Intuition says we have freewill. It's self-evident, we can feel it, we know it. Yes, the intellect is first to doubt it because the intellect itself is only a computer without freewill that runs on programs and likes to project its limitations upon other things. But even on intellectual grounds, one can make a good argument for freewill:Az1 wrote:To what degree are our percieved decisions really based on something other than a computer synthesized-like response based on prior causes?
Good question. In order for decisions to be nothing more than outputs of subroutines, there must be a one-to-one correspondence between cause and effect - in other words, given a certain cause, there must be a certain predictable effect. If not, then the ambiguity would require something outside causality to create the final outcome, which would have to be freewill choice.
So, assuming that our decisions are only links in a chain of causality and therefore not decisions at all, this would mean the next step would have to follow the progression of the previous steps. This means, given an impulse, we will make the most probable response.
But you will notice that for every impulse that affects us, every program triggering, environmental stimulus, every feeling we have -- there is indeed a default reaction that would be in line with the progression of previous experience and programming, but it is also possible to counter this, not by employing another program, but simply by choosing to act against it.
If we are products of our programs, how can we act against the program commands and disobey our impulses? Why, if all the conditions are right for us to react one way is it possible for you to act another way? Since the final outcome is not the expected causal effect of the initial cause, there must be something outside causality having created it: freewill.
So what I'm saying is, the very fact that we can choose between following the logical progression of previous effects or choose to act against this progression shows that we have choice. Of course, most people don't act from their conscious cores where freewill resides, and simply respond like puppets to stimulus and programs - but this doesn't disprove the idea that freewill exists.
Lastly, there's a problem with the idea of knowing all the initial conditions and system characteristics of someone to predict their next move, showing that their behavior is deterministic. The problem is that some of these initial conditions and system characteristics involve quantum properties which, as far as modern physics can determine, include variables that simply cannot be predicted with absolute certainty...and so the final outcome cannot be predicted perfectly either. Something outside mathematics, outside causality is determining what these quantum variables, and hence the final outcome should be. This "something" must be consciousness/freewill because it's not anything causal, physical, or material.
This also shows why awareness is the key - without knowing what the default causal reaction is, you might end up making it and thus only be following programs. The first step to making a real choice is to know the options. Determinism/causality says only one option is the most probable, but we have the choice to choose another and thus act nondeterministically.
]]>
haha They want logic! They want things to make sense! Problem is, intuition doesn't always make sense. I've learned this the hard way. On another thread I posted my personal story about getting in my car back in '96 to drive home from work, despite hearing an intuitive guide voice telling me not to, and to go back inside and hang out with my coworkers....for just 5 minutes. But it didn't make "logical sense", so, I didn't listen, and got in that car anyway. Five minutes later, I was in an accident and my car was totaled, and my life careened onto a completely new timeline, one that was not positive. If I'd only listened to intuition. Now I know, and I've learned.