@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 @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.
