Jericho's Philosophy Corner

[Redhorse]

If someone knows your choices before you actually make them, are you still actually making a choice, or are you running on a pre-installed program?

We, the ones making the choices, are not omniscient (guessing that's what you meant earlier, not omnipotent). Therefore, it's still free will.
Also, another opinion some have is that God knows everything you may possibly choose to do, and what path those choices/actions would take you down. But he doesn't know what you will ultimately choose, because he gave the gift of free will, and that is your decision alone.

edit: Basically, he knows all the possible outcomes, but not what your actual choice will be. If so, though, I'm certain he could guess. Perhaps he chooses not to~

[Prinapocalypse]

@Xeras - You're still making a choice in my opinion.

You could still choose to do two completely different things, which would've taken your life in very different directions. But in the end you still chose one over the other. Anyone seeing which path you will take isn't forcing you to either decision. Thus it's still a choice.

[JerichoDeath]

We, the ones making the choices, are not omniscient (guessing that's what you meant earlier, not omnipotent). Therefore, it's still free will.
Also, another opinion some have is that God knows everything you may possibly choose to do, and what path those choices/actions would take you down. But he doesn't know what you will ultimately choose, because he gave the gift of free will, and that is your decision alone.

edit: Basically, he knows all the possible outcomes, but not what your actual choice will be. If so, though, I'm certain he could guess. Perhaps he chooses not to~

+2 points: I haven't heard this one before.

I have a nice little information tidbit to throw out, but before I do, I've got to address this:

Free will is the ability to make voluntary decisions and choices without interference from fate.

While I like the bit about making voluntary decisions, I personally wouldn't include an indirect affirmation of fate as a related issue to religion. The ideal of Free-Will is independent of Religion as it exists as an idea in nearly every society, while the religious views of those societies change dependent on region.

Anywho, before I engage Devil's Advocate mode, I have a question for Redhorse-san:
If God is All-Knowing, therefore always observing us all, does this action fall under the Observer Effect, in your opinion, in so far as the act of observing having an effect on the ones being observed?

[Xeras]

Jericho.

I don't really understand what you are asking, but this is potentially what I got from it.

Do you think people act differently, since they fear that 'God' is watching them?

[Redhorse]

+2 points: I haven't heard this one before.

I have a nice little information tidbit to throw out, but before I do, I've got to address this:

Free will is the ability to make voluntary decisions and choices without interference from fate.

While I like the bit about making voluntary decisions, I personally wouldn't include an indirect affirmation of fate as a related issue to religion. The ideal of Free-Will is independent of Religion as it exists as an idea in nearly every society, while the religious views of those societies change dependent on region.

Anywho, before I engage Devil's Advocate mode, I have a question for Redhorse-san:
If God is All-Knowing, therefore always observing us all, does this action fall under the Observer Effect, in your opinion, in so far as the act of observing having an effect on the ones being observed?

Whoooo~! 2 points!!! Also, I had enough additional room in my sig to put JerichoDeath now, so you might like that~

There, I was simply giving a standard dictionary definition of free will to be silly/ start off the conversation~
Nothing for me to affirm, I'm afraid, indirectly or otherwise. So it's all good, dude.

Now for the question. Nothing much to say except, of course it does. It's EVERYWHERE. So many rights and rules in the world are based upon values that only matter because there are sooooooo very many god-fearing people. If we didn't think someone was watching us and silently judging, there'd be a lot less guilt and remorse in the world, I should think (Not saying there would be none, because of course people base the things they do off of empathy for fellow beings, etc. as well obviously). It would be so much easier for people to be truer to their basic nature, or perhaps, less true to themselves (lying goes both ways and all that shiz). The action of observing us has quite a large effect, basically. Mabye because it's on such a large scale (everyone everywhere, every minute of every day).

Oh, I love Devil's Advocate. Bring it, bratja.

