Comments on: The Atheist’s Dilemma: Logical Conclusions to the Lack of Free Will http://danielmiessler.com/blog/the-atheists-dilemma-logical-conclusions-to-the-lack-of-free-will grep understanding Sun, 29 Jan 2012 20:44:46 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: thatfunnyvibe http://danielmiessler.com/blog/the-atheists-dilemma-logical-conclusions-to-the-lack-of-free-will/comment-page-2#comment-257285 thatfunnyvibe Wed, 08 Jun 2011 20:34:00 +0000 http://dmiessler.com/archive/the-atheists-dilemma-logical-conclusions-to-the-lack-of-free-will#comment-257285 <p>This article is basically my philosophy, put in much better words than I could ever come up. The only thing I can say is that even though our lives are out of our control and we lack free will, if we were to go back to 1500 again, the Universe would NOT unfold the exact same way. Through the discovery and understanding of quantam mechanics (i'm no expert) we have discovered that many of the ways electrons and other things can move or be found are COMPLETELY RANDOM. For me, this means that it would be impossible for us to predict the future, EVEN if we were to understand the exact nature of how our universe is run. (There is evidence that quantum mechanics is something that is truly random, NOT that it seems random because we don't really understand the exact mechanism of it, but it really is TRULY random) However, we would be able to exactly see how the present has been determined by the past.</p> <p>This was kind of a clusterfuck but I hope my point came across.</p> This article is basically my philosophy, put in much better words than I could ever come up. The only thing I can say is that even though our lives are out of our control and we lack free will, if we were to go back to 1500 again, the Universe would NOT unfold the exact same way. Through the discovery and understanding of quantam mechanics (i’m no expert) we have discovered that many of the ways electrons and other things can move or be found are COMPLETELY RANDOM. For me, this means that it would be impossible for us to predict the future, EVEN if we were to understand the exact nature of how our universe is run. (There is evidence that quantum mechanics is something that is truly random, NOT that it seems random because we don’t really understand the exact mechanism of it, but it really is TRULY random) However, we would be able to exactly see how the present has been determined by the past.

This was kind of a clusterfuck but I hope my point came across.

]]> By: A Character Encoding and Mapping Primer « billyduc.homelinux http://danielmiessler.com/blog/the-atheists-dilemma-logical-conclusions-to-the-lack-of-free-will/comment-page-1#comment-253786 A Character Encoding and Mapping Primer « billyduc.homelinux Mon, 13 Sep 2010 04:38:28 +0000 http://dmiessler.com/archive/the-atheists-dilemma-logical-conclusions-to-the-lack-of-free-will#comment-253786 <p>[...] Conclusion [...]</p> [...] Conclusion [...]

]]> By: Google Secret Loophole http://danielmiessler.com/blog/the-atheists-dilemma-logical-conclusions-to-the-lack-of-free-will/comment-page-1#comment-244816 Google Secret Loophole Tue, 29 Jun 2010 13:09:11 +0000 http://dmiessler.com/archive/the-atheists-dilemma-logical-conclusions-to-the-lack-of-free-will#comment-244816 <p>i think people always flow this site!</p> i think people always flow this site!

]]> By: annawoods04 http://danielmiessler.com/blog/the-atheists-dilemma-logical-conclusions-to-the-lack-of-free-will/comment-page-1#comment-244482 annawoods04 Sat, 22 May 2010 08:05:56 +0000 http://dmiessler.com/archive/the-atheists-dilemma-logical-conclusions-to-the-lack-of-free-will#comment-244482 <p>Sometimes these things if taken into consideration does matter a lot and sometimes doesn't. I felt like we were on a roller coaster of logical fallacy after logical fallacy of this guy. I'm glad you took the time to read his post and hopefully, your replies can help get his critical thinking skills going.<br><br><a href="http://www.totallyfreeadvertising.com" rel="nofollow">london free advertising</a></p> Sometimes these things if taken into consideration does matter a lot and sometimes doesn't. I felt like we were on a roller coaster of logical fallacy after logical fallacy of this guy. I'm glad you took the time to read his post and hopefully, your replies can help get his critical thinking skills going.

