Message from @Haze

Discord ID: 736312700145107202


2020-07-24 19:34:05 UTC  

we just dont have a profound understanding of brain function to make a valid assumption even.

2020-07-24 19:35:34 UTC  

That's the thing that I have a problem with. It appears this study simply shows us that we still have a lot to learn about the brain and it's decision making mechanism

2020-07-24 19:36:39 UTC  

The working definition I have of free will is that the entity that is my self is able to be a cause without being restrained by effects

2020-07-24 19:36:46 UTC  

I think when people define free will sometimes they paint this picture of not being constrained by any limitations and not being influenced by anything, but I think that definition would make you a god if it were true.

2020-07-24 19:37:00 UTC  

Of course that kind of free will doesn’t exist

2020-07-24 19:37:05 UTC  

Influenced and determined are different

2020-07-24 19:37:14 UTC  

Obviously we’re influenced

2020-07-24 19:37:35 UTC  

But I think you could make a logical argument for completely dominated as well.

2020-07-24 19:38:04 UTC  

you could, but it doesnt mean it has to be rooted in reality.

2020-07-24 19:38:49 UTC  

So would impulse buying be an example of biological determinism?

2020-07-24 19:39:28 UTC  

no, its based in psychology. which marketing and advertisement exploits.

2020-07-24 19:44:55 UTC  

So here is a situation. I'm at store and I see a candy bar that I like. My impulse is immediately to buy it. I pick it up and then immediately decide I shouldn't and I drop it. Two decisions made about 1 second apart from each other.

2020-07-24 19:46:06 UTC  

How would one explain this relative to the study. Because this does happen

2020-07-24 19:49:12 UTC  

well the two decisions were based on two different lines of thinking. both of them have been considered by your mind at many points in the past. it would depend on which world view you subscribe to, for example "im going to treat myself yolo" or "too much sugar, i shouldnt."

2020-07-24 19:51:20 UTC  

I do understand that its not really speaking relative to the study structure. but in essence there's a lot more complexity that the decision is ultimately built upon.

2020-07-24 19:53:32 UTC  

there's no consideration to the effect of the subconscious on decisions you make and free will. No consideration to basal levels of brain activity, or basal levels of neurotransmitters, or possible gateway effects for amplification or neuronal signaling.

2020-07-24 19:53:54 UTC  

of*

2020-07-24 19:56:25 UTC  

So there is still a lot more research(if even currently possible) before we can truly determine if we can freely choose?

2020-07-24 19:57:11 UTC  

theres a lot more research needed to answer a lot simpler questions, before we ever have what it takes to tackle free will

2020-07-24 20:01:46 UTC  

So would you agree that siting this in an argument against a God given free will is actually futile because of its theoretical nature?

2020-07-24 20:03:47 UTC  

well, I wouldn't say its futile, but I don't think it will lead to a distinct result, it will have the benefit of it being an argumentative exercise i suppose

2020-07-24 20:05:33 UTC  

I just think that to lean on the side of biological determinism is to absolve yourself of the responsibility of making a choice. philosophically speaking I dont think its beneficial

2020-07-24 20:07:13 UTC  

What do you think of the Pangburn pleasure drive hypothesis?

2020-07-24 20:07:39 UTC  

I haven't looked into it or read

2020-07-24 20:08:10 UTC  

is there a link?

2020-07-24 20:10:15 UTC  

No but I'm sure if you ask Travis he'll gladly spell it out. I think he hypothesizes that the choice that you make will ultimately be the one that results in the most pleasure.

2020-07-24 20:11:32 UTC  

hmm, i wouldnt like to say what i think unless i know more about what he hypothesizes

2020-07-24 20:12:21 UTC  

because from what you said, one could easily make the counter-argument that people make choices that lead to miserable dead ends all the time.

2020-07-24 20:13:50 UTC  

It would seem that way at least a lot of the time

2020-07-24 20:18:50 UTC  

But I would argue that a moral foundation could counter the pleasure drive

2020-07-24 20:21:14 UTC  

again, I dont know the specifics of his hypothesis, but if its just as simple as you laid it out, then certainly that would be an argument.

2020-07-24 20:25:51 UTC  

I'm sure it is more than that but that is the basic principle as far as I can tell

2020-07-25 03:59:32 UTC  

Ther did no decision you can make that couldn’t be correctly categorized as an effect of causes that occurred previously in your life

2020-07-25 04:56:19 UTC  

But you don't think that the building up of a strong moral foundation could counter the effect of those occurrences?

2020-07-25 06:26:45 UTC  

Okay let’s go through this then

2020-07-25 06:26:58 UTC  

A strong moral foundation is just a schema for decision making

2020-07-25 06:27:33 UTC  

At even causes one to build up such a foundation? Your parents, society, natural temperament aka outside causes

2020-07-25 06:35:17 UTC  

So you don't believe an immoral person can reach a point in his/her life and choose at that point to become a moral person?

2020-07-25 06:35:29 UTC  

You could

2020-07-25 06:35:40 UTC  

But that would happen due to some shift in outside circumstance

2020-07-25 06:36:07 UTC  

One sees the error in their ways. But they see it for a reason. And they have to see it to change. Outside cause