There are two completely incompatible models of free will and thus, the term is overloaded and subject to misinterpretation.
1. "free will" in the sense of a necessary description of the way in which a particular self-identified subject choses an action without coercion. In that sense, one can say "I freely chose to turn right at the intersection" or "I chose to eat this burger." The English language requires such a usage because we need a way to describe actions that exist without coercion. 2. "free will" in the sense that some elements of our universe may be non-deterministic and in which the idea of the "self" (and particularly, the idea of our own self) may have an ability to change some outcomes based on some concept of agency. This is an extremely illusive concept because it is basically unprovable by definition. For example, imagine a construct of 10,000 neurons in which you know exactly what each neuron does, precisely how it receives its stimulus and its exact programming. You can then say "I know how this construct works and reliably discern what inputs will lead to what outputs." However, it is *impossible* to prove that there is not another as of yet invisible or unmeasurable mechanism within the construct that can alter or override the standard system of inputs and outputs. This is an extremely hairy problem that extends into paranomal phenomena, UFOlogy, religion, etc. in that one cannot can not, by stating any system of laws or deterministic systems, rule out the possibility of some override function or, for that matter, exceptions where one law simply ceases to function. The concept of "God" bridges over both of these concepts and makes it more complex, because it supposes an external agency that may even have a motive in keeping up trapped inside some presumably maximally deterministic system, or tricking us into thinking that we have agency when we do not, or for that matter, some tricky scenario where some master planners battle for agency. George R. R. Martin's Sandkings is remarkably like 1st Enoch in this regard. I personally suspect agency is non-binary and instead has multiple scalar elements a genetic override function and is rather complex than anyone has modeled to date. On Sun, 14 Aug 2022 at 14:47, Stathis Papaioannou <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Sun, 14 Aug 2022 at 22:07, John Clark <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> >> On Sun, Aug 14, 2022 at 7:39 AM Stathis Papaioannou <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> >> Everybody is always subjected to force, sometimes, as when an >>>> electromagnetic force enters your eye and prevents you from walking into a >>>> brick wall it's a good thing because you don't want to walk into a brick >>>> wall, and sometimes, such as when the gravitational force prevents you >>>> from jumping over a mountain, it's a bad thing because you want to >>>> jump over that mountain. >>>> >>> >>> >>> *>It's different if you say "I was forced by someone holding a gun to my >>> head" or "I was forced by the laws of physics".* >>> >> >> If it could be proven that I murdered because somebody put a gun to my >> head that would be a legitimate mitigating circumstance because it would be >> unlikely that in the future somebody would hold a gun to my head again and >> thus I would be unlikely to murder again. But if I did it because of the >> law of electromagnetism that would not be a mitigating circumstance because >> I am likely to encounter electromagnetism again and thus likely to murder >> again. >> > > There would be no point in punishing you if you murdered because someone > held a gun to your head, because it wouldn’t change your future behaviour > or the behaviour of others on a similar situation. On the other hand, > punishing someone who kills in order to steal the victim’s money may deter > him and others like him from doing it again, even though his brain was just > following the laws of physics. > > >>> *> there is no point in punishing a sleepwalker who kills someone >>> because it won't deter other sleepwalkers from doing the same thing.* >>> >> >> But a few amps flowing through his body for just a few seconds would >> improve him immeasurably and prevent the sleepwalker from ever murdering >> again. And because he is likely to sleep again, he would be an extremely >> dangerous man that needs to be dealt with. Imprisonment won't solve the >> problem, in 2019 in the USA 143 prisoners were murdered by other prisoners >> who had already been convicted of murder, and the man who murdered Martin >> Luther King was an escaped prisoner. >> > > The idea of acting of your own free will only applies to punishment as > deterrent. You have to have control over your behaviour and to understand > what you are doing in order for that to work, and that doesn’t apply to > sleepwalkers. > >> -- > Stathis Papaioannou > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Everything List" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAH%3D2ypUK_kSXzCNdL4G%2BzTRZ5CNoY77CFMOYB%2BXUdx%3D%2Br_cpNw%40mail.gmail.com > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAH%3D2ypUK_kSXzCNdL4G%2BzTRZ5CNoY77CFMOYB%2BXUdx%3D%2Br_cpNw%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAHWbU%3Da7Y8aseBwLPcueg7wS2LRrkyOv%3DZS9Pcq8w1RXtxiVfA%40mail.gmail.com.