london free advertising

]]> By: annawoods04 http://danielmiessler.com/blog/the-atheists-dilemma-logical-conclusions-to-the-lack-of-free-will/comment-page-1#comment-244228 annawoods04 Sat, 22 May 2010 03:05:56 +0000 http://dmiessler.com/archive/the-atheists-dilemma-logical-conclusions-to-the-lack-of-free-will#comment-244228 <p>Sometimes these things if taken into consideration does matter a lot and sometimes doesn't. I felt like we were on a roller coaster of logical fallacy after logical fallacy of this guy. I'm glad you took the time to read his post and hopefully, your replies can help get his critical thinking skills going.<br><br><a href="http://www.totallyfreeadvertising.com" rel="nofollow">london free advertising</a></p> Sometimes these things if taken into consideration does matter a lot and sometimes doesn't. I felt like we were on a roller coaster of logical fallacy after logical fallacy of this guy. I'm glad you took the time to read his post and hopefully, your replies can help get his critical thinking skills going.

london free advertising

]]> By: Daniel Miessler http://danielmiessler.com/blog/the-atheists-dilemma-logical-conclusions-to-the-lack-of-free-will/comment-page-1#comment-243945 Daniel Miessler Fri, 26 Feb 2010 21:39:43 +0000 http://dmiessler.com/archive/the-atheists-dilemma-logical-conclusions-to-the-lack-of-free-will#comment-243945 <p>So good. Posted. Thanks.</p> So good. Posted. Thanks.

]]> By: Jon http://danielmiessler.com/blog/the-atheists-dilemma-logical-conclusions-to-the-lack-of-free-will/comment-page-1#comment-243941 Jon Fri, 26 Feb 2010 18:10:45 +0000 http://dmiessler.com/archive/the-atheists-dilemma-logical-conclusions-to-the-lack-of-free-will#comment-243941 <p>apropos:<br><br><a href="http://www.lukesurl.com/comics/2010-02-24-determinism.png" rel="nofollow">http://www.lukesurl.com/comics/2010-02-24-deter...</a></p> apropos:

http://www.lukesurl.com/comics/2010-02-24-deter…

]]> By: Mike http://danielmiessler.com/blog/the-atheists-dilemma-logical-conclusions-to-the-lack-of-free-will/comment-page-1#comment-243906 Mike Sat, 13 Feb 2010 08:19:00 +0000 http://dmiessler.com/archive/the-atheists-dilemma-logical-conclusions-to-the-lack-of-free-will#comment-243906 <p>In the words of Peter Wang, "It is what it is."<br><br>I see no evidence of anything else.</p> In the words of Peter Wang, “It is what it is.”

I see no evidence of anything else.

]]> By: A tcpdump Tutorial / Primer « The world apart http://danielmiessler.com/blog/the-atheists-dilemma-logical-conclusions-to-the-lack-of-free-will/comment-page-1#comment-243823 A tcpdump Tutorial / Primer « The world apart Tue, 19 Jan 2010 17:46:23 +0000 http://dmiessler.com/archive/the-atheists-dilemma-logical-conclusions-to-the-lack-of-free-will#comment-243823 <p>[...] Societal Implications of Our Having No Free Will [...]</p> [...] Societal Implications of Our Having No Free Will [...]

]]> By: nintendo dsi r4 http://danielmiessler.com/blog/the-atheists-dilemma-logical-conclusions-to-the-lack-of-free-will/comment-page-1#comment-243752 nintendo dsi r4 Thu, 24 Dec 2009 07:21:42 +0000 http://dmiessler.com/archive/the-atheists-dilemma-logical-conclusions-to-the-lack-of-free-will#comment-243752 <p>Love your Blog, hope i will have some time soon to upgrade mine as well :)Woooow, so beautiful! Thank you so much for sharing beautiful book and poem with us. I can tell that you are such a sweet person as your beautiful work.I can't wait to see the next work of you!What an inspiration. This is such a great idea. I'll be keeping a close eye on your blog and looking forward to each new post.</p> Love your Blog, hope i will have some time soon to upgrade mine as well :)Woooow, so beautiful! Thank you so much for sharing beautiful book and poem with us. I can tell that you are such a sweet person as your beautiful work.I can't wait to see the next work of you!What an inspiration. This is such a great idea. I'll be keeping a close eye on your blog and looking forward to each new post.