[JerichoDeath]

Okay. That's enough break time.
-

I'm gonna put aside the issue of religion for now; it's a bit too hot to handle with these kid gloves that I'm wearing. *puts issue aside*
-

Now, it seems that we've essentially answered the question of what Free-Will is, and then we've moved to the next logical step: Does Free Will really exist?

I'm assuming, based on the reactions so far, that everyone is with the Pro-Free Will camp, like me. I also have the feeling that the majority of us here would be Compatibilists. So, in that spirit, I'll advocate the Incompatibilist view of Casual Determinism.
In other words: Cause and Effect

I'll use the example of the "causal chain" to explain. Any action, or indeed any situation, is caused by an event (or events more likely) that led up to that effect. Because the past is what it is, out of our control, what happens now, or in the future, has been determined already. Even a person's thoughts are affected by this chain; The events in their past that led up to this point have caused whatever actions that they are inclined to take.
All of that led to the idea that if one were to know everything in the past and present (but not the future), they could still accurately predict the future down to very small details. (Here, I'm mostly referring to human action, and not anything that would be significantly effected by the processes of Thermodynamics... besides, this is Philosophy, not pure science~)

[Ubiquitor]

No one action has a single well-defined effect. Rather, outcomes derive from a set of effects with varying likelihoods. In this vein of thought, regarding an individual's thought process aspect of the chain, the possible effects are guided by the random variable whose distribution is strongly influenced by one's own Free Will (hoo hoo ~).

I am sure that people do in fact attempt to view the world in terms of Systems, utilizing notions of controllability and observability, but such a model would be rather difficult to devise. I am however reminded of Foundation.

[Nazou]

Yes, choices...

[JerichoDeath]

I didn't mean to imply that a cause has only one effect, or by the same token, an effect having only one cause. No, the chain refers to the chronological order of events, regardless of how many there are. In any case, it seems that you've taken a Compatibilist view on the idea of Free Will vs Determinism: meaning that they are capable of coexistence.

The idea of Incompatibilism shows that these two concepts are inherently opposite from each other, or mutually exclusive.
Here's an example:
Someone decides to take the left path in a fork in the road to get to their destination. They know that either path will take them to their destination. So, why did they choose the left path instead of the right? Well, the answer lays somewhere (or everywhere) in their past. Events in that person's past played out in such a way to make them into a person who would choose to go in that direction. Had events played out differently, the result of the "decision" might have been different, but they didn't and it wasn't. Thus, the choice was already determined ahead of time, by the events that happened in the past, and the Free Will that the person experienced was only an illusion of their own mind.

[Prinapocalypse]

I would say that decisions like the one in that scenario aren't influenced by past events much at all. But lets pretend for a moment that some event in this person's past made them think one path was better than the other, they still have the choice of either path. There's nothing stopping them from taking the other path instead (even though they may think it's the worse choice).

Events can effect decisions, but they don't force you into those decisions. So Free Will remains even when the choices are stacked against you.

[Ubiquitor]

Someone decides to take the left path in a fork in the road to get to their destination. They know that either path will take them to their destination. So, why did they choose the left path instead of the right? Well, the answer lays somewhere (or everywhere) in their past. Events in that person's past played out in such a way to make them into a person who would choose to go in that direction. Had events played out differently, the result of the "decision" might have been different, but they didn't and it wasn't. Thus, the choice was already determined ahead of time, by the events that happened in the past, and the Free Will that the person experienced was only an illusion of their own mind.

As an Engineer, I certainly find the notion of reducing a person to the form of a very complex causal system to be rather amusing, and on some level such an approximation of behavior could be accurate; however, approximations are still approximations. The variance from the expected value of any such prediction model will result from the influence of Free Will (response level: meh).

[JerichoDeath]

I would say that decisions like the one in that scenario aren't influenced by past events much at all. But lets pretend for a moment that some event in this person's past made them think one path was better than the other, they still have the choice of either path. There's nothing stopping them from taking the other path instead (even though they may think it's the worse choice).

