I'm liking this, Lee. The control over instinctual drives that you allude to may be the essence of free will; or "free wont".
On Aug 9, 4:07 pm, Lee Douglas <[email protected]> wrote: > Ahh I see. > > No RP, I have always maintained that free will is simply the ability > to choose. There really is no such thing as a free choice, all > choices can only be made within the bounds of the choice avaliable. > > I may choose to fly unaided by mechanics, I simply cannot so, that > choice is not avaliable to me, but I can choose which mechanical > device to use to fly, glider, plane, helicopter. > > As to emotions, you can still choose how you use your emotions. When > you are angry you can choose what to do with that anger if you > practice enough of course. > > Myself I am never engulfed by my emotions, I have practiced hard for > many years now to be the master of my emotions, to use them as I will, > and not the other way around. > > I tell you my freind, I'm the small, scruffy, poor bloke that your dad > warned you never to pick on. I have had to fight for most of my life, > and I learned a loooong time ago that if violence has to be done, it > is better done in a calm mannor, it frightens the heck out of people. > > so am I emotional, yes of course who is not, but no my emotions do not > engulf me. > > On Aug 9, 2:57 pm, RP Singh <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Lee , granted it is the I making the choice , but the question remains > > whether it is doing so freely or bound by some factors. A man is > > shouting at the top of his voice , but is he doing so bound by the > > emotion of anger or freely as you so assert ? What in your view is > > Freedom ? Do you feel emotions out of choice or do they engulf you > > automatically ? > > > On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 7:04 PM, Lee Douglas <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Okay fair doo's then RP. > > > > No sir I see no contradiction here. > > > > My stance being that freedom of choice exists, if you make a choice > > > under duress it is still you, the I, making the choice. > > > > On Aug 9, 1:30 pm, RP Singh <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> Lee , I merely answered your question to Om , maybe I shouldn't have , > > >> but doesn't it contradict what you were then asserting. Let my beliefs > > >> be for the moment and think of a reasonable answer. > > > >> On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 4:42 PM, Lee Douglas <[email protected]> > > >> wrote: > > >> > hehe but according to you RP no desicions are free. > > > >> > On Aug 9, 10:39 am, RP Singh <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> >> Decision taken under duress is not a free one , you couldn't have > > >> >> chosen otherwise given your temperament. > > > >> >> On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 2:58 PM, Lee Douglas <[email protected]> > > >> >> wrote: > > >> >> > Yes fear is a great motivater, as is love I guess. > > > >> >> > Although what I'm really talking about is decision. > > > >> >> > If I am treatend with pain or death, do this or I'll cut off your > > >> >> > toes, I may well do as I am being threatend to do, but the moment I > > >> >> > make the desicion to comply, it is I that has made that desicion. > > >> >> > In > > >> >> > effect I have choosen to do what I previously choose not to do. > > > >> >> > On Aug 8, 10:10 pm, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> > > >> >> > wrote: > > >> >> >> ...in other words Lee...fear of personal or other torture and/or > > >> >> >> death. > > > >> >> >> On Aug 8, 4:12 am, Lee Douglas <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> >> >> > Ahh then I see. I do not belive that choice and free will are > > >> >> >> > seperate things at all. > > > >> >> >> > Let us look at the words. > > > >> >> >> > Free will. > > > >> >> >> > The ability to chose in acordance with your will. > > > >> >> >> > On Aug 8, 11:47 am, rigsy03 <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> >> >> > > Haven't you noticed trying to get from A to B and winding up > > >> >> >> > > at C? I > > >> >> >> > > have. So far I have been going over some stuff by Sophocles. > > >> >> >> > > Epictetus, Zola, Marx&Engels, Huxley and Skinner > > >> >> >> > > (Determinists) but > > >> >> >> > > have to read Dostoyevsky and Hocking (Free Will). I think > > >> >> >> > > there is a > > >> >> >> > > difference between choice and free will. I make choices all > > >> >> >> > > the time > > >> >> >> > > but am not sure my will is really free. > > > >> >> >> > > On Aug 8, 5:07 am, Lee Douglas <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> >> >> > > > Ohh I disagree with this entirley Rigsy. > > > >> >> >> > > > At the time the Minds says take action B, then we have made > > >> >> >> > > > a choice. > > >> >> >> > > > I question the ability of things to force a desicion from us > > >> >> >> > > > and I'l > > >> >> >> > > > ask once again is it possible for somebody to force anybody > > >> >> >> > > > into > > >> >> >> > > > makeing a choice that they do not want to? > > > >> >> >> > > > On Aug 6, 2:22 pm, rigsy03 <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> >> >> > > > > I disagree that we possess or always have free will at our > > >> >> >> > > > > disposal- > > >> >> >> > > > > even the civil laws make distinctions. We are forced onto > > >> >> >> > > > > many paths > > >> >> >> > > > > and decisions- softly or harshly. > > > >> >> >> > > > > On Aug 5, 2:04 pm, Allan Heretic <[email protected]> > > >> >> >> > > > > wrote: > > > >> >> >> > > > > > You lays have free will no matter how you seeing it > > >> >> >> > > > > > created. It is the consequences of those choices that > > >> >> >> > > > > > can be a bitch, > > >> >> >> > > > > > Allan > > > >> >> >> > > > > > On 4 aug. 