]]> By: j http://danielmiessler.com/blog/the-atheists-dilemma-logical-conclusions-to-the-lack-of-free-will/comment-page-1#comment-243712 j Tue, 08 Dec 2009 02:29:21 +0000 http://dmiessler.com/archive/the-atheists-dilemma-logical-conclusions-to-the-lack-of-free-will#comment-243712 <p>A child with who is not brought up by people will not act like a person. The child learns through it's surroundings. The person still has the ability to change from a 5th dimensional possibility.</p> A child with who is not brought up by people will not act like a person. The child learns through it's surroundings. The person still has the ability to change from a 5th dimensional possibility.

]]> By: leea http://danielmiessler.com/blog/the-atheists-dilemma-logical-conclusions-to-the-lack-of-free-will/comment-page-1#comment-241802 leea Tue, 28 Apr 2009 04:27:01 +0000 http://dmiessler.com/archive/the-atheists-dilemma-logical-conclusions-to-the-lack-of-free-will#comment-241802 <p>From what I see, the point your making is not that we don't have freewill, its that we don't have a say in the life we were born into or the gifts and talents we received. I believe what you're saying, but I don't see how that plays into deciding what actions or decisions we are going to make based on what we want to do, or our will. Free will to me is the ability to make the decisions you want to make, and not do the ones you don't want to do.</p> From what I see, the point your making is not that we don't have freewill, its that we don't have a say in the life we were born into or the gifts and talents we received. I believe what you're saying, but I don't see how that plays into deciding what actions or decisions we are going to make based on what we want to do, or our will. Free will to me is the ability to make the decisions you want to make, and not do the ones you don't want to do.

]]> By: leea http://danielmiessler.com/blog/the-atheists-dilemma-logical-conclusions-to-the-lack-of-free-will/comment-page-1#comment-241564 leea Tue, 28 Apr 2009 00:27:01 +0000 http://dmiessler.com/archive/the-atheists-dilemma-logical-conclusions-to-the-lack-of-free-will#comment-241564 <p>From what I see, the point your making is not that we don't have freewill, its that we don't have a say in the life we were born into or the gifts and talents we received. I believe what you're saying, but I don't see how that plays into deciding what actions or decisions we are going to make based on what we want to do, or our will. Free will to me is the ability to make the decisions you want to make, and not do the ones you don't want to do.</p> From what I see, the point your making is not that we don't have freewill, its that we don't have a say in the life we were born into or the gifts and talents we received. I believe what you're saying, but I don't see how that plays into deciding what actions or decisions we are going to make based on what we want to do, or our will. Free will to me is the ability to make the decisions you want to make, and not do the ones you don't want to do.