Events can effect decisions, but they don't force you into those decisions. So Free Will remains even when the choices are stacked against you.

It isn't that the past is forcing into a decision, but rather, your past has already shaped your "decision" ahead of time. Even those thoughts that you may be having ("this might not be the best idea, but-") only came about due to the events in your past that have shaped you into the person that you are now.
(you being a general term here)

Whether or not you're consciously aware of it, all of the instinctive urges, past experiences, and current circumstances are controlling your ultimate reaction to the situation at hand. Thus, even the illusion of decision making and Free Will were simply fabrications that your conscious mind developed after being taught by people in the past that you can make your own decisions.

One could go far enough to say that the Idea of Free Will is simply a moral excuse for punishing criminals who break the law since they "choose" to act as they did. Punishing, in this case, being a mere way to seek gratification for hurt feelings and such.

(I don't mean to sound angry or anything. I simply have a tendency to ramble a little when I talk about things that I'm interested in.)

Someone decides to take the left path in a fork in the road to get to their destination. They know that either path will take them to their destination. So, why did they choose the left path instead of the right? Well, the answer lays somewhere (or everywhere) in their past. Events in that person's past played out in such a way to make them into a person who would choose to go in that direction. Had events played out differently, the result of the "decision" might have been different, but they didn't and it wasn't. Thus, the choice was already determined ahead of time, by the events that happened in the past, and the Free Will that the person experienced was only an illusion of their own mind.

As an Engineer, I certainly find the notion of reducing a person to the form of a very complex causal system to be rather amusing, and on some level such an approximation of behavior could be accurate; however, approximations are still approximations. The variance from the expected value of any such prediction model will result from the influence of Free Will (response level: meh).

Assuming, of course, that any such variance would be generated, and further assuming that the variance isn't generated from a lack of complete information with which to test. Still, you couldn't go back into the past to test the reaction again either.
Remember, this is philosophy. We ask a question not to find the answer, but to widen our own minds through intelligent discourse.

[Ubiquitor]

Assuming, of course, that any such variance would be generated, and further assuming that the variance isn't generated from a lack of complete information with which to test. Still, you couldn't go back into the past to test the reaction again either.

Assumptions are made on all accounts. One potentially flawed assumption is that with the possession of all information, variance in outcome no longer becomes a factor due to "accounting for its cause" (though in truth it may be reduced to minimal significance).

[Prinapocalypse]

It isn't that the past is forcing into a decision, but rather, your past has already shaped your "decision" ahead of time. Even those thoughts that you may be having ("this might not be the best idea, but-") only came about due to the events in your past that have shaped you into the person that you are now.
(you being a general term here)

Whether or not you're consciously aware of it, all of the instinctive urges, past experiences, and current circumstances are controlling your ultimate reaction to the situation at hand. Thus, even the illusion of decision making and Free Will were simply fabrications that your conscious mind developed after being taught by people in the past that you can make your own decisions.

One could go far enough to say that the Idea of Free Will is simply a moral excuse for punishing criminals who break the law since they "choose" to act as they did. Punishing, in this case, being a mere way to seek gratification for hurt feelings and such.

(I don't mean to sound angry or anything. I simply have a tendency to ramble a little when I talk about things that I'm interested in.)

An interesting theory but the thought that past events dictate future events to such a degree, is simply not something I feel to be true. Though of course there's really no way to disprove such a theory either, that I can think of.

There are cases where people let the past dictate their futures, but that is a subconscious decision with them being aware of that choice, in my opinion.

(And no worries I didn't think of your reply as sounding angry anyway. I tend to ramble on about stuff too )

[Redhorse]

@Procalypse: I don't think Jericho is merely talking about conscious decisions. He's also saying that past events determine what state of mind you have too. Past events influence your choices by making you the person you are, etc.


I agree with Ubiquitor's position.