2011, at 17:48, paradox > > >> >> >> > > > > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> >> >> > > > > > > There are a number of approaches to this question, Jo; > > >> >> >> > > > > > > but essentially > > >> >> >> > > > > > > and in summary (and i do a great injustice to a very > > >> >> >> > > > > > > powerful > > >> >> >> > > > > > > philosophical school), the deterministic tradition > > >> >> >> > > > > > > suggests that since > > >> >> >> > > > > > > we''re fundamentally bounded chemical systems immersed > > >> >> >> > > > > > > in a "sea" of > > >> >> >> > > > > > > ever more elaborate chemical processes, regulated by > > >> >> >> > > > > > > immutable > > >> >> >> > > > > > > (replicable and predictive) physical laws, and nothing > > >> >> >> > > > > > > else (which > > >> >> >> > > > > > > takes you back to the mind/brain question), our > > >> >> >> > > > > > > actions are no more > > >> >> >> > > > > > > than expressions of these chemical processes, > > >> >> >> > > > > > > constrained at an > > >> >> >> > > > > > > aggregate level by universal physical laws. When we > > >> >> >> > > > > > > think we make > > >> >> >> > > > > > > decisions based on choice, it is the mind "stroking" > > >> >> >> > > > > > > itself since, in > > >> >> >> > > > > > > terms of "proximate" action, we know that our > > >> >> >> > > > > > > decisions are preceeded > > >> >> >> > > > > > > in time by a neuro-electrcal "footprint" (interesting > > >> >> >> > > > > > > work by Benjamin > > >> >> >> > > > > > > Libet, presented in his book "Mind Time"); and in > > >> >> >> > > > > > > terms of more > > >> >> >> > > > > > > deliberative action, we are pretty certain to make the > > >> >> >> > > > > > > same decisions > > >> >> >> > > > > > > over and over again given the same set of variables, > > >> >> >> > > > > > > since our > > >> >> >> > > > > > > cognition is hard wired, and its operations are > > >> >> >> > > > > > > governed by the self > > >> >> >> > > > > > > same chemical processes and physical laws. Hence the > > >> >> >> > > > > > > question: do we > > >> >> >> > > > > > > have free will? and if we do, how much free will do we > > >> >> >> > > > > > > have? > > > >> >> >> > > > > > > On Aug 2, 7:44 pm, Jo <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> >> >> > > > > > >> I don't understand how some can say we don't have > > >> >> >> > > > > > >> free will. You can > > >> >> >> > > > > > >> choose to do anything you want at any given time. How > > >> >> >> > > > > > >> is that not free > > >> >> >> > > > > > >> will? > > > >> >> >> > > > > > >> On Aug 2, 12:51 pm, archytas <[email protected]> > > >> >> >> > > > > > >> wrote: > > > >> >> >> > > > > > >>> "We have access to a technology that would have > > >> >> >> > > > > > >>> looked like sorcery in > > >> >> >> > > > > > >>> Descartes's day: the ability to peer inside > > >> >> >> > > > > > >>> someone's head and read > > >> >> >> > > > > > >>> their thoughts. Unfortunately, that doesn't take us > > >> >> >> > > > > > >>> any nearer to > > >> >> >> > > > > > >>> knowing whether they are sentient. "Even if you > > >> >> >> > > > > > >>> measure brainwaves, > > >> >> >> > > > > > >>> you can never know exactly what experience they > > >> >> >> > > > > > >>> represent," says > > >> >> >> > > > > > >>> psychologist Bruce Hood at the University of > > >> >> >> > > > > > >>> Bristol, UK. If > > >> >> >> > > > > > >>> anything, brain scanning has undermined Descartes's > > >> >> >> > > > > > >>> maxim. You, too, > > >> >> >> > > > > > >>> might be a zombie. "I happen to be one myself," says > > >> >> >> > > > > > >>> Stanford > > >> >> >> > > > > > >>> University philosopher Paul Skokowski. "And so, even > > >> >> >> > > > > > >>> if you don't > > >> >> >> > > > > > >>> realise it, are you." Skokowski's assertion is based > > >> >> >> > > > > > >>> on the belief, > > >> >> >> > > > > > >>> particularly common among neuroscientists who study > > >> >> >> > > > > > >>> brain scans, that > > >> >> >> > > > > > >>> we do not have free will. There is no ghost in the > > >> >> >> > > > > > >>> machine; our > > >> >> >> > > > > > >>> actions are driven by brain states that lie entirely > > >> >> >> > > > > > >>> beyond our > > >> >> >> > > > > > >>> control. "I think, therefore I am" might be an > > >> >> >> > > > > > >>> illusion. > > >> >> >> > > > > > >>> So, it may well be that you live in a computer > > >> >> >> > > > > > >>> simulation in which you > > >> >> >> > > > > > >>> are the only self-aware creature. I could well be a > > >> >> >> > > > > > >>> zombie and so > > >> >> >> > > > > > >>> could you. Have an interesting day." (from a recent > > >> >> >> > > > > > >>> New Scientist) > > > >> >> >> > > > > > >>> We range over debates in free will and what it is to > > >> >> >> > > > > > >>> be human. So far > > >> >> >> > > > > > >>> we haven't established free will or even that we are > > >> >> >> > > > > > >>> not merely > > >> >> >> > > > > > >>> avatars in 'something else's game'. > > > >> >> >> > > > > > >>> I wonder whether there are advantages in considering > > >> >> >> > > > > > >>> ourselves as > > >> >> >> > > > > > >>> creatures limited by programming and also capable of > > >> >> >> > > > > > >>> it?- Hide quoted text - > > > >> >> >> > > > > > >> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > >> >> >> > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > >> >> >> > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > >> >> >> > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > >> >> >> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > >> >> >> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > >> >> >> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > >> >> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > >> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -
