Brit Girls - Fat

[Mark J]

6 minutes ago, the village idiot said:

Mushrooms are certainly another route into experiencing the feeling of 'no self'. It is certainly an avenue worth exploring for some. The issue with psychedelics is that (as Sam Harris points out) it is akin to embarking on a journey by strapping yourself to a ballistic missile with no guidance system. Meditation is more like raising a sail on a steady ship with a rudder and cruising gently towards a better life. Each leg of the journey is more interesting and enhancing than the previous one. There are a few light storms on route, but by steering a good course the voyage is transformative.

 

Blimey, that was a bit flowery wasn't it!

Yes, I've read of monks who embarked on a psychedelic journey.  They however had a guidance system.  They confirmed that it's the same space.

Edited December 24, 2017 by Mark J
Sausage fingers

[Vespasian]

On 12/22/2017 at 19:40, the village idiot said:

Seriously top marks for conceding on free will. It is an exceedingly high hurdle to clear.

 

The problem with the rest of the post is that if you agree there is no such thing as free will then you have to accept that individuals cannot be held accountable for their actions.

 

It is certainly true that the threat of punishment could have an effect on peoples brains and reduce criminal behaviour in the population, but the individual (by definition of no free will) cannot choose for that information to be utilised by the brain in issuing it's directives at any one point in time. It would be wrong to assume that they could have acted any differently even given the threat of punishment.

 

It ain't such a high hurdle, I'm a philosopher in my spare time..   in the manner of Newtons mathematical smatterers mind...

Which is why I've decided to come back and answer this question.. The question of free will and criminal behavior..

 

when I have ruminated on the problem two things have popped up in my mind over the days..  in a vid on utube discussing free will mention was made of an experiment with students taking exams.. they gave a test group an opportunity to cheat and those that could cheat mostly did cheat...  Now I didn't know what to make of this at first, I mean their cheating was still the result of their environment was it not..

But if they hadn't been given the opportunity to cheat they couldn't of cheated could they..

 

This has been getting on my nerves to be honest, a head scratcher as to how it all ties in to free will and human behavior... 

 

The second thing that was bumping around in my head was Schrodinger's cat.. 

 

 

To whit, look for evidence of free will and you wont find it, don't look for evidence and it exists.. its a paradox..

 

Both free will and predeterminismn only exists if you both look for them and do not look for them..   if you like...

 

 

which leads me to crime and justice.   if free will both exists and doesn't exist at the same time then utility suggests we treat crime by not allowing criminals to cheat..  IE, don't give em a chance to cheat justice and they wont act like they can cheat justice...

 

Conclusion,  free will exists in a paradox of both existing and not existing....depends if you look for it..or not?.. 

Edited December 26, 2017 by Vespasian

[the village idiot]

1 hour ago, Vespasian said:

 

It ain't such a high hurdle, I'm a philosopher in my spare time..   in the manner of Newtons mathematical smatterers mind...

Which is why I've decided to come back and answer this question.. The question of free will and criminal behavior..

 

when I have ruminated on the problem two things have popped up in my mind over the days..  in a vid on utube discussing free will mention was made of an experiment with students taking exams.. they gave a test group an opportunity to cheat and those that could cheat mostly did cheat...  Now I didn't know what to make of this at first, I mean their cheating was still the result of their environment was it not..

But if they hadn't been given the opportunity to cheat they couldn't of cheated could they..

 

This has been getting on my nerves to be honest, a head scratcher as to how it all ties in to free will and human behavior... 

 

The second thing that was bumping around in my head was Schrodinger's cat.. 

 

 

To whit, look for evidence of free will and you wont find it, don't look for evidence and it exists.. its a paradox..

 

Both free will and predeterminismn only exists if you both look for them and do not look for them..   if you like...

 

 

which leads me to crime and justice.   if free will both exists and doesn't exist at the same time then utility suggests we treat crime by not allowing criminals to cheat..  IE, don't give em a chance to cheat justice and they wont act like they can cheat justice...

 

Conclusion,  free will exists in a paradox of both existing and not existing....depends if you look for it..or not?.. 

 I feel your pain Vespasian.

 

Rather than thinking about free will both existing and not existing, try framing it in terms of 'free will doesn't exist but the illusion of it certainly does'.

 

It is very difficult to think your way through the illusion because your brain is creating the feeling of free will and tagging it onto every thought and action including thoughts on whether there is free will! The brain creates a 'You' and attributes some of it's automatic processes to it, giving the impression that there is a You thinking about these things. In reality there is no 'thinker of thoughts'.

 

You can get a slight sense of how thinking is automatic, beyond the control of a 'self'. It is just a bit of fun but gives a small amount of insight into how the brain does what it does independantly, given what it's got.

 

Sit and think for 1 minute. You can think about absolutely anything you want. The only rule is to use your free will to not think about a pink elephant. Ok, Go.

