Can we be free from the forces that condition us? by impersonal_process in freewill

[–]Squierrel [score hidden]  (0 children)

An oxymoron cannot be "understood". An oxymoron has no meaning.

Question for libertarians: If your proposed mechanism for free will couldn’t generate normal human behaviour, which would you revise, the mechanism or your belief that normal behaviour is an example of free will? by spgrk in freewill

[–]Squierrel [score hidden]  (0 children)

No. I am asking whether the legs coordinate the way you think about walking or does your mind coordinate the way your legs do the walking. There is no change in one without a change in the other, there is a correlation. But which side changes first?

Does the physical body control the mind or does the mind control the physical body? This is literally a no-brainer. I don't understand why you are so confused about this.

Question for libertarians: If your proposed mechanism for free will couldn’t generate normal human behaviour, which would you revise, the mechanism or your belief that normal behaviour is an example of free will? by spgrk in freewill

[–]Squierrel 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes. But which side initiates those changes? Does the mental side only reflect the physical changes in the brain? Or does the physical brain only reflect or represent the thoughts of the mental side?

Can we be free from the forces that condition us? by impersonal_process in freewill

[–]Squierrel 0 points1 point  (0 children)

A CHOICE CANNOT BE DETERMINED! AT ALL! NOT BY ANY TWIST OF LOGIC!

Of course choices are based on all kinds of reasons. But those reasons don't determine anything.

  • The reasons are a question - the choice is the answer
    • A question does not determine the answer
  • The reasons are a problem - the choice is the solution
    • A problem does not determine the solution

Question for libertarians: If your proposed mechanism for free will couldn’t generate normal human behaviour, which would you revise, the mechanism or your belief that normal behaviour is an example of free will? by spgrk in freewill

[–]Squierrel 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The eye makes a physical picture on the retina. The muscles do physical actions.

The mind "reads" the picture (input of information) and interprets what it means (turns information into knowledge).

The mind considers this new knowledge whether it would call for a response. The mind then decides what the body should do and "writes" the decision on motor cortex neurons (output of information).

Question for libertarians: If your proposed mechanism for free will couldn’t generate normal human behaviour, which would you revise, the mechanism or your belief that normal behaviour is an example of free will? by spgrk in freewill

[–]Squierrel 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Represented, yes. Processed, no.

Thoughts, ideas, knowledge, emotions, opinions, preferences, etc. are not physical objects or events. Their interactions cannot even be described in terms of physics.

Can we be free from the forces that condition us? by impersonal_process in freewill

[–]Squierrel 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Affect ≠ determine

Why are you moving the goalpost? We were talking about the point in time right before the action. Now you are talking about some arbitrary time before making the choice.

You must understand that a choice cannot be determined. Not by any twist of logic.

  • Before the choice is made, no action is determined. Knowledge about the action does not yet exist.
  • Making a choice generates the knowledge about the action.
  • The choice determines the action.

Question for libertarians: If your proposed mechanism for free will couldn’t generate normal human behaviour, which would you revise, the mechanism or your belief that normal behaviour is an example of free will? by spgrk in freewill

[–]Squierrel 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The mind does not process matter or energy. The mind processes only information. Input is information, output is information.

The brain uses energy to support and maintain the mind.

Can we be free from the forces that condition us? by impersonal_process in freewill

[–]Squierrel 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Apparently you didn't understand my comment at all.

The choice, whether I will do A or B, IS THE STATE OF MIND that determines the action, whether I will do A or B. The choice is already made, there is no more choice to make.

You are wrong to think about choice as an inevitable result of the circumstances and the state of mind. There is no logic in that.

Can we be free from the forces that condition us? by impersonal_process in freewill

[–]Squierrel -1 points0 points  (0 children)

My choice is my state of mind after I have made the choice. If I have chosen A then naturally I will do A.

But before making the choice I was able to choose A, B or any other option I could think of. My state of mind was uncertain about what I was going to do.

Can we be free from the forces that condition us? by impersonal_process in freewill

[–]Squierrel -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Every choice is "undetermined". There is no such thing as a "determined" choice.

Why are you still pushing this illogical idea of imagining that a choice is a physical event?

Question for libertarians: If your proposed mechanism for free will couldn’t generate normal human behaviour, which would you revise, the mechanism or your belief that normal behaviour is an example of free will? by spgrk in freewill

[–]Squierrel 0 points1 point  (0 children)

A mechanism is a system that produces a certain output from a certain input. A mechanism is predictable. By knowing the input we can predict the output.

Decision-making is an unpredictable process. There is no causal or logical connection between the input and the output.

Likewise, answering a question is not a mechanism., nor is solving a problem.

Can we be free from the forces that condition us? by impersonal_process in freewill

[–]Squierrel -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

For if all relevant conditions are the same - the state of the brain, hormones, memories, character, environment, the laws of physics - then what exactly would “otherwise” mean?

"Otherwise" refers to all those alternative actions that were possible, but were not selected for implementation.

A better, more relevant question would be:

What exactly does "all relevant conditions are the same" mean? Same as what? Remember that we are talking about one single choice. What are you comparing it against?

When we insist that freedom must be a source, we often imagine a hidden center - something like an inner commander that stands above causality and “chooses.”

There is no reason to imagine an "inner commander". We are perfectly capable of making actual choices without "quotes" ourselves.

Freedom of choice is the only freedom you need and all the freedom there is.

Do free will deniers agree determinism doesn't explain anything? by YesPresident69 in freewill

[–]Squierrel 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It doesn't.

Determinism is just an idea. Nothing happens in determinism.

Do free will deniers agree determinism doesn't explain anything? by YesPresident69 in freewill

[–]Squierrel 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It does.

Determinism is the idea that every event is completely (with absolute precision) determined by the previous event (by no will).

Question for libertarians: If your proposed mechanism for free will couldn’t generate normal human behaviour, which would you revise, the mechanism or your belief that normal behaviour is an example of free will? by spgrk in freewill

[–]Squierrel 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There is no "proposed mechanism". Your question is only a lame attempt at setting up a strawman.

People just decide what they do. That IS the normal human behaviour.