Hello ladies and gentlemans, this maybe seem a little bit strange for some people but i ask you to give me at least 1 topic to think about, which will have result and not like uhm if i eat this candy will it make me fatter or not :D
How about this...
Do you have free will?
How do you know you really do, rather than just it feeling like you do?
If you have free will, does that mean that before you made a choice, any of the options could have happened?
If any of the things could have happened, what caused you to choose one or the other?
If you were caused by something to make the choice, wasn't it that thing which determined the outcome, not you?
If you were not caused by something to make the choice, doesn't that mean it happened for no reason?
Earlier i have searched about logical thinking and so on so basiclly many physocologists agreed that in reallity all choices we make is made by emotions and other factors behind it so does that mean that i actually have no free will because all of my actions are made because unconcious factors but does the fact that this factor is being unconcoius takes my free will away but wasnt it all
My choice to follow this hidden factor and make decision, the fact that outer factor made me do it, but at same time i am the one who chooses to follow this makes this free will not existable ? And now this actually brought me to question what is free will :D i will keep thinking stillwater thanks for an amazing push lets say so i would like to hear your opinion but not like which will answer my question but will be more likely a little hint because i am stuck : D
But to say that my emotions take my free will that means the emotion arent actually mine , its me who creates this emotions and its me who allows them to have an effect on my action sometimes consciously sometimes unconsiosuly i dont think that the fact something happens without me realising it at concoius level doesnt mean that i am not responsible for that action so if we say we are the creators and its all our mind then actually if have free will but from this statement that everthing is my mind its me who takes my own free will
I need opinions :D correct me very strictly if i am wrong.
I am not certain that free will actually exists. A rat within a maze has free will to explore the maze, but their frame of reference precludes the concept of free will beyond the maze. I suppose free will can only exist within the subset of the system that forms your reality. That subset could be something that is forced upon you, such as the common understanding of the reality system we share now, or a construction of your own such as radical ideology that you cannot look beyond.
You could argue that even with good knowledge of the system we are in that we still lack free will as every decision is simply additive to our previous experiences. Does a person that beats their child really choose that reality, or is it a subset created for them by society and their own parenting?
A philosophical question to really muddy this water, is an experience objectively more or less valid with free will? You can't really say that the life of someone with free will was worth more than the life of a slave. All experiences are different but equal?
If you know the popular Sims 1-2-3-4 simulation PC game, you can see that you are the "god" like person who controls almost everything and your character is doing your commands (you), but he/she can do whatever wants if you don't give commands lol. Ok maybe not so accurate model, but I think this could be a good one.
I'm not saying that we live any reality like this but I think it could give some clues :D In a much more complex way.
I think the concept of free will needs to be looked at from a higher perspective. I tend to believe that our spirits create certain set of circumstances and events through which the character they wish to experience need to go through during its life span in certain realities. By creating obstacles, the free will of the personality may be limited. For example, there was a study done on prisoners. Their brains were scanned and examined and the scientists had found that most of them has much smaller amygdala, which is linked to the feeling of empathy and decision making. So, being born with underdeveloped brain, will cause certain behavior, which is linked to this disability. Does that mean the spirit itself thinks this way. I don't think so, but it needed to experience these limitations and create a character that will behave this way. Everything is for the purpose of experiencing different scenarios and learning from the combination of all possibilities. So, bottom line, I think free will exists in a higher level, but it is limited within the different personalities.
Quotei will keep thinking stillwater thanks for an amazing push lets say so i would like to hear your opinion but not like which will answer my question but will be more likely a little hint because i am stuck : D
It is the kind of question you can progress on, in the sense that you know more than you did when you started, but possibly not fully settle. And that is all I can offer... a few tugs further down the rabbit hole.
Perhaps "god" is asking them self if they actually have free will, or just think they do.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6dqNiSGo9yU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uIXGxRZk3G4
These two presentations can help bring you deeper into the question if you are new to the academics of it.
There is this idea of "free won't" described in the first presentation (and touched on in the second):
Basically it goes like this:
When humans act quickly, and even with conscious intent, often the action will happen even before the awareness that there is a choice to be made even happens for the person. This is tested with a reflex experiment described in that presentation. So already, we have fairly strong evidence that our bodies are employing our limbs to do things that we didn't consciously choose for them to do.
A model of the relationship of the conscious mind to our actions is theorized by some neurologists that says our unconscious is making most of our decisions for us, and then sending its decisions to the conscious mind later, in some cases. The conscious mind is given time to "veto" the choice the rest of the brain made, and choose not to do the thing. So in effect our minds are choosing which of our actions not to do, instead of taking an actual positive initiative. This mainly applies to things which happen in the space of seconds; more involved decisions, like who to date, or when to walk to the fridge, seem like they may have larger conscious components.
So that is a good introduction to the kind of issues there are, taking the situation from a purely physical vantage.
Further along, we have to define what we actually mean by free will.
1) Does it mean that our conscious mind is making decisions based on information it receives?
2) Does it mean that we could have made other choices to the ones we made? (this has consequences on what the metaphysical structure of the universe is like)
3) Does it mean that we humans have or are some sort of immaterial being separate from what appears to be a deterministic universe? (obvious strong metaphysical consequences)
Most people seem to think that the question of free will necessitates more than 1, up to 2, but not necessarily 3; but it is important to know which question you are actually asking too.
If the universe is a self-contained materialist system (which I don't think it is), the question of free will is probably easily answered. Questions of spooky quantum events aside, since there is no obvious answer for how a materialist consciousness would actively cause a particle to take one possible quantum outcome over another (and everything that consciousness would do would have predictable material causes as well), it really seems like there is no place for it in such a world.
So let's say that we accept either monism of mind, or dualism (meaning respectively that only mind exists, or that mind and matter exist separately). We are basically in the dark. If we are describing a physical system, we can explain why things happen, using macro physics, chemistry, and micro physics. If we are talking about an immaterial being, there are no cogs turning we can see! We can't point at atoms to explain things. Does the immaterial being have any kind of structure? If it does, what describes the relationship its parts have between one another? If there are laws governing these parts, then we have a physics of the immaterial! Which is an absurdity... since a non-physical thing by its very definition doesn't have physics.
If, true to form, the immaterial beings have no parts which operate on one another according to laws... then it is truly anyone's guess, since there is almost no way to study it or understand its workings!