Does free will exist? (the ability to choose differently)

Does free will exist?
(the ability to choose differently)

POSIWID: The Purpose Of A System Is What It Does Shirt $21.68

It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14

POSIWID: The Purpose Of A System Is What It Does Shirt $21.68

  1. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Define ability

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Free will in the commonly understood sense.

      Define "?"

      !

      When an entity controls you, you still willingly chose to submit to their control.

      So you believe free will exists? I don't mean free will in a Hobbesian way.

      Free will does exist, specifically, agent cause libertarian free will(where you have the ability to choose differently).
      But to clarify, No one (at least not free will proponents) is disputing that one's range of actions can be/are gamified by their available context, and environment. What the debate over the nature of will relates to is the nature of information, and narrative. (in other words, 'does one have control over how one contextualizes their reality?' is the actual dispute)
      So, the claim that the proponents of 'Determinism' would have to prove is that information has context inherent to it, and this has been shown to be not true; given the nature of information as expanded upon in Wittgenstein's work in particular, 'intrinsic values' can't exist in the environment/information because the construction of a narrative is internally required for information to be internalized, which would imply that meaning is derived from an internal, abstract process - because there would be no 'intrinsic values' one could argue contextualizes this process, as this would cause any reasoning which attempts to make such a case to become a tautology, Agency as a concept emerges to describe the afore mentioned 'abstract' process.

      >range of actions can be gamified by their available context and environemnt
      Does that mean the available context or the environment has some sort of agency? It is acting upon "range of actions."
      It sound like even with the rest of what you wrote, you're claiming people have free will in an agent cause libertarian sense.
      I feel like I'm missing some background here. Can you give me an example of what you mean?

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        You can choose different options but those options are going to be easier or harder depending on the information you have. But also that what counts as an option depends on how you interpret information. Because information doesn't have "intrinsic context" to it. So it will necessarily depend on what narrative of reality you self-construct.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          So basically if I've never heard of such a thing as "accountant" then I can never choose to be an accountant? But if I have heard of that job then I can choose it?

          I'm not even sure we can self-construct a narrative. I am starting to believe that we don't have any free will at all because we can't will what we will.

          Yes, but only if God exists.

          how so? If you're not a molinist and are a calvinist then it's totally possible for God not to exist if there is no free will.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            I'm not a molinist nor a calvinist. We have free will because we are given rational souls by God capable of free will. This does not exist in an atheistic worldview.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            I'm a theist too, but I'm not sure how you go through life feeling like you experience free will.
            When I type this response it doesn't even feel like I'm willing it. It just happens. I of course can put myself into your frame of mind, but I don't get it.

            https://i.imgur.com/KKnLH1v.jpeg

            Do you want it to?

            Yes. I can't help it.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Kind of a restatement but the proponents of Determinism would have to prove that information has inherent context, and this has been shown to be not true; given the nature of information as expanded upon in Wittgenstein's work in particular, "intrinsic context" can't exist in the environment/information because the construction of a narrative is internally required for information to be internalized, which would imply that meaning is derived from an internal, abstract process because there would be no "intrinsic context" one could argue contextualizes this process, as this would cause any reasoning which attempts to make such a case to become a tautology. Agency as a concept emerges to describe the afore mentioned abstract process.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Okay. If humans and the human experience lacks agency-causal free will, then human beings are hardly different (please don't do the same context thing with "different," you know what I mean) from the sun, or rocks, or the ocean. If that's the case then maybe the solar system could be having the "experience" of that abstract internal process moving forward in time too.
            Forgive me, but I'm failing to see the connection to free will here (as agency in the common sense). You're putting forth a cool thought. You're just telling me in a different way what you believe? I need more premises; all I see are the last few premises leading to your plausible conclusion.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            What I'm saying is that information and meaning are distinct phenomena. And being a Determinist requires you to believe information has intrinsic meaning. If information has intrinsic meaning then the external pressures people experience throughout there life would be internalized the same way. Thus producing repeatable behavior. Like how physical objects produce repeatable behavior after external pressures are added to it. But information and meaning are distinct phenomena. Intrinsic meaning (i.e. the idea that information has only one form of meaning) can't exist in the environment/information because the construction of a narrative is internally required for information to be internalized. Which would imply that meaning is derived from an internal abstract process because there would be no intrinsic meaning one could argue contextualizes this process. If you want to say that the abstract process is determined somehow through like hidden variables then fine. But I would just take Ockham's razor with this one. And you would need some evidence for this hidden variable.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Thanks. I understand this better now.
            I would say that internal process cannot be willed. It is determined. Maybe there is some randomness involved because of quantum phenomena, but this is not at all controllable. Not to be snide about it, but I think Ockham's razor favors my argument. You cannot will what you will. You cannot will to engage in that internal abstract process of contextualizing information. The fact that the contextualization occurs is what gives us "conscience" in my opinion. But ultimately everything is just as determined for us as for a crab without the ability to contextualize information like we do. Honestly the Schopenhauer argument is what did it for me. I readily experience that my wills just enter my brain without any control. Like I'm a conduit for a muse.

  2. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Define "?"

  3. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    When an entity controls you, you still willingly chose to submit to their control.

  4. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Free will does exist, specifically, agent cause libertarian free will(where you have the ability to choose differently).
    But to clarify, No one (at least not free will proponents) is disputing that one's range of actions can be/are gamified by their available context, and environment. What the debate over the nature of will relates to is the nature of information, and narrative. (in other words, 'does one have control over how one contextualizes their reality?' is the actual dispute)
    So, the claim that the proponents of 'Determinism' would have to prove is that information has context inherent to it, and this has been shown to be not true; given the nature of information as expanded upon in Wittgenstein's work in particular, 'intrinsic values' can't exist in the environment/information because the construction of a narrative is internally required for information to be internalized, which would imply that meaning is derived from an internal, abstract process - because there would be no 'intrinsic values' one could argue contextualizes this process, as this would cause any reasoning which attempts to make such a case to become a tautology, Agency as a concept emerges to describe the afore mentioned 'abstract' process.

  5. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >yahwejak gave us free will, but if we use it in any way he doesn't like he'll send us to hell

  6. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Yes, but only if God exists.

  7. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Do you want it to?

  8. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    ?si=ChysJ9OJwbrLpiUK

    ?si=Pqs2HWaIdHt25GJw

  9. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Determinism is a israeli construct

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *