66
submitted 1 day ago by Dr_Box@lemmy.world to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml

There is an argument that free will doesn't exist because there is an unbroken chain of causality we are riding on that dates back to the beginning of time. Meaning that every time you fart, scratch your nose, blink, or make lifechanging decisions there is a pre existing reason. These reasons might be anything from the sensory enviornment you were in the past minute, the hormone levels in your bloodstream at the time, hormones you were exposed to as a baby, or how you were parented growing up. No thought you have is really original and is more like a domino affect of neurons firing off in reaction to what you have experienced. What are your thoughts on this?

(page 3) 18 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] mlegstrong@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 day ago

I believe free will exists but the world is deterministic. In your life you can make any choice you want & it was decided by you. However the effect of your actions on the world is so small that it will continue on a predetermined path. Events in the future are “predetermined” & all I have power over is how I react to it.

[-] nitrolife@rekabu.ru 2 points 1 day ago

it all depends on how you define a person. Most likely, you think that a person's consciousness is something inside the brain, and in this case, the "external" body really influences your decisions. But that's not how it really works. The body is also a part of you, so everything that happens inside it, including "the hormone levels", is a part of you. And your experience is a part of you too. It's just that you can't control it, but that doesn't mean it's not your decisions. Otherwise, we will come to the conclusion that muscle memory is also not a part of you, but some kind of external factor. In general, if you are interested in my answer: yes, we always make decisions on our own.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Strayce@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 1 day ago

Fun thought exercise but functionally irrelevant. It still feels like I'm making decisions, so that's close enough.

[-] sproid@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 day ago

You gave an argument against free will based on Determinism, but there are other good and even better arguments IMO. Like the science-centrist arguments of Neuroscience , Psychological and the Evolutionary Arguments. Then there are the philosophical Arguments from Divine Predestination or Fate. There are still more but the fun is on the discovery.

[-] PonyOfWar@pawb.social 2 points 1 day ago

Yes I do, because my own experience of existence suggests I have it. Could that all be an illusion? Sure. But believing I don't have free will would pretty much deny the existence of my self, which, being myself, I'm not really capable of, nor would I want to do that.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] UltraGiGaGigantic@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 day ago

We have free will, but the majority are not free to exercise it because of material conditions and/or circumstance.

[-] quediuspayu@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

Does that even mater? Either stance can't be proved.

[-] djsoren19@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

If free will was truly non-existent, it would mean that a theoretical entity with access to perfect information would be able to perfectly predict your actions. I don't believe that is possible; I think that human beings are too irrational. Consider a very simple decision: what am I going to have for dinner? You could know the restaurants I have access to, what food is in my home, what I have discussed in a given day, and even what my current mood is, but it can ultimately come down to a whim. I could choose something I've never had before, for no reason, and seek it out.

I believe that we are individual actors in a very complex system that introduces lots of constraints to our decision-making process. We may not even be consciously aware of some of the constraints; however, we are always the ones ultimately making the decisions. You always have the option of a whim.

[-] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 1 day ago

What about randomness? Most people would say to be random is not to have free will.

[-] djsoren19@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 1 day ago

This depends, because there are two different kinds of randomness. A lot of the "randomness" that people encounter is actually based upon something, and our theoretical entity with access to perfect information could predict the outcome of that randomness perfectly. I'm thinking of stuff like computer randomness, number generation, games of chance, that sort of thing.

However, true random absolutely exists; in the words of Terry Pratchett "Things just happen, what the hell." You see it with mutations in nature; ordinarily healthy cells can spontaneously change without directed input. It is unpredictable, even for our theoretical entity.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
[-] crawancon@lemm.ee 1 points 1 day ago

ya'll some neo and oracle bustas up in here.

yes, as entities that are conscious of consciousness, we can steer ideas and actions with our will and intent.

This may or may not have universal implications, so stop trying to be all grandiose. we're barely existing conscious ants that have imaginations. does that mean the universe won't experience entropy? one of these things is not like the other.

[-] socsa@piefed.social 0 points 1 day ago

Local causality doesn't imply unbroken universal causality. In fact, the idea everything is a purely deterministic projection of some initial state is far weirder than the idea that stochastic actions can influence a partially deterministic state.

[-] fakir@lemm.ee 0 points 1 day ago

You have as much free will as a leaf or a fish.

[-] Zak@lemmy.world -1 points 1 day ago

Yes. I could talk about quantum indeterminacy as a scientific argument for it, but fundamentally, I believe in it because I want to[1]. I don't like the idea of being a deterministic machine with a fate I can't influence with active choices. It's not provable either way with the current state of science, so I choose to believe my preferred option is the correct one.

[1] Of course such a statement presumes free will. I think I want to, anyway.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›
this post was submitted on 20 May 2025
66 points (98.5% liked)

Asklemmy

48118 readers
965 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS