Free Will

[NotPublished]

Seriously though, if I am going to try question all the actions I peform when I very well want to do them on the basis that they make me happy - Call it an act of free will or an act of predeterminisn, it doesn't matter cause it still makes me happy in the end.

[Doktor Howl]

Okay, everyone that thinks we don't have free will, sound off.

I don't think we have complete free will, why do you ask?

Because it causes me to doubt your bipedal status.

Even that weird old fucker, Hemmingway, knew we had free will. 

[Faust]

Okay, everyone that thinks we don't have free will, sound off.

I don't think we have complete free will, why do you ask?

Because it causes me to doubt your bipedal status.

Even that weird old fucker, Hemmingway, knew we had free will. 

I know I have had compulsions that I have managed to find the root cause of and eliminate. Theres still emotional/nervous stuff that I don't have complete control over and I would consider not having that control yet hampering the choices I can make and the things I can do, for now impeding my will.

[Doktor Howl]

Maybe some of you don't have free will.  I feel bad, if that's the case.  You'd be just a tiny cog in a huge universal machine that does nothing, if that were the case.  You might as well kill yourself...I mean, if you were allowed to.

I'm a fucking human being.  I may not always be able to control my condition or my surroundings, but I control what I do (at least when I'm well, but that's a whole different ball of wax).  I am driving the meat.  End of fucking story.

[Doktor Howl]

I know I have had compulsions that I have managed to find the root cause of and eliminate. Theres still emotional/nervous stuff that I don't have complete control over and I would consider not having that control yet hampering the choices I can make and the things I can do, for now impeding my will.

Yeah, and I spent a month believing my family was trying to kill me.  Illnesses of the brain are no different than illnesses of the body.  They may effect you, but unless you are actually mentally incapacitated full time, you have free will.

We don't have instincts, we have drives.  The difference is, we can ignore our drives.

[Faust]

I know I have had compulsions that I have managed to find the root cause of and eliminate. Theres still emotional/nervous stuff that I don't have complete control over and I would consider not having that control yet hampering the choices I can make and the things I can do, for now impeding my will.

Yeah, and I spent a month believing my family was trying to kill me.  Illnesses of the brain are no different than illnesses of the body.  They may effect you, but unless you are actually mentally incapacitated full time, you have free will.

We don't have instincts, we have drives.  The difference is, we can ignore our drives.

And if you cant ignore or overcome one of your drives then it doesn't relate to free will? I think were I think we are just discussing where we draw the line on it.

[Jasper]

Okay, everyone that thinks we don't have free will, sound off.

Short answer:   

Other short answer:  It is dysfunctional to take that stance because the entire rule of law is based on the premise that people's actions are tacit signifiers of intent.  The cliche being "Actions speak louder than words", or in this case, subjective states.

Faust,

You seem to have bundled your argument with the assumption that life is fair.

If your body, for whatever reason, has no will of its own, and kills people, "you" are responsible.  Because it doesn't matter what you intend to do, what matters is what you end up doing anyway.

Ok but the physical act of killing is separate from responsibility weightings which are subjective. And that's where will and intent generally come in.

What happens because of someones involvement, regardless of intent, may be their responsibility.  It is important to realize that, if a being (possessed of free will or no) knows that they may be held responsible for what happens because of them, they are less likely to behave poorly.

Additionally, without even looking at the truth value of free will, it should be obvious that behaving as though actions are not tied to responsibilities is a very bad idea.

Also, I now have polio.

[Telarus]

http://gizmodo.com/5496383/new-lipstick-changes-colors-when-ladies-are-horny

All your free will are belong to us.

[Brotep]

Thread reminds me of a lot of issues raised in my "philosophy of action" class.


This is unacceptable.

http://gizmodo.com/5496383/new-lipstick-changes-colors-when-ladies-are-horny

All your free will are belong to us.

Better.

[Jasper]

http://gizmodo.com/5496383/new-lipstick-changes-colors-when-ladies-are-horny

All your free will are belong to us.

This seems legit.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Okay, everyone that thinks we don't have free will, sound off.

Short answer:   

Other short answer:  It is dysfunctional to take that stance because the entire rule of law is based on the premise that people's actions are tacit signifiers of intent.  The cliche being "Actions speak louder than words", or in this case, subjective states.

Faust,

You seem to have bundled your argument with the assumption that life is fair.

If your body, for whatever reason, has no will of its own, and kills people, "you" are responsible.  Because it doesn't matter what you intend to do, what matters is what you end up doing anyway.

Ok but the physical act of killing is separate from responsibility weightings which are subjective. And that's where will and intent generally come in.

What happens because of someones involvement, regardless of intent, may be their responsibility.  It is important to realize that, if a being (possessed of free will or no) knows that they may be held responsible for what happens because of them, they are less likely to behave poorly.

Additionally, without even looking at the truth value of free will, it should be obvious that behaving as though actions are not tied to responsibilities is a very bad idea.

Also, I now have polio.

I like this post.

[Bu🤠ns]

I'd like someone who is smarter than myself address the earlier stated point regarding how both free will and determinism both imply a self separate from the environment. Because this is where the argument pretty much stops for me.

It seems to me that the idea of separation stems from the monotheistic Creator who is apart from world and that we're somehow here to be TESTED in some fashion or other.

Here we are, picking peanuts out of poop...(I'm guessing Dok shat already).

What "me" is picking "what" out of "what"?

Caddisflies' environment are an aspect of their self?

Where do we draw the line?

oh, right, our skin.

goddamn sunburn.

shit. 

[ñͤͣ̄ͦ̌̑͗͊͛͂͗ ̸̨̨̣̺̼̣̜͙͈͕̮̊̈́̈͂͛̽͊ͭ̓͆ͅé ̰̓̓́ͯ́́͞]

[East Coast Hustle]

Jesus. Even the attempts at intelligent threads are retarded now.

[NotPublished]

I don't know what Free-Will even means. I make decisions based on what I know, with the intention of remaining happy.

I've always felt the whole idea of Free-Will/Pre-determined to be stupid.

I guess making a decision that wasn't influenced by anything shows Free-Will?
But thats very black & white.