It is only necessary to refute determinism and indeterminism, which are human philosophical constructions, in order to see the truth as it is and entirely. That people have free will is naturally obvious.
I am not sure that free will exists.
I know it appears to be there at times. I just don't believe it is.
I am thinking that if free will existed:
face book would not work.
People would not become addicted to games or drugs.
The transference and counter transference would not work.
intermittent conditioning gone
Military, gone
I have spent some time observing people and myself.
I have found that whenever I look deeply into peoples lives and their history, their state of being always makes perfect sense in light of the informational input received from that history (with the exception of genuine psychopathy)
As and example, the two people who are closest to me, appear to be in possession of the most outstanding self control I have ever encountered. In both of them, that level of what appears to be free will or self determinism was instilled in them through fear, and it was done deliberately.
I am still not buying into free will, but I am open to persuasion
Free will exists if there is a possibility of change, if there is movement, and as is evident to the senses, movement exists, therefore there is change, therefore there is free will.
If everything was determined, everything would be static, and everything would cease to move.
Liberty has to do with how capable we are to enjoy our free will, not with whether we have it or not. We are free to the extent that there are no options disabled by our own inner fear/lack of control.
Do you think a river has free will?
Like rivers we just respond to information/feedback.
The feedback we receive as human, has many more dimensions than that recieved by a river. Therefore our response has far more possibilities than that available to a river.
I do not believe that everything is predetermined, I believe we have purpose, I believe we are looking for an answer to a problem. We are wired to create in response to our environment the same way as we wire up AI. DO you suppose that AI could develop free will? I am quite sure we will create the illusion of AI haveing free will.
More than a feeling I would say it is a perception. I perceive that I have freedom when I do any action. Being able to feel free or not. I can feel that I have no freedom and still perceive that I have it. We are always free to act as we want, although sometimes we feel that we are tied and that we do not have freedom. As you can see, there is a difference between intuiting and feeling.
No rational person believes a human can "do anything they want".
I'm certain there are a great many things you would do (that you are not currently doing) if it were truly as easy as snapping your fingers.
Your current slate of "choices" are determined by your history and biology. And your ability to make "good choices" is also determined by your history and biology.
A person born with a low IQ cannot "choose" to have a higher IQ.
I don't say that there are no circumstances that limit our freedom. I speak of free will, not absolute freedom. Your framework for action is limited by your current state of circumstances, however, you are free to act as you wish within that framework.
A person born with a low IQ cannot "choose" to have a higher IQ.
...however, you are free to act as you wish within that framework.
Do you believe a Chess Grandmaster is "free" to move the pieces "wherever they want"?
Or are they constrained by their training and experience and their goal (desire) of winning?
And as to your second point,
There have been a large number of scientific studies attempting to increase a person's general IQ (including projects like lumosity), and although a (low or average IQ) person can generally improve performance on a specific game with practice, that improvement does not translate into increased general proficiency (they are unable to generalize their problem solving skill and apply it to other systems).
In his book, Flynn thinks it pointless to continue research on elementary cognitive tasks (e.g., reaction time tests, such as with Jensen’s “button box”). But such tests may provide our first opportunity to measure g in absolute terms (on a ratio scale; Jensen, 2005). Performance on reaction time tests is scored in milliseconds. Unlike IQ scores, time has a zero point and equal-size units. Ratio-level measurement would finally allow us to chart patterns and rates of cognitive growth and decline over the life course as well as over decades. The Flynn Effect might have been explained long ago had we historical data of this sort. *
It is only necessary to refute determinism and indeterminism, which are human philosophical constructions, in order to see the truth as it is and entirely. That people have free will is naturally obvious.
I am not sure that free will exists.
I know it appears to be there at times. I just don't believe it is.
I am thinking that if free will existed:
face book would not work.
People would not become addicted to games or drugs.
The transference and counter transference would not work.
intermittent conditioning gone
Military, gone
how do you see things co-existing with free will?
What you say happens because people don't have self-control and discipline, it is because people don't have liberty, although they do have free will.
I have spent some time observing people and myself.
I have found that whenever I look deeply into peoples lives and their history, their state of being always makes perfect sense in light of the informational input received from that history (with the exception of genuine psychopathy)
As and example, the two people who are closest to me, appear to be in possession of the most outstanding self control I have ever encountered. In both of them, that level of what appears to be free will or self determinism was instilled in them through fear, and it was done deliberately.
I am still not buying into free will, but I am open to persuasion
Free will exists if there is a possibility of change, if there is movement, and as is evident to the senses, movement exists, therefore there is change, therefore there is free will.
If everything was determined, everything would be static, and everything would cease to move.
Liberty has to do with how capable we are to enjoy our free will, not with whether we have it or not. We are free to the extent that there are no options disabled by our own inner fear/lack of control.
Do you think a river has free will?
Like rivers we just respond to information/feedback.
The feedback we receive as human, has many more dimensions than that recieved by a river. Therefore our response has far more possibilities than that available to a river.
I do not believe that everything is predetermined, I believe we have purpose, I believe we are looking for an answer to a problem. We are wired to create in response to our environment the same way as we wire up AI. DO you suppose that AI could develop free will? I am quite sure we will create the illusion of AI haveing free will.
Right. Agree with you. Although I don't think AI has free will, just seems to have it.
In other words, a naked appeal to emotion.
They are not emotions but direct knowledge.
Direct knowledge of your emotions.
Freewill is simply a feeling you get when you make a decision.
In the same exact way, someone could argue that their god (Krishna) is REAL because they can feel Krishna's love in their heart.
I know my god loves me because I experience a feeling of (god's) love.
Would you accept this as "incontrovertible evidence" of the existence of Krishna?
More than a feeling I would say it is a perception. I perceive that I have freedom when I do any action. Being able to feel free or not. I can feel that I have no freedom and still perceive that I have it. We are always free to act as we want, although sometimes we feel that we are tied and that we do not have freedom. As you can see, there is a difference between intuiting and feeling.
You are perceiving a feeling.
No rational person believes a human can "do anything they want".
I'm certain there are a great many things you would do (that you are not currently doing) if it were truly as easy as snapping your fingers.
Your current slate of "choices" are determined by your history and biology. And your ability to make "good choices" is also determined by your history and biology.
A person born with a low IQ cannot "choose" to have a higher IQ.
I don't say that there are no circumstances that limit our freedom. I speak of free will, not absolute freedom. Your framework for action is limited by your current state of circumstances, however, you are free to act as you wish within that framework.
It depends, do you think the IQ is innate?
Do you believe a Chess Grandmaster is "free" to move the pieces "wherever they want"?
Or are they constrained by their training and experience and their goal (desire) of winning?
And as to your second point,
There have been a large number of scientific studies attempting to increase a person's general IQ (including projects like lumosity), and although a (low or average IQ) person can generally improve performance on a specific game with practice, that improvement does not translate into increased general proficiency (they are unable to generalize their problem solving skill and apply it to other systems).
aND, 3 MINUTES,