]]> By: Xanthir, FCD http://danielmiessler.com/blog/the-atheists-dilemma-logical-conclusions-to-the-lack-of-free-will/comment-page-1#comment-230320 Xanthir, FCD Tue, 18 Nov 2008 18:15:50 +0000 http://dmiessler.com/archive/the-atheists-dilemma-logical-conclusions-to-the-lack-of-free-will#comment-230320 <p>Your premise is true - we <em>don't</em> have free will. What's more, the concept of free will is itself nonsensical. Get people to tie it down and most end up retreating to admitting that free will is simply randomness in the system. I don't consider a subatomic particle to have free will (though Conway disagrees, but I think that's just a difference in terminology), so randomness does <em>not</em> correspond to our intuitive concept of free will. The few that can dodge elsewhere end up being contradictory, saying something along the lines of that free will is the ability to go against your own will. And of course, you have the large group that simply don't cannot grasp the idea of emergent phenomena and desperately grasp at the idea of the homunculus in one's mind, in some form or another.</p> <p>I'm disappointed, though, that in your last paragraph you fall into the same trap as so many people when consider the lack of free will, assuming that, now that we are equipped with this knowledge, we must somehow lose all ability to pass moral judgement. This is simply ridiculous. For one thing, passing moral judgement, bestowing praise and punishments, are part and parcel of your #3.</p> <p>The main objection to this punishing viewpoint, though, is that while 'free will' does not exist as a coherent concept, we can still act as if some fuzzy intuitive approximation of it does due to our lack of knowledge. I don't know what you will do in the future. I don't know what <em>I</em> will do in the future. I simply don't have the necessary knowledge or computational power to predict that. As such, we abstract the brain into a black box with some levels and buttons on it, which we can twist and pull to achieve certain effects but who's internal workings and final outputs are ultimately a mystery.</p> <p>In the end, I believe that claiming something has 'free will' is nothing more than a claim that the entity has a sufficiently complex internal state that the outputs are not completely predictable from the inputs.</p> Your premise is true – we don’t have free will. What’s more, the concept of free will is itself nonsensical. Get people to tie it down and most end up retreating to admitting that free will is simply randomness in the system. I don’t consider a subatomic particle to have free will (though Conway disagrees, but I think that’s just a difference in terminology), so randomness does not correspond to our intuitive concept of free will. The few that can dodge elsewhere end up being contradictory, saying something along the lines of that free will is the ability to go against your own will. And of course, you have the large group that simply don’t cannot grasp the idea of emergent phenomena and desperately grasp at the idea of the homunculus in one’s mind, in some form or another.

I’m disappointed, though, that in your last paragraph you fall into the same trap as so many people when consider the lack of free will, assuming that, now that we are equipped with this knowledge, we must somehow lose all ability to pass moral judgement. This is simply ridiculous. For one thing, passing moral judgement, bestowing praise and punishments, are part and parcel of your #3.

The main objection to this punishing viewpoint, though, is that while ‘free will’ does not exist as a coherent concept, we can still act as if some fuzzy intuitive approximation of it does due to our lack of knowledge. I don’t know what you will do in the future. I don’t know what I will do in the future. I simply don’t have the necessary knowledge or computational power to predict that. As such, we abstract the brain into a black box with some levels and buttons on it, which we can twist and pull to achieve certain effects but who’s internal workings and final outputs are ultimately a mystery.

In the end, I believe that claiming something has ‘free will’ is nothing more than a claim that the entity has a sufficiently complex internal state that the outputs are not completely predictable from the inputs.

]]> By: Xanthir, FCD http://danielmiessler.com/blog/the-atheists-dilemma-logical-conclusions-to-the-lack-of-free-will/comment-page-1#comment-248549 Xanthir, FCD Tue, 18 Nov 2008 18:15:00 +0000 http://dmiessler.com/archive/the-atheists-dilemma-logical-conclusions-to-the-lack-of-free-will#comment-248549 <p>Your premise is true - we <em>don't</em> have free will. What's more, the concept of free will is itself nonsensical. Get people to tie it down and most end up retreating to admitting that free will is simply randomness in the system. I don't consider a subatomic particle to have free will (though Conway disagrees, but I think that's just a difference in terminology), so randomness does <em>not</em> correspond to our intuitive concept of free will. The few that can dodge elsewhere end up being contradictory, saying something along the lines of that free will is the ability to go against your own will. And of course, you have the large group that simply don't cannot grasp the idea of emergent phenomena and desperately grasp at the idea of the homunculus in one's mind, in some form or another.</p> <p>I'm disappointed, though, that in your last paragraph you fall into the same trap as so many people when consider the lack of free will, assuming that, now that we are equipped with this knowledge, we must somehow lose all ability to pass moral judgement. This is simply ridiculous. For one thing, passing moral judgement, bestowing praise and punishments, are part and parcel of your #3.</p> <p>The main objection to this punishing viewpoint, though, is that while 'free will' does not exist as a coherent concept, we can still act as if some fuzzy intuitive approximation of it does due to our lack of knowledge. I don't know what you will do in the future. I don't know what <em>I</em> will do in the future. I simply don't have the necessary knowledge or computational power to predict that. As such, we abstract the brain into a black box with some levels and buttons on it, which we can twist and pull to achieve certain effects but who's internal workings and final outputs are ultimately a mystery.</p> <p>In the end, I believe that claiming something has 'free will' is nothing more than a claim that the entity has a sufficiently complex internal state that the outputs are not completely predictable from the inputs.</p> Your premise is true – we don’t have free will. What’s more, the concept of free will is itself nonsensical. Get people to tie it down and most end up retreating to admitting that free will is simply randomness in the system. I don’t consider a subatomic particle to have free will (though Conway disagrees, but I think that’s just a difference in terminology), so randomness does not correspond to our intuitive concept of free will. The few that can dodge elsewhere end up being contradictory, saying something along the lines of that free will is the ability to go against your own will. And of course, you have the large group that simply don’t cannot grasp the idea of emergent phenomena and desperately grasp at the idea of the homunculus in one’s mind, in some form or another.

