Do I have a choice? (determinism vs libertarianism vs compatibilism)

Is there any difference between a human's freedom and the freedom of a computer program in this view? I can choose A or B based on my internal disposition and external data just as an if - else statement could choose A or B. Am I missing something?

Is this human level of understanding any different than an extremely complex code? As far as conscious goes, it seems like that is a very subjective term, could a simple program have some level of consiousness?Is it the case that out of complexity comes free will or is there something else going on in this view?I guess the thrust of this line of questioning is how is hard determinism different than compatibilism except that you define something that is complex as free will?

I appologize if this is drifting a little off topic, Admins, if this is diverging too far just give me the word.That said, is this compatable with an evolutionary view? I don't expect evolution to produce anything similar to our understanding or to our free will. Looking at the completely (I think I can say completely) deterministic behavior of single celled orgranisms, it seems impossible, especially when you consider evolution is simply change in code and selection of certain codes (just like AI seems impossible to reach our level.) Are you suggesting some sort of emergent property which comes from complexity of only biological systems (and not electrical). I feel like I'm missing something.Perhaps a major flaw in my logic is the assumption that the world is deterministic, the single celled organisms we evolved from worked in a deterministic nature, and we evolved from these organism.

I am just having a tough time seeing how a deterministic mind can have free will while a deterministic process (moon orbit/computer program) doesn't. With the assumption (whether or not it is true) that the world is deterministic would you say an intelligent ape(with a deterministic mind) is capable of having free will in a meaningful sense? How bout neanderthals or insects or humans with extremely low IQ? Is there a grey area of somewhat free will?

Ok, all of this is under the assumption that determinism is indeed the case (which may or may not be true but seems to be acceptable under compatibilism.) The connection I was trying to make between AI and a human mind was that the logical rules of AI are deterministic like the physical rules of how the neurons work are deterministic. I'm picturing looking at the brain from outside the subject of the brain and noticing all of the deterministic processes. This reminds me of a programmer who has used a computer to simulate evolution with self replicating code. I actually read about it here, I'll try to find the link. In this case we get rid of the pragmatic issue. Yes these programs are governed by logic (which I would compare to the physical laws of our world/neurons) but absolutely what servives is there because it works. So those programs are pragmatic. How would the "decisions" that these programs make fit in to everything do you think? What I see is an array of possible outputs based on external inputs and current state of the brain.I hope I'm not being overly dense here, I've always had trouble trying to comunicate in this subject (but at the same time had strong interest).ABE:
Here is a link of what I think is the original article of artificial evolution.Edited by Max Power, : No reason given.

I think a big part of my confusion is that what you see as consciousness I see as simply really complex. What seems as an entity that knows its own existances is really just a whole mess of atoms following their deterministic laws (assuming deterministic because compatibilism claims to work with it). This is why I brought up the whole AI thing with nwr, a program is simply a collection of deterministic {laws/codes} just like the world is a set of deterministic {laws/processes}. Let me ask you this, do you think that it is possible to create an AI which can have a free will in a meaningful way. This AI could be created by some dude on a computer running through code or a more pragmatic way like this experiment I've been discussing with nwr about where evolution is actually happening on a computer.Thanks for taking the time.

Likewise, I think this is significantly different than simply modeling genetic algorithms, perhaps I should have set this up better. This programmer created a set of code that simply replicates itself (this is simple binary code that rewrites itself somewhere else). He implements a death function and a random mutation function in the rewrites. He found some extremely short codes for self replication (22 bytes) that even an MIT student couldn't get near (31 bytes), as well as a pool of parasites and other interesting "creatures". Is your beef with the discrete nature of the computers (1's and 0's) rather than the perceived continuous nature of the world? I see these truth/logic "decisions" as the rules of chemistry and physics in the analogy. Don't our neurons work in a true/false way? I may be wrong on this but I always thought it was kind of a fire/not fire mechanism. Doesn't pragmatic mean that it makes its decisions based on what works? In the artificial evolution example the "creatures" that are still exist are there because what they do (their decisions) are the ones that worked. Edited by Max Power, : No reason given.

I think I've been trying to use the whole AI analogy to show that the brain works in a deterministic way, without realizing that compatibalism works with determinism. I appologize for the wasted time.It seems though, that the thrust of the argument of compatibalism is based on the emergent properties that come from "consciousness." I think this is probably too big to really get into in this thread and possibly I'll write up a new thread on the subject or revive one (I'll have to check).