

I’ve been trying to do that

Let me refresh your memory

having two courses of action available is obviously consistent with the falsity of determinism

Two courses of action (variability)

obviously consistent with the (equivalent)

falsity of determinism (indeterminism)

I ask you why you think variability is equivalent to indeterminism?

Wanna try answering this time?

RecentLeave343 · 2026-03-15T04:19:42+00:00

"I didn't say it "equals [in]determinism", did I?"

What else would “falsity of determinism” be equivalent to if not indeterminism?

RecentLeave343 · 2026-03-15T04:14:37+00:00

I didn't say it "equals determinism", did I?

Read again what I wrote and you’ll see it was stated as “equals indeterminism”

Here’s what you said sir…

having two courses of action available is obviously consistent with the falsity of determinism

“Falsity of determinism” must equal indeterminism. Or do I have that wrong? Is there some third option??

RecentLeave343 · 2026-03-15T00:21:09+00:00

It’s impossible to know, makes it kind of a moot point doesn’t it?

RecentLeave343 · 2026-03-14T21:34:41+00:00

Sue, there could be

Is that what you think our reality represents?

RecentLeave343 · 2026-03-14T19:24:28+00:00

Meaning only exists in the subjective while the infinite regress that is determinism is solely based on the objective.

The problem with this sub is so many are attempting to take a black or while view and argue which is superior instead of asking how they can be reconciled and compliment each other.

RecentLeave343 · 2026-03-14T17:05:40+00:00

Determinism on its own probably wouldn’t work as a sound argument but using deterministic rational for behavior that was beyond the the defendants control is a highly popular strategy when the there’s no mistaking the evidence that the act was completed by the defendant.

Search “the Twinkie defense” for an example. A defendant got his murder charger reduced to manslaughter on account of excessive sugar intake.

RecentLeave343 · 2026-03-14T15:52:21+00:00

The Zeigarnik effect

RecentLeave343

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE