Free will or lack of.......

[onetruth]

24 minutes ago, Vespasian said:

If free will is predicated on cause and effect..and if the beginning of the universe had no cause then how would that fit into the debate about free will?..

 

For clarity, free will is (I think) dependant on cause-and-effect not being universal to everything, and the big-bang would be an example of how it isn't.  

[onetruth]

2 minutes ago, the village idiot said:

Hmmm, not much I can do with that!

You can ignore it!  It isn't an argument proving free will, but it does limit free will to being outside of the realm of causality.  Which it had to be anyway, if it exists.  

[the village idiot]

3 minutes ago, Vespasian said:

Looks like I might of thrown a spanner in the works...

 

Looks to me if you really want to use cause and effect you have to prove the universe came into existence because of a cause..

No. In order to prove that quantum mechanics/spontaneous arisings are relevant to free will you have to show that they can manifest themselves as will in the decision making process.

[Vespasian]

3 minutes ago, onetruth said:

For clarity, free will is (I think) dependant on cause-and-effect not being universal to everything, and the big-bang would be an example of how it isn't.  

Not sure I'm getting what you're getting at..   I think I'm being bamboozled..LOL

 

I'm about to find out what Bertrand Russel had to say on the subject.   be back shortly

[onetruth]

1 minute ago, the village idiot said:

No. In order to prove that quantum mechanics/spontaneous arisings are relevant to free will you have to show that they can manifest themselves as will in the decision making process.

You can use them as examples of how not everything is causal.  This means you can not go on to dismiss free will simply because it does not fit in with your ideas of causality, not unless you reject QM and the big bang first (which you might want to - they are only theories).

[the village idiot]

1 minute ago, onetruth said:

You can use them as examples of how not everything is causal.  This means you can not go on to dismiss free will simply because it does not fit in with your ideas of causality, not unless you reject QM and the big bang first (which you might want to - they are only theories).

Quantum events in and of themselves are not causal, but their effects on the outputs of the brain are.

[Vespasian]

Just skimmed over an article by Russle..

 

heres an interesting snippet that seems to align with what I've been puzzling over...  more than likely why I mention the universe having a cause..

 

When a man does not himself know why he acted as he did, we may search his unconscious for a cause, but it never occurs to us that there may have been no cause.

[onetruth]

8 minutes ago, the village idiot said:

Quantum events in and of themselves are not causal, but their effects on the outputs of the brain are.

Yes, I agree.  Couldn't Will be more like quanta than it is like the brain?  In terms of being independent from what-has-come-before, I mean. 

Edited January 6, 2018 by onetruth
[it is like]

[the village idiot]

13 minutes ago, onetruth said:

Yes, I agree.  Couldn't Will be more like quanta than the brain?  In terms of being independent of what-has-come-before, I mean. 

Yes, they could certainly play their part, introducing 'unpredictability' into the cause and effect chain. I still don't see how this translates to any kind of reprieve for free will.

Edited January 6, 2018 by the village idiot

[the village idiot]

7 minutes ago, Vespasian said:

Just skimmed over an article by Russle..

 

heres an interesting snippet that seems to align with what I've been puzzling over...  more than likely why I mention the universe having a cause..

 

When a man does not himself know why he acted as he did, we may search his unconscious for a cause, but it never occurs to us that there may have been no cause.

Very interesting, but again, nothing there to support the free will argument.