[Mesterh]

On 23/12/2017 at 09:54, the village idiot said:

Good questions Mesterh!

 

I don't think we are able to predict the future in any meaningful way, however I do believe that it is theoretically possible to do so. The barrier to doing this, as pointed at in an earlier post, is that some computing device would have to be able to be aware of every single causal influence that has affected everything in the universe since the beginning of time. I dont think we are ever going to have this, even given the fact that our developments in AI are truly terrifying.

 

I believe that everything that we think and do is the effect of an unimaginable number of causal influences, none of which we picked, stretching back to the beginning of time. When Vespasian noted that it doesn't really matter whether our outputs are predetermined or not I think he was probably right. It does have important implications for things like our criminal justice system, and systems of governance, but in terms of living out our day to day lives it pretty much is business as usual.

 

To accept the existence of free will you have to either assume that there is some kind of central collection point for information in the brain that collates all the neural firings and combines them in a sensible way to issue a directive with the additional power to 'change it's mind'. We know there is no such region, and this is not how the brain works. Or you have to assume that there is some kind of non-material force independant of the brain that can veto it's deliberations. This would be, by definition, supernatural.

 

The worry that we would all become psychopaths is an interesting one, but there is no reason to assume that this would be the case. Ultimately we may not have free will but our actions are most definitely influenced by outside forces. This is where aspects like good governance come in. Despite perceptions, the world has become a hugely less violent place over time. This is largely due to the development of governmental structures which influence cultures and by extension our behaviours.

 

The question of whether we have free will is still certainly a hotly debated topic amongst scientists and philosophers. We do not yet have a definitive answer. All we can do is weigh up the available evidence that we become exposed to and make a choice (or not)

I think quantum mechanics would disagree. Ie we can only predict the future if we know the speed and position of every particle which isn't possible. Therefore I do believe we have free will as nothing is already determined which it would have to be if we had no control over our destiny. 

 

God does play dice.

 

Surly our actions are based on memory and natural reactions. If someone truly lost their memory surly that would affect their 'free will'

 

I would also think that chaos theory would have some say in not having free will. If every one of our actions is already determined then how does the unknown constantly happening affect that? Maybe we don't have free will, it's just that it is constantly changing?

Maybe I can't change the future because it is constantly changing.

 

I suppose we will never know, so it doesn't really matter, therefore we should just hang thieving scum as it will make our life better, which considering the shortness of it is very important indeed.

 

[the village idiot]

3 minutes ago, Mesterh said:

I think quantum mechanics would disagree. Ie we can only predict the future if we know the speed and position of every particle which isn't possible. Therefore I do believe we have free will as nothing is already determined which it would have to be if we had no control over our destiny. 

 

God does play dice.

 

Surly our actions are based on memory and natural reactions. If someone truly lost their memory surly that would affect their 'free will'

 

I would also think that chaos theory would have some say in not having free will. If every one of our actions is already determined then how does the unknown constantly happening affect that? Maybe we don't have free will, it's just that it is constantly changing?

Maybe I can't change the future because it is constantly changing.

 

I suppose we will never know, so it doesn't really matter, therefore we should just hang thieving scum as it will make our life better, which considering the shortness of it is very important indeed.

 

Hi Mesterh.

 

We haven't yet got a grip on quantum mechanics, it may well be that it provides a barrier to ever being able to predict the future. This doesn't in any way bolster the free will argument. If anything it supports the argument against it. If there is unpredictable randomness at a sub-atomic level this would suggest that we have even less control over events (thoughts and actions).

 

Even if nothing is determined at quantum level our brains still do what they do with what they have access to. This is determined. We have no control over what our brains command at any given moment, it just feels like we do. Our brain state in any given moment is dictated by our genes, stored memories, the strength of particular neural connections, the environment and ultimately every event (including thoughts) from the beginning of time up until a microsecond ago. We have no initiation control over any of these things. The only logical inference from this is that we don't have free will.

 

If someone truly lost their memory their actions and thoughts would be different but their 'amount' of free will would be the same. None.

 

Chaos theory doesn't affect free will either. To think about the nature of free will you have to consider the state of the brain that preceeds any thought or action and understand that you have no control over that exact state. You could have a thought that changes the mind at the last second causing you to carry out a different action, but that thought itself arose automatically too. It feels very much like 'You' have changed 'Your' mind but this is just an illusion (again, created automatically by the brain).

 

It is absolutely possible to know we have no free will. There is nowhere for it to be in the material world. Even if you imagine a 'supernatural' force independant of the physical brain/body deciding which option to go for (this is what it can feel like sometimes), that in itself would be contrary to free will as it would not be you deciding.

 

Hanging 'thieving scum' is certainly an option. It would presumably stop them thieving, but it would be immoral and do we really want to go down that road. If you accept the no free will argument, and I don't really think there's any way you can't (admittedly, as a humble stick technician I am crap at explaining it), then purposefully punishing a murderer would be akin to torturing a grizzly bear for killing a human. The murderer should be locked up, but every effort should be made to change his brain. This should be entirely possible with the right inputs and we will get better at this over time.

 

Understanding that we have no free will will also help governments and societies to put things in place to reduce the frequency of bad behaviour in the future. People worry that the realisation of no free will will lead to more destructive behaviour. In actual fact it has great potential to take things in completely the opposite direction.

[Vespasian]

If it wasn't an arb forum I could bang on about this till kingdom come...   

 

Of the vids on utube I watched yesterday a third were devoted to understanding free will..   and even after that I can't settle on a solution..

 

I fully understand our actions are the result of unconscious actions in the brain directing  us to act..  But I can't imagine that means our conscious mind doesn't influence the unconscious mind..   chicken and egg, which comes first?.   

 

On the subject of free will in regards crime and punishment, two things spring to mind.. First, people who believe criminals can't help themselves are much more likely to forgive criminal behavior.. (applies to me a lot of times).

 

Criminals who believe they can cheat will cheat..  If a killer thinks his punishment is being treated in a clinic for a month to change his behavior, those behind him will take advantage and more people will die as a result...

 

IE, If society took a more forgiving attitude to crime, the the result would be more crime.  its not exactly what we want is it?..

 

 

Bit of a puzzler in it, you want to help, but by helping you only make things worse..   

 

 

 

 

[Stubby]

I heard the gritter come out at about one AM this morning . I thought to myself its gonna be cold in the morning . Sure enough there is a driving , biting wind and a blanket of snow .  Did I predict this or did I just think I predicted it or ........?

[Rough Hewn]

I heard the gritter come out at about one AM this morning . I thought to myself its gonna be cold in the morning . Sure enough there is a driving , biting wind and a blanket of snow .  Did I predict this or did I just think I predicted it or ........?

Winter is now your fault stubby.
[emoji12]

[Rough Hewn]

Who wants free will?
Workers are much happier and productive without it.
[emoji23][emoji23][emoji23]

[the village idiot]

46 minutes ago, Vespasian said:

If it wasn't an arb forum I could bang on about this till kingdom come...   

 

Of the vids on utube I watched yesterday a third were devoted to understanding free will..   and even after that I can't settle on a solution..

 

I fully understand our actions are the result of unconscious actions in the brain directing  us to act..  But I can't imagine that means our conscious mind doesn't influence the unconscious mind..   chicken and egg, which comes first?.   

 

On the subject of free will in regards crime and punishment, two things spring to mind.. First, people who believe criminals can't help themselves are much more likely to forgive criminal behavior.. (applies to me a lot of times).

 

Criminals who believe they can cheat will cheat..  If a killer thinks his punishment is being treated in a clinic for a month to change his behavior, those behind him will take advantage and more people will die as a result...

 

IE, If society took a more forgiving attitude to crime, the the result would be more crime.  its not exactly what we want is it?..

 

 

Bit of a puzzler in it, you want to help, but by helping you only make things worse..   

 

 

 

 

You're almost there Vesp

 

I think you are attaching too much significance to the concious mind. It is certainly true to say that the concious mind influences the unconcious mind. This is undeniable. The important thing to appreciate here is that what appears in conciousness (thoughts) are themselves products of the unconcious mind. These thoughts can and do feed back to the unconcious mind generating more thoughts (ad infinitum) until death.

 

The unconcious brain is constantly automatically churning out stuff. A small proportion of this stuff appears in conciousness as thoughts. This is what gives us the sense of being a Self. We have no control over the unconcious, what appears in conciousness or how these appearances feed back to the unconcious. These are the processes that dictate how our lives pan out in every way, and as we have no control over any of it, by extension, we have no free will.

 

The sense of Self in conciousness gives us the very strong impression that 'we' are pulling the levers of life experience, but this too is all just part of the automatic feedback loop generated by our marvelous but ADHD smitten crazy unconcious brain.

 

Your points about crime clinics and forgiveness are very interesting. Forgiveness is a very helpful response for people affected by crime. Would the certainty of being forgiven result in more crime being actioned? Quite possibly. The threat of imprisonment (removal from society because you are a danger to it) acts as a useful preventative input to peoples brains and should certainly remain for the time being. Whether or not the criminal is forgiven is important but a bit of a side issue.

 

What would be most beneficial is to get to a stage where we understand the significant inputs that put the criminal's brain into the state it was the moment he/she performed the crime. This is a fairly monumental undertaking but essentially possible, at least for the main drivers. We can then structure things to make the criminal action less likely to occur in the first place. This is a much more productive way forward than demanding revenge for an individual's act when they are essentially a meaty computer that thinks it has got itself sussed.