Message from @nemurin
Discord ID: 593641252982095872
man can do what he will.
but we do not will what we will.
it isn't so clean i think
willing what we will is up to the universe, and thus is constrained and defined.
That makes no sense to me. How is it “free” if the output is result of processes outside of an individuals control.
but this is not free will.
free will is the ability to do what we will.
and we can.
existence is out of your control, its a false dilemma
the question is there some sort of flexed muscle or nerve that directs your will moment to moment
Determinism makes the claim that all actions are caused by beliefs, desires, and temperaments. The problem comes when one's beliefs and desires, for example, come into conflict. Each person must choose their paradigm of thought to break this contradiction. It's in this process that people have free will.
and im partial to the theory that the subconcious makes your decisions ultimately, but it is trained by the concious language and models of the mind
some people define free will more broadly. as though we have some cosmic power to plick at the strings of fate ourselves.
as much as we may wish we did, we dont.
more mystically more like
and personally, i dont wish we did.
Is your argument that free will exists as the ability to reach new conclusions when presented with new information? If so, that can be explained by a slew of other processes @vespertilionineVigilante
well insofar as the information that can be generated and interpreted is inexhaustible it allows freedom enough
a person would need infinite time to exhaust all arrangements of thought and that no one has
and empiricism will never yield a causuality of thought only a physical description
Henlo retards
free will in the way we describe it is the ability to act without the constraint of fate or determination.
in this sense, i do not beleive free will exists.
well any thing in linear time is determined
Hmm
however, free will does not necessarily have to be this definition.
if your will is perfectly alligned with fate,
there is no issue.
well yes there is often a confusion by the ability to make choices with a will, and complete freedom from causality which is silly
and, look at that, by nature of how our universe works
it is.
funny
well everyone is fated in a sense, as there will be a time at which our activity terminates and then it could be described in exact scientific detail and no matter what we choose that is true
@☭ Anon ☭ Not really, no. I'm willing to concede most of the precepts of determinism, including the idea that one can reach new conclusions deterministically. However, I don't see a way out of the contradiction brought about when beliefs, desires, and/or temperaments conflict with each other.
our desires are shaped by biology and our exposure to external stimuli
@vespertilionineVigilante I would say that is simply a lack of self comprehension no? As the beliefs fight they are synthesized into a amalgam of sorts
if you were sufficiently clever, and could look in someones head such a conflict could be graphed and modeled at all points i think
For example, suppose I am deliberating over whether or not to eat a bowl of ice cream. I feel like having the ice cream (temperament), but I also believe that resisting it will lead to a more desirable outcome in the future (desire). How do I make this decision? My point is that comparing temperaments to desires in this case would be like comparing apples to oranges unless I adopt a paradigm of thought that states that one is categorically superior to another.
Your subconcious assigns utility values and bellies you out of indecision based off of your accumulated preferences, which are in turn based off your experiences and internal thoughts