@Reb I ask this because I read an article That was basically a scientist saying that we basically have no free will, but we need to pretend we do lol
@RickiTarr @Reb@strangeobject.space
I wonder about that scientist. In theory, if you knew the state of everything, you could predict the future. But, Schroedinger showed you can not know the state of everything. Also, quantum mechanics kind of implies that the evolution of things (even at the lowest level) is probabilistic in nature. (Einstein's "Gott wuerfelt nicht." quote).
So quantum mechanics really seems to imply predestination exists only in terms of probabilities, which is pretty week.
I tend to follow Robert Anton Wilson's approach, which is consistent with quantum mechanics and very much anti-predestination.
I follow Sartre's concept of "you define yourself." It is the only thing that makes sense. You are not a passive punching bag for the universe.
@RickiTarr @Reb@strangeobject.space It is a Jorge Luis Borges question.
@RickiTarr @rrb @Reb I believe they can co-exist, and that it's a scientific question. it comes down to complexity: Will is an emergent property of a universe so skull-crushingly complex it's impossible to comprehend. The underlying rules of this universe become simpler the lower-level we get (e.g. particles with only 2-3 states), which would imply predictability - but there's so much of everything that complexity & things like choice & free will emerge at the higher levels. More = different.
@jwcph @RickiTarr @Reb@strangeobject.space
Quantum entanglement messes up the idea of particles only having 2 to 3 states doesn't it?
At least it does for me.
@jwcph @RickiTarr @rrb @Reb
interesting, but you're asserting, "Will is an emergent property," without providing any evidence that it is.
And that's where the argument begins to stall.
@TessRants @RickiTarr @rrb @Reb I only have a limited number of characters 😁 there's plenty of evidence that will is an emergent property - in fact, it's a bit difficult to argue that it's anything else without getting into metaphysics or superstition.
@jwcph @TessRants @RickiTarr @Reb@strangeobject.space
I never really saw proofs that something is emergent, anyway. Besides which, the concept emergent is kind of hand wavy, verging on mystical.
@jwcph @TessRants @RickiTarr @Reb@strangeobject.space Will is also a concept that verges on mysticism.
However, as an atheist, I kind of like the idea of demanding statistical validation of any religious concept. I think Buddhism is the only faith that would pass that test.
@rrb @TessRants @RickiTarr @Reb Emergence is quite well-understood as a concept. For example, temperature is an emergent property of matter; it is not present, even in principle, at the individual atomic or molecular level, but manifests objectively, predictably & measurably at higher levels.
Will may not be quite as predictable, but is still very well-documented within psychology, sociology & behavior.
- so no, neither is mystical or metaphysical in and of themselves.
@rrb @jwcph @RickiTarr @Reb
Buddhism, aside from esoteric sects, is less a religion and more of a mental/ emotional training program.
@TessRants @jwcph @RickiTarr @Reb@strangeobject.space whose practices can be measured using neuroscience
@TessRants @jwcph @RickiTarr @Reb@strangeobject.space it also has no gods
@jwcph @RickiTarr @rrb @Reb
time to clarify our terms;
by Will do you mean Consciousness, Desire, or simply The Ability to Choose?
(Sure, we could go for a Shakespearean dick joke here - he would have - but I'm totally going to pretend to be very serious™️)
[also, metaphysics is just the term for the philosophical study of reality. It's not woo or superstition, but questions about what we believe exists.]
@RickiTarr @rrb @Reb
Part of the job of philosophy is to come up with the questions science then goes on to answer. Which, of course, will produce new questions...
@rrb @RickiTarr @Reb But all that could be an illusion.
@RickiTarr @Reb@strangeobject.space
week (Sic) -->weak