I’m disappointed, though, that in your last paragraph you fall into the same trap as so many people when consider the lack of free will, assuming that, now that we are equipped with this knowledge, we must somehow lose all ability to pass moral judgement. This is simply ridiculous. For one thing, passing moral judgement, bestowing praise and punishments, are part and parcel of your #3.

The main objection to this punishing viewpoint, though, is that while ‘free will’ does not exist as a coherent concept, we can still act as if some fuzzy intuitive approximation of it does due to our lack of knowledge. I don’t know what you will do in the future. I don’t know what I will do in the future. I simply don’t have the necessary knowledge or computational power to predict that. As such, we abstract the brain into a black box with some levels and buttons on it, which we can twist and pull to achieve certain effects but who’s internal workings and final outputs are ultimately a mystery.

In the end, I believe that claiming something has ‘free will’ is nothing more than a claim that the entity has a sufficiently complex internal state that the outputs are not completely predictable from the inputs.

]]> By: rcglinsk http://danielmiessler.com/blog/the-atheists-dilemma-logical-conclusions-to-the-lack-of-free-will/comment-page-1#comment-150476 rcglinsk Fri, 06 Jun 2008 21:41:55 +0000 http://dmiessler.com/archive/the-atheists-dilemma-logical-conclusions-to-the-lack-of-free-will#comment-150476 <p>I think this is all semantics. Quantum theory rejects a deterministic universe. The question is whether randomness and chance are good enough pysical truths to justify a conclusion that free will is happening. I think the real debate here is on where to draw the line between randomness chance and will. But the notion of a purely deterministic and predictable human should be thrown right out as contradicting the probabalistic nature of quantum scale occurences. </p> <p>If I'm predisposed by my personality to respond to a certain stimuli one way 95% of the time and another way the other 5%, then we could say that my "decision" to not have vanilla ice cream this time was just the occurence of that 5% random chance. All that really does is define free will out of existence. And a point above that it would be foolhardy to act as if there were no free will is well taken. In sum, Failing to concieve of how a system we don't completely understand could produce a phenomena that we don't completely understand is not proof that the phenomena is impossible.</p> I think this is all semantics. Quantum theory rejects a deterministic universe. The question is whether randomness and chance are good enough pysical truths to justify a conclusion that free will is happening. I think the real debate here is on where to draw the line between randomness chance and will. But the notion of a purely deterministic and predictable human should be thrown right out as contradicting the probabalistic nature of quantum scale occurences.

If I’m predisposed by my personality to respond to a certain stimuli one way 95% of the time and another way the other 5%, then we could say that my “decision” to not have vanilla ice cream this time was just the occurence of that 5% random chance. All that really does is define free will out of existence. And a point above that it would be foolhardy to act as if there were no free will is well taken. In sum, Failing to concieve of how a system we don’t completely understand could produce a phenomena that we don’t completely understand is not proof that the phenomena is impossible.

