On Apr 2, 9:52 am, 1Z <peterdjo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Mar 14, 6:08 pm, Craig Weinberg <whatsons...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Mar 14, 12:32 pm, meekerdb <meeke...@verizon.net> wrote:
> > > On 3/14/2012 7:21 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
> > > > On Mar 13, 11:15 pm, meekerdb<meeke...@verizon.net> wrote:
> > > >> On 3/13/2012 3:00 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
> > > >>>http://pss.sagepub.com/content/22/5/613.abstract
> > > >>> Abstract
> > > >>> The feeling of being in control of one s own actions is a
> > > >>> strong subjective experience. However, discoveries in psychology and
> > > >>> neuroscience challenge the validity of this experience and suggest
> > > >>> that free will is just an illusion. This raises a question: What would
> > > >>> happen if people started to disbelieve in free will? Previous research
> > > >>> has shown that low control beliefs affect performance and motivation.
> > > >>> Recently, it has been shown that undermining free-will beliefs
> > > >>> influences social behavior. In the study reported here, we
> > > >>> investigated whether undermining beliefs in free will affects brain
> > > >>> correlates of voluntary motor preparation. Our results showed that the
> > > >>> readiness potential was reduced in individuals induced to disbelieve
> > > >>> in free will. This effect was evident more than 1 s before
> > > >>> participants consciously decided to move, a finding that suggests that
> > > >>> the manipulation influenced intentional actions at preconscious
> > > >>> stages. Our findings indicate that abstract belief systems might have
> > > >>> a much more fundamental effect than previously thought.
> > > >>> Has anyone posted this yet? Hard to explain what brain correlates are
> > > >>> doing responding to an illusion...
> > > >> I think they just rediscovered hypnotism.
> > > >> Brent
> > > >> "Man can do what he wills but he cannot will what he wills."
> > > >> --- Schopenhauer
> > > > If someone is hypnotized to think that they are eating an apple when
> > > > they are really eating a raw onion, they have to be able to imagine
> > > > what it is like to eat an apple.
> > > > If someone is hypnotized to think that they have no free will, but
> > > > free will doesn't exist to begin with, why would there be any
> > > > difference to the brain?
> > > I someone says to you, "You are paralyzed. You can't lift your arm." and
> > > you hear these
> > > words and interpret them how would that happen without any changes in
> > > your brain?
> > Voluntary movement has to first exist in order for a suggestion of
> > paralysis to be meaningful.
> "Voluntary" might mean "controlled deterministically by higher brain
The higher brain centers might mean 'us'. We control our own voluntary
movements. To control is to determine. We determine our movements
because we are the phenomenological end of the process to which our
brain is the conjugate. What we want to do is reflected in the
processes of our brain, but the brain has no opinion at all about our
voluntary movements. It is our subjective experience and physiological
process both contribute to who we are and what we do. Neither aspect
makes sense without the other.
> >If all movement was involuntary in the
> > first place then there would be no significant difference between
> > passively watching yourself move and passively watching yourself not
> > move
> > If we had no free will, our belief about it should have no effect on
> > the actual ability to execute our wishes though our motor cortex.
> Non sequitur.
Why? If you program a machine to believe that it has free will, how
would such a belief have any effect on its behavior? How could it
improve its performance in any way?
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to firstname.lastname@example.org.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at