-2
submitted 1 day ago by Nilay@lemmy.world to c/science@lemmy.ml
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] HubertManne@piefed.social 1 points 19 hours ago

honestly merging the two may be a bit much but whay you said there sorta hits the nail on the head. I feel going way back to the argument in the video that free will would just be a function of randomness. I actually do think the stupider we are the more we would think things have free will. I mean many ancient religions viewed everything as being alive often with what would seem like free will. Then again we have often had beliefs with animals that they lack cognition or feeling when I think they have free will as well down to some point of lack of complexity. Its hard to say at one point it is emergent and there are cetainly levels.

[-] Ferk@lemmy.ml 1 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 18 hours ago)

Yes, there's been societies in the past that would attribute "free will" to fill the gaps in their knowledge, but that's an approach that consistently has been shown to be wrong as our knowledge of the world has expanded. So for that reason I don't think it's not a good approach to try and define things in relation to the limits of our knowledge.

this post was submitted on 16 Feb 2026
-2 points (43.8% liked)

Science

20174 readers
27 users here now

Subscribe to see new publications and popular science coverage of current research on your homepage


founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS