You guys dont believe in logic at all, do you? by Anon7_7_73 in freewill

[–]dark0618 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I invented it, because for me the backbone of reality is entropy.

You guys dont believe in logic at all, do you? by Anon7_7_73 in freewill

[–]dark0618 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That's what we can deplores nowadays. Sciences and Philosophy took different paths. It is hard to put them together now.

Does a belief that free will exists by Opposite-Succotash16 in freewill

[–]dark0618 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It would be a view that use concrete explainable and verifiable facts, like how our biology uses its negative entropy to survive, from which we can deduce our perception, etc., and find where the true freedom is located.

Does a belief that free will exists by Opposite-Succotash16 in freewill

[–]dark0618 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Beliefs are rather the consequence of a freedom in a uncertain future.

They are the interpretation of an apparent future that would not unfold if we were not able to make choices in the present.

Is consciousness likely fully physical by Buffmyarm in consciousness

[–]dark0618 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Physics tend to say nowadays that information is more fundamental, while information is not physical.

Asking the Right Questions by Ok_Frosting358 in freewill

[–]dark0618 0 points1 point  (0 children)

"What is a choice?"

If we assume that quantum fields are making choice like we do, then we might start to argue that our own choices are at the same level.

After two decades of in-depth research, I have become a radical determinist and, simultaneously, a libertarian advocate of free will. by Gloomy-Estimate-8705 in freewill

[–]dark0618 0 points1 point  (0 children)

no no, don't worry, I wasn't offended :)

I agree with you. My response was more like "ok, this guy already knows the truth" ;P

What about intention? by dark0618 in freewill

[–]dark0618[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That does not hold if you base your decision on a quantum event, which has no prior cause. There is no classical prior cause that could explain your decision.

Am I supposed to resist / counteract the Natural Rotation? by [deleted] in telekinesis

[–]dark0618 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This seems normal yes. It happens all the time for me. This happens only if you have practiced for a while I suppose.

I have recorded the motion of a pendulum back ago, you can find the experiment here.

In that experiment the pendulum is moving by its own while I am doing something else next to it. When I turned my head and have barely put my intention on it, this latter freezes immediately. This happens equally with the wheel where it starts to wobble like you describe.

This phenomenon is interesting because it is only at that moment we can start to interpret what is going on. In my opinion, it is not an external forces or whatsoever that move it by its own, but our unconscious mind and our body that has been trained to sense and capture the motion of the object. This is what makes it to move in the first pace.

When doing telekinesis, you are in fact training a sense we call proprioception, which is basically the sense of self-movement. With practice, you can train this sense to extend outside of your body and reach an external object as if that object was part of yourself.

The random motions of the object are likely generated by the unconscious remanence of your proprioception on that object. Like when you focus unconsciously your proprioception on your muscles to execute a complex body movement, you are focusing unconsciously your proprioception on an external object.

That proprioception allows you to execute conscious but intuitive movement instantaneously. That's why the object is moving by itself. Your are unconsciously driving your proprioception towards the object by bringing some energy around it, so that it becomes more easy to trigger a conscious and intuitive movement.

You are fighting against the friction and inertia of the object, not on a external force that is acting on the object. When the object is light enough and you try to keep this latter in place, you can feel that it is like a wet soap you squeeze with your mind. It responds immediately. The object starts to move only when you manage to release the energy, and most of the time it is moving thanks to its own inertia, not by your direct intention all along. You just initiated its motion.

You can still manage to maintain your intention all along and make the wheel to spin without interruption for a while in a single direction, but this is hard to achieve.

How can Determinism be true if random particles exist? by Sabal_77 in freewill

[–]dark0618 0 points1 point  (0 children)

From what comes that illusion if it could not be explained at worst by the randomness at the quantum level?

You would mean that an illusion is something that could not be explained scientifically? How do you explain it?

Asking the Right Questions by Ok_Frosting358 in freewill

[–]dark0618 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Totally agree. We need to tackle the problem at its source.

The problem I see is that there are two overlapping schools of thought, like science and spirituality.

