|
Powered by
|
|
Section: All | News & Politics | Geek Stuff | Devel | Non-existent Life | Random | Food! | Life |
Mon, November 17, 2003
Free Will 2
No, that's not "Free Willy 2", it's "Free Will", part 2. As in, more rambling from yours truly on the topic of free will. Yay.
Show Rest of Post
I have a number of topics to discuss, but they're all inter-related so I'm not sure if I'll be able to present it in any coherent manner. But, after all, this is just a blog entry, and I did say it would be more "rambling". So, here goes nothing...
Fate/determinism vs Foreknowledge - I think a lot of people (philosophers and non-philosophers) have trouble with the notion of fate, because it would appear to contradict the existence of free will. If everything's already decided, then we really have no choices. But, from a programmer's perspective (at least this programmer), it's not that clear cut. I see the universe as a giant program (as I've blogged before), and like any program, the behavior of every single aspect of the program is pre-defined (unless you have random variables, but I don't believe in the existence of true randomness, so we'll set that aside). Pre-defined, yes. Pre-determined? Or how about, foreknowledge? When you run a huge-ass simulation in a supercomputer, you have a decent idea of what's going to happen. But the whole point of running the program is to find out what really does happen. So, couldn't reality be the same way? Every single aspect of our life might be predefined, but the only way to find out exactly what happens is to actually live life. And since nobody knows the outcome, does it really matter if it really is predefined or predetermined? I think that's another place where God and reality may differ (assuming my theory is, to a certain degree, correct). God supposedly knows the future, but reality doesn't.
free will vs determinism - I hinted on this yesterday, but I thought of a clearer way of stating it: free will is not in direct opposition with determinism, but rather with oppression of the will. I don't see how you can talk about the free will in terms of God or sub-atomic particles. I think free will is inherently a human construct, and can thus only be discussed within the context of humans, either at the individual level or at the social level. With God, you might be able to argue that since, in the past, when people mentioned God, they really meant "The Church", in which case yes, that would be a social construct and could thus be seen to be in opposition with free will.
physical urge vs other urge (vs thought) - So what is "will", whether it's free or otherwise? Is it rational, irrational, emotional, instinctual, or purble and black polka-dotted? If we decide to pee in our pants, is that an act of free will? You could argue that it depends on whether it was a conscious act or an unconscious act. If it's conscious and in defiance of social customs, according to my definition, that would be an act of free will. But at the bottom of that decision lies the physical urge and need to pee. In that case, which portion of the act is free will? All you did was to let your physical urge defy opposing social norms. Is that free will? Or how about, for example, art. If we make something, is that an act of free will? Or is creativity also an inherently physiological urge? Here's another question: how's free will different to free thought? It almost seems like "will" is a minifestation of some need we have, while thoughts are more abstract and less dependent on the physical existence. Hm... I'll have to chew on that one.
| |
Posted Wed, April 28, 2004 03:30 by Gay Hitchhiker
gay hitchhiker
[moderate]