The very fact that anyone thinks anything is almost impossible to reconcile with a fully deterministic view.
On the other hand, @SamHarrisOrg's perspective robs us if free will without physical determinism. If some version of the question is worth sleeplessness, that's the one.https://twitter.com/seanonolennon/status/971223011087990784 …
-
Show this thread
-
To be clear: worrying about determinsm comes very close to proving the universe is not deterministic. That does not, however, prove one has meaningful free will.
62 replies 7 retweets 122 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @BretWeinstein
That is a misunderstanding. The universe seems reversible, so it is almost certainly deterministic, but that is unrelated to free will. Free will is the ability to act on what one believes to be right (as opposed to act on compulsion). Randomness would destroy intentionality.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Plinz @BretWeinstein
So it follows that if randomness exists at the heart of our biological brain function that free will is not possible (ie I cannot be intentional), correct?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @matbalez @BretWeinstein
Our brain is a probabilistic system, which means that it is deterministic with an offset of randomness. By definition, only the deterministic part can be determined by your intentions.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Plinz @BretWeinstein
Right. And so does this lead you to conclude that we have some, but not completely, free will? And if so in what proportion is it free? Or put differently, how large is the role of random offset?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
The randomness is irrelevant because we are not responsible for it; it manifests as confusion, tremors and tics. We must be concerned about the deterministic part that is not accountable to our purposes. The opposite of free will is compulsion.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.