One thing is for sure though, if our world is deterministic, then whatever freewill is, we haven't got it.
I don't think so. I think that it does depend on what freewill is.
You can think of freewill as "no one can predict what I'm going to decide to do!" In this sense, I would agree with you. However, in this sense, I don't even want freewill anyway. There's lots of things I do that I would be very upset if other people could not predict my actions. Like loving my wife tomorrow, or choosing whether or not to purposefully drive into a tree on my way home tonight. I want other people to be able to predict my choices on those questions... every day, and all the time.
You can think of freewill as "the ability to make conscious decisions about your future actions based on your own personal past experience." In this sense, I don't agree with you. Regardless of whether or not we find out the universe is deterministic... I can consciously make decisions to plan my actions based on my own personal past experiences right now... so it doesn't make a difference. It's inconsequential to this sort of idea of freewill.
I just say that if our world is predetermined, I can't change the outcome. If I can't change the outcome, i do not have choice - all I have is the appearance choice.
True. And I agree with you.
I'm just saying that if you want to call "the ability to make conscious decisions about your future actions based on your own personal past experience" an "appearance of choice" than I don't care. I can still make conscious decisions about my future actions based on my own personal past experience... and it doesn't matter if it's determined or not.
But scientist can (predict what we're going to do). Scientist can know what your going to do up to 7 seconds before you do it. Granted it for now it is a simplistic experiment, but the foundations of this research is beginning to show our subconscious and body are pulling the strings.
Like I said, that's fantastic! I want people to be able to predict some of the things I do.
And, well, I always make a choice in my brain first... then I actually move or talk or something like that. I wonder if they can measure when "a choice is made" and when "my brain acknowledges that a choice is made" rather than "I move my hand as a reflection of that choice." That would be interesting
The only time I'll be upset is when the Scientists tell me I'm going to choose the red pill, and I'm unable to make a conscious decision to go against what they say and choose the blue pill anyway.
If *that* ever happens... then I'll have to change my ideas about what freewill is.
If that *never* happens... then I'm perfectly content with identifying freewill as "the ability to make conscious decisions about future actions based on past experience."
I just don't think it's necessary to add the qualifiers 'past experience'
Yeah, I was wondering that myself. I just jammed it in there 'cause it made it sound more formal
if you can't make decisions based on anything at all that will change a predetermined outcome then you don't have free choice.
What would a test for this sort of thing look like?
That is, would we have to be able to identify a "predetermined outcome" and then see if anyone can get out of it?
A. Red and blue button in a room. Observers "predetermine" that the subject will press the red button. Subject presses the red button.
What about this:
B. Red and blue button in a room. Observers "predetermine" that the subject will press the red button. Observers inform subject that subject will be pressing the red button. Subject presses the blue button (if possible???)
If the subject always presses the red button in "B"... then I agree we have something.
But does "A" actually show that anything is "predetermined?" Or does it just show that we can make accurate predictions?
I don't think there is anyway of proving we don't live in a determinate world.
I was trying to think of an experiment that would show that we did, indeed, live in a non-freewill world.
How would such an experiment work?
Even if we showed that the quantum world was determinate through math... how do we show that this *insists* that our brains/consciousness results in determined "no-freedom-to-choose" results?
What if there's a way for a determinate quantum world to still result in our bains/consciousness being able to "overcome" that determined state to whatever we actually did "freely" choose? Can we show that "randomness" is a necessary requirement for such a thing? What if it isn't required? I don't feel like "randomness" is involved when I choose something.
Is it possible to ever know such things?
(Not arguing here, just asking open ended questions...)
If we can't show that we don't live in a determinate world... And then, even if we do live in one... we can't test if it actually removes freedom from the conscious choices we make or not...
Where do we go from there?
Sounds like a big 'ol box of not-much-use-to-anyone-for-anything to me