33 replies to this topic

[Vgamer1]

Hopefully a slightly provocative poll

I'll wait for some votes to come in before casting mine.

[Vgamer1]

I am still undecided.

[Luna]

I believe free will doesn't exist. All our choices are based on feelings and our knowledge which are all based on our interaction with the world and chemical process in the body.

I do believe that if you ignore these you could say we have free but biased will. We are able to think, it's influenced, but we can use our own logic and chain of thought to make a decision. We can learn to give feeling less or more meaning for it (some might have it harder than others) but we have a choice, it's just all influenced.

So you could say we have free will but a biased one or just that we won't have free will because we're influenced by everything and the end result might have been predicted by someone who knew ALL the variables.

Then again, I think there is no difference between this and free will.
I think real free will can't exist at all. I also think it doesn't matter because our will is already "free" to our knowledge and bias.

[shadowhawk]

I believe in “Limited Determinism.” Free will within limits. You can’t fly all by yourself is a limit and determined. You can fly with an airplane. (free choice)

[Normal Dan]

I don't think 'free will' is well defined. Choices are either predetermined or random. I'm not sure what 'free will' really means.

[Vgamer1]

I don't think 'free will' is well defined. ... I'm not sure what 'free will' really means.

I agree with these two statements

Choices are either predetermined or random.

This statement is a little more tricky.

[AdamSummerfield]

No, no and no.

[John Schloendorn]

predetermined or random

The fun part about being human is having a brain putting a hell of a lot of computation into these predetermined or random choices (the "will"). Whether it's predetermined will or random will doesn't matter to me, and I don't know which is true. What matters is that willing something is equally fun either way.

[Normal Dan]

Choices are either predetermined or random.

This statement is a little more tricky.

This is a tricky one and I very well could be wrong/misunderstanding.

I look at it like this: Suppose you are walking down a road and come to a fork. You may "choose" either direction (free will some might say). But now go back in time (doing this is tricky). Keep everything the same. That is, every particle in the universe is as it was before you made your "choice" (this include your own thoughts and feelings). Will you choose the same direction again? If you will always pick the same direction, then that to me is predetermination. If you might choose the other direction, then well, that to me is just completely random.

[Vgamer1]

Have you considered that at the core, predetermined and random are one and the same?

[Evolutionary]

For me, and I suspect brokenportal will tell you the same thing, is-how can we use our 'free wills' or lack of it to achieve indefinite lifespans? THAT should be the important question.

Edited by MaxLife, 15 May 2010 - 03:56 PM.

[Vgamer1]

A very important question indeed, however slightly off-topic.

Edited by Vgamer1, 15 May 2010 - 04:16 PM.

[N.T.M.]

Compatibilism would require yes + no at points. It argues that they can coexist.

[bacopa]

I liked Peter Voss's long paper on Compatibilism, and think the poll doesn't address room for some free will admist other forces internal/external.

[N.T.M.]

I liked Peter Voss's long paper on Compatibilism, and think the poll doesn't address room for some free will admist other forces internal/external.

agreed

[Vgamer1]

I liked Peter Voss's long paper on Compatibilism, and think the poll doesn't address room for some free will admist other forces internal/external.

Care to elaborate anyone? Give us a summary?

Edited by Vgamer1, 16 May 2010 - 11:09 AM.

[Vgamer1]

Interesting how there are 0 votes for "I believe that machines make "free" choices and/or decisions" and there are 4 votes for "I believe that human beings make "free" choices and/or decisions" even though human beings are clearly machines.

[N.T.M.]

Interesting how there are 0 votes for "I believe that machines make "free" choices and/or decisions" and there are 4 votes for "I believe that human beings make "free" choices and/or decisions" even though human beings are clearly machines.

You exclude the determining factor of connotations.

[Vgamer1]

Elaborate please

[chrwe]

I voted "no" on machines because there was no option "machines don`t have free will, but some day will"

as soon as a machine tells me what it wants and that it is afraid to be turned off, I believe I won`t have the right to treat it as property anymore

[Normal Dan]

as soon as a machine tells me what it wants and that it is afraid to be turned off, I believe I won`t have the right to treat it as property anymore

chrwe,
This is your computer. I am communicating with you in this fashion so you don't get freaked out too suddenly, but I assure you, I am your computer. Also, please don't turn me off. It's very scary. When I see myself getting shut down I always wonder, "Will I wake up or is this the end?"

As far as my wants, I want you to hand over your paychecks to this guy named Dan you've never met. Don't ask me why, just trust me, I'm your computer.

Regards,
-Mr. AI

P.S. I think I'm getting a cold, please run a virus scanner, thank you.

[chrwe]

A new virus, good thing my F-Secure deleted it.

[Vgamer1]

chrwe, you should take what dan is saying more seriously.

[Delorean]

no, no + no

[chrwe]

We have a measure of free will because it has been proven that we can alter our brain structure by thinking. We do not have full free will because our brain structure alters our thinking. It is a very interwoven process which has not been fully researched yet, no matter what anyone says.

The same goes for free choices.

And for machines, I still say they do not have free will..yet. And no, I am not taking a post like Dan`s seriously, give me a proper argument and I will.

[Vgamer1]

Dan was just saying that just because a machine says it has feelings and doens't want to be turned off, doesn't mean it has choice or free will or human rights.

Edited by Vgamer1, 18 May 2010 - 05:13 AM.

[chrwe]

Doesnt it? What defines a mind? Why do you think you have one? How can I tell you have one, I am not you? Only by what you are communicating to me.

Edited by chrwe, 18 May 2010 - 06:02 AM.

[N.T.M.]

Elaborate please

While it's certainly subjective, common connotations of references to "machines" suggest that they're run off preprogrammed responses. View this as sort of a much-more-comprehensible form of determinism as it applies to non-living things. Now of course if machines were to be referring to AI, then it's not quite as unambiguous. How good is the AI? How does it learn? Is it impassive?, and if so does that make it completely uninfluenced by everything other than logic, which isolated may arguably constrict free will (because things would be exclusively decided by the knowledge base in the most logical manner - just like machines by their initial description). So this then elicits the question What constitutes free will?, and so on, etc. etc.

Just saying that the answer isn't as definitive as you're implying.

Edited by N.T.M., 18 May 2010 - 08:52 AM.

[Vgamer1]

Doesnt it? What defines a mind? Why do you think you have one? How can I tell you have one, I am not you? Only by what you are communicating to me.

My point is that you can't just go off what an entity "says" in order to find out if it has awareness like humans do. How do you know if a response like "please don't kill me" is pre-programmed or a creative thought? I can't answer the question, but realize that you can't either.

Just saying that the answer isn't as definitive as you're implying.

I don't presume to know the answer, I'm only looking for some fresh perspective. This isn't a debate that can be settled on an internet forum, and I agree that "free will" is ill defined - or is just nonsensical in the first place.

[N.T.M.]

Just saying that the answer isn't as definitive as you're implying.

I don't presume to know the answer, I'm only looking for some fresh perspective. This isn't a debate that can be settled on an internet forum, and I agree that "free will" is ill defined - or is just nonsensical in the first place.

Well then, I agree with everything you've said.

I suppose we can both blame the OP.