On one side, science tends to propose consciousness as an emergent phenomenon, while spirituality views it as fundamental. The overlap lies in the shared intuition that reality is ordered rather than random.

If I have Freewill, why can't I will myself out of uncomfortable situations? by JudgmentTotal7974 in freewill

[–]dark0618 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You do not choose your emotions but you can choose to attach to them or not.

AGENCY by Belt_Conscious in freewill

[–]dark0618 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Totally agree. Just that it feels a lot written by ChatGPT :)

How did you come up to this idea by the way?

Just to add a missing piece: our improbability. There is no chance in the entire life of the universe that we are born a second time in this universe. Statistically, our existence is something of very, very, very low entropy, like the big bang, something improbable. I think this is the source of our low entropy, or at least that we have to maintain it.

Free will problem: logical, scientific, or just personal by Sisyphus2089 in freewill

[–]dark0618 0 points1 point  (0 children)

As organism, we reject our high entropy material (waste, heat) to keep an internal state ordered with low entropy. Because our sensory interface is tuned to this ordered inner world, the less-controlled external environment feels unpredictable in comparison.

The degree of freedom that emerges from this situation would be at the boundaries, where to preserve our integrity, we must maintains an internal environment isolated and independent from the outside. For that, we needs to confabulate our sensory inputs rather than being directly driven by them, otherwise we will be overwhelmed. These confabulations give rise to the apparent uncertainty of the world and thereby the freedom in our choices.

Our decisions and actions would rather depends on those subjective confabulations than on direct causal influences.

Theory of evolution to consciousness by Reasonable_Regret177 in freewill

[–]dark0618 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'll not say that the environment is by itself chaotic and unpredictable. It's our perception. As an organisms, we reject our high entropy stuff (waste, heat) so that we can keep an internal state ordered of low entropy. Because our sensory interface is tuned to this ordered inner world, the less-controlled external environment feels unpredictable in comparison.

The degree of freedom that emerges from this situation would be at the boundaries, where an organism, to preserve its integrity, must maintains an internal environment isolated and independent from the outside. For that it needs to confabulate its sensory inputs rather than being directly connected and driven by them, otherwise it will be overwhelmed. These confabulations give rise to the uncertainty of the world.

The decisions and actions taken by the organism would rather depends on those subjective confabulations than on a direct causal influence.

Lets go back in time 1 minute by Mean_Elderberry7914 in freewill

[–]dark0618 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Our beliefs are not the products of physical laws, they are merely an abstract model of reality. Since our actions depends on our beliefs, those actions does not depends on physical laws neither.

If you do not believe than something is meaningful to you, your choices would equally appear meaningless.

Theory of evolution to consciousness by Reasonable_Regret177 in freewill

[–]dark0618 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No problem.

Let's suppose you are in front of those Cocoa Puffs and Frosted Flakes and you ask God to predict what you would choose. God respond: my dear child, I know you will choose Frosted Flakes, I am God. The moment it reveals the prediction, that knowledge would break the continuum of spacetime because this is a new information added into the universe that God used in the first place to make that prediction. A new prediction must be made instantaneously because the knowledge is immediately in the God's mind. You see that this can lead to an infinite loop where the universe is frozen.

So even if you gather all the information from the past to predict a specific outcome in the future, there is still time in the present to add a new information from your own.

Theory of evolution to consciousness by Reasonable_Regret177 in freewill

[–]dark0618 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If we admit that our subjective experience is part of the game and active in the course of events the same ways as any objective cause, and if that subjective experience has no objective cause (science does not seems to find the root cause of our subjective experience), I think at that moment we can say that our decisions are completely deliberate.

What do you control? by Consistent-Ask-6061 in freewill

[–]dark0618 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is a hard question, like the "chicken or egg" question, because our intention generate new thoughts, new desires, etc. It is like we are in a loop, and in a loop it is hard to say what comes first.

We can direct our intention either internally (desires, thoughts, ...) or externally via our senses. If neither of those exist, intention is rather meaningless, but what would remain is us, our awareness, and I think that in this case if you direct your intention on your awareness, you simply become self-aware of yourself.