]]> By: rcglinsk http://danielmiessler.com/blog/the-atheists-dilemma-logical-conclusions-to-the-lack-of-free-will/comment-page-1#comment-248548 rcglinsk Fri, 06 Jun 2008 21:41:00 +0000 http://dmiessler.com/archive/the-atheists-dilemma-logical-conclusions-to-the-lack-of-free-will#comment-248548 <p>I think this is all semantics. Quantum theory rejects a deterministic universe. The question is whether randomness and chance are good enough pysical truths to justify a conclusion that free will is happening. I think the real debate here is on where to draw the line between randomness chance and will. But the notion of a purely deterministic and predictable human should be thrown right out as contradicting the probabalistic nature of quantum scale occurences. </p> <p>If I'm predisposed by my personality to respond to a certain stimuli one way 95% of the time and another way the other 5%, then we could say that my "decision" to not have vanilla ice cream this time was just the occurence of that 5% random chance. All that really does is define free will out of existence. And a point above that it would be foolhardy to act as if there were no free will is well taken. In sum, Failing to concieve of how a system we don't completely understand could produce a phenomena that we don't completely understand is not proof that the phenomena is impossible.</p> I think this is all semantics. Quantum theory rejects a deterministic universe. The question is whether randomness and chance are good enough pysical truths to justify a conclusion that free will is happening. I think the real debate here is on where to draw the line between randomness chance and will. But the notion of a purely deterministic and predictable human should be thrown right out as contradicting the probabalistic nature of quantum scale occurences.

If I’m predisposed by my personality to respond to a certain stimuli one way 95% of the time and another way the other 5%, then we could say that my “decision” to not have vanilla ice cream this time was just the occurence of that 5% random chance. All that really does is define free will out of existence. And a point above that it would be foolhardy to act as if there were no free will is well taken. In sum, Failing to concieve of how a system we don’t completely understand could produce a phenomena that we don’t completely understand is not proof that the phenomena is impossible.

]]> By: me http://danielmiessler.com/blog/the-atheists-dilemma-logical-conclusions-to-the-lack-of-free-will/comment-page-1#comment-150410 me Fri, 06 Jun 2008 16:03:19 +0000 http://dmiessler.com/archive/the-atheists-dilemma-logical-conclusions-to-the-lack-of-free-will#comment-150410 <p>John Locke already solved the problem of free will centuries ago.</p> John Locke already solved the problem of free will centuries ago.

]]> By: me http://danielmiessler.com/blog/the-atheists-dilemma-logical-conclusions-to-the-lack-of-free-will/comment-page-1#comment-248547 me Fri, 06 Jun 2008 16:03:00 +0000 http://dmiessler.com/archive/the-atheists-dilemma-logical-conclusions-to-the-lack-of-free-will#comment-248547 <p>John Locke already solved the problem of free will centuries ago.</p> John Locke already solved the problem of free will centuries ago.

]]> By: Daniel Miessler http://danielmiessler.com/blog/the-atheists-dilemma-logical-conclusions-to-the-lack-of-free-will/comment-page-1#comment-73963 Daniel Miessler Wed, 01 Aug 2007 18:50:57 +0000 http://dmiessler.com/archive/the-atheists-dilemma-logical-conclusions-to-the-lack-of-free-will#comment-73963 <p>@Arik</p> <p>You're right, of course, about the possibility of true randomness. I for one simply feel it's an illusion based on a lack of information. But I'm talking from intuition there, so it's nearly worthless.</p> <p>I simply feel that our little system was seeded by something, and whatever created the rules that govern it did not have the ability to create randomness. Highly-random "randomness"? Sure. But I almost feel like *true* randomness is something that exists outside of physics and systems.</p> <p>Anyway...that's just talk. Accept it as such. :)</p> @Arik

You’re right, of course, about the possibility of true randomness. I for one simply feel it’s an illusion based on a lack of information. But I’m talking from intuition there, so it’s nearly worthless.

I simply feel that our little system was seeded by something, and whatever created the rules that govern it did not have the ability to create randomness. Highly-random “randomness”? Sure. But I almost feel like *true* randomness is something that exists outside of physics and systems.

Anyway…that’s just talk. Accept it as such. :)

]]>