I know free will exists because I choose not to be like any of the faggots who deny it.
>>16808809Free will is the admission price to western law. People who think they're too clever to accept it should be lobotomized and chemically castrated and/ or deported to the interior of Africa.
>>16808822free will is meaningless if you arent free from jiggaboos
but it was already predestined that you would make this faggot ass thread, just how it is for me owning you rn checkmate
I always wonder what the materialist idiots think is going on when you walk down the bakery section at Kroger and you remember if you walked up the stairs enough to justify buying a box of cookies. How is this weekly interaction not proof that we have free will?
If the universe is deterministic you can't control anything and thus don't have free willIf the universe is random you can't control the randomness and thus don't have free willNo amount of seething and coping will change this
>>16808940The universe is deterministic in that it follows our collective will, it appears random because we don't have the willpower to steer everythin.
>>16808809I choose neither
>>16808936What even is this argument?A combination of past experiences, present environment, and physical wiring or your brain led you to make the "choice" to do whatever. >enter bakery>stimulus of being there triggers series of logic gates in brain>eventually hits a point where brain checks how much stepping was done in recent memory >if "steps estimate" is "high" then buy cookies.This leads to a whole argument about what "free will" even is and since it's a poorly defined concept these free will arguments are pretty much pointless.
>>16808940pseud
>>16808981Enlighten us.
>>16808961That's exactly why I framed it as that. I think you've either never had a self argument or are just genuinely stupid enough to not understand it. I bet you know a lot more facts than me.
>>16809059I just don't think you've taken the time to think over the anti-free-will argument and what is actually being claimed. Nothing in your post is even suggestive of free will. It's an example of a stimulus triggering logic gates which is exactly what "materialist idiots" think is happening.I added the ambiguity of free will as a concept as an aside. Nothing about the way you "framed it" supports that. Indeed, you claimed your example as "proof that we have free will."
How do you know it was a choice you made?
>>16808940Have you heard of voluntary and involuntary muscles?
>>16808940>>16808941the universe is probabilistic, and so are wedeterminism exists only in the minds of the low functioning autistic
>>16809070And I think you are stupid. But this was determined.
>>16808809>steps in your wayBtw, free will is just a posteriori cope to make your life make enough sense to not kys.
>>16809083>all of my failures were predestinedYou would have been utterly despise by Socrates.
>>16809083Much more likely that determinism is a posteriori cope to absolve your life of failed decisions. (This is actually a healthy coping mechanism to continually reboot your life if you fail a lot.)
>>16809085Didnt say anything about determinism, did I? "Free will" needs several limitations and presuppostions to even work philosophically, turning the actual question more into >is there kinda free will or no free will at all?because a free "free will" is nothing more than a fantasy.
>>16809087If "my imagination can make unicorns" is your idea of free will you are correct.
>>16809099>>16809087Imagine your idea of not God is predicating you argue this with me. What a shitty predisposed universe.
>>16809087What are your insights into a free "free 'free will'"?
>>16809099Try willing another thing when you will something and there's no reason not to will it.If will is completely free, independent even, why is every and any will based on a) reality as a human, b) your individual reality as a human and c) not completely random. If will were free, it would the hell not be influenced by peculiarities like reality or your location/physical state, wouldn't it?
>>16809104I'll make you want to put my balls into your mouth and fondle them with your tongue because you'll have no other choice.
>>16809107I cosign your philosophical description of determinism as a homosexual rape fantasy.
>>16808809So why don't you freely will yourself to kill yourself?
You not being like any of the faggots that deny it was predictable right from the big bang thoughbeit.
>>16809118>I know all about the big bangThis post is more evidence that determinists are people whose brain development stopped shortly after reading a children's book about the universe.
>>16808809i know that i deny humans specifically have free will. now get your ass to work and pay your taxes.
as always I am the only person who has anything insightful to bring to the conversation and as always what I bring will filter 99% of you
>>16809141>wallpaper of teal deer>conversationfiltered
>>16808809No, if free will were real you could choose from some infinite set of options besides just being limited to denying it, confirming it, nonsensically redefining it or claiming ignorance.
>>16808822No, western law gives willpower and personhood to collections of paperwork, are you saying legal contracts of incorporation have free will?
>>16809099Your imagination didn't make unicorns, the concept of unicorns was imagined hundreds if not thousands of years before you were born, you just learned about them at some point.
>>16808809you're just following your brain's strongest impulse
>>16808809Determinists are retards that don't actually know what will means. Even if you were to reduce decision making to pure chemical reactions, that does not negate a person having agency over their own choices.Are you making decisions yourself or is another agent? You make your own choices, therefore you have free will even if you are influenced by biology or society.Also, to say you don't believe in free will presupposes a self with a mind, a mind which can know things and make decisions, therefore the proposition of "I don't believe in free will" is self defeating and an absurdity.
>>16809436>Even if you were to reduce decision making to pure chemical reactionsThat's not what's being done. The working of the brain is reduced to pure chemical reactions. You are overlaying the terminology of "decision making" on that without any basis.>, to say you don't believe in free will presupposes a self with a mindNo, it doesn't.
>>16809437>That's not what's being done. The working of the brain is reduced to pure chemical reactions. You are overlaying the terminology of "decision making" on that without any basis.I'm saying even if that was the case, which hasn't been demonstrated at all, that does not negate the agency of the person.>No, it doesn't.Yes it does. Do propositions and knowledge require a mind? If they do, then that assumes a mind and an agent or subject with it. If you accidentally find out the truth, that isn't justified true belief therefore you can't give an account for the proposition of "people have no free will". If you do think people can have justified true belief for determinism, then you have the absurd position of somehow having a mind that can know determinism while also being incapable of knowing determinism due to human consciousness being an illusion, which is a contradiction.If determinism is true, then knowledge is illusory and not even possible to truly have.
>>16808940No amount of seething and coping will change that both you and OP are gay and retarded.kill yourself. (note if you don't kill yourself after I proclaimed it, then you have freewill and you are wrong, so the only way to prove ME wrong is to kill yourself as you suck on a dick.)
>>16809439>that does not negate the agency of the person.That depends on whether it is possible to overlay the terminology of "decision making" on the mechanistic description based on chemical reaction. If it's not possible to do that, then the notion of agency will be negated.>Do propositions and knowledge require a mind?Most words in this question are not well-defined. You can't deduce any robust conclusions by using such vague and ill-defined terms.
>>16809441If you have free will, kill yourself. If you don't kill yourself, that proves you're incapable of making that decision and so you have no free will.
>Ask ChatGPT something>Get a reply>Somebody else on the internet asks it the same, using the exact same prompt>He gets a response similar to mine, but not exactly the same.Doesn't that prove that free will exists? LLMs work by multiplying your prompt with its internal parameters and generating a response based on that.If free will didn't exist, ChatGPT would always reply the same words when it gets the same prompt, because its parameters are fixed, and the multiplications always result in the same numbers.And yet LLMs don't always give the same reply, which means they have free will to choose which words to use, a free will that can't be explained by science, because science is determinist and LLMs are non determinist
>>16809442>That depends on whether it is possible to overlay the terminology of "decision making" on the mechanistic description based on chemical reaction. If it's not possible to do that, then the notion of agency will be negated.Yet you haven't demonstrated this at all, you instead presuppose this to be the case without any justification.>Most words in this question are not well-defined. You can't deduce any robust conclusions by using such vague and ill-defined terms.Justified true belief is an ill defined term? Take an epistemology class dude.
>>16809445>Yet you haven't demonstrated this at allWhich part do you want me to demonstrate?>Justified true belief is an ill defined term?Absolutely. Since you mentioned the term epistemology, I assume you are philosophically trained, so I have to tell you - there's a reason no one in the sciences uses terms like "justified true belief" in their work - it's because they're not well-defined and don't lead to robust conclusions.
>>16809443>REEEEEE>NO U!!!!!fuck you nigger, you don't get to uno reverse ME.I'm out side of you retarded universe, I do as I wish, you little retarded nigger!Anyways, I was first so YOU have to kill yourself, if you don't I win!
>>16809447Why would I engage with someone that thinks Justified True Belief is an ill defined term when it is literally clear cut on what it exactly means.So you don't think science requires justification? If it doesn't, then science is irrational and pointing to a stack of evidence means nothing if it doesn't lead to actually knowing truth.Yeah if scientists actually took a basic epistemology class, maybe they would conduct actual science with results instead of chasing whatever the current zeitgeist is and having a reproducibility crisis.
>>16809455Yes, science certainly requires no post hoc "justification", especially from philosophers who still haven't learned anything in over two millennia. >reproducibility crisisThis "crisis" is only in psychology which is a very primitive science.
>>16809451Maybe you should use your free will to stop being so angry all the time?
>>16809436Explain how non-determinism leads to free will
>>16808940This is logically undeniable but it's a bad definition of free will. If you're not in charge of your actions, who is?It's your own programming (personality) that determines how you behave. You literally wouldn't be you if you acted differently. The fact that it's predetermined doesn't change your ability to learn and improve and act differently in the future, the only difference is that you were always going to make the choices you made based on the information you had.You're not a slave, which is what freaks people out when they think about "not having free will". Mercifully, based on our current knowledge, it also does NOT seem like even a hypothetical fantasy super computer could predict what you're going to do with perfect precision, because the universe appears to be fundamentally randomistic.
>>16808940How does does knowledge and predictive power negate free will? I know if I ask my brother for pizza that he will always want the same toppings no matter what, how does me having knowledge of this mean he did not choose these things?Knowledge and will in some sense aren't even the same category of things other than they both require a mind. If free will is negated by predictions, does free will all of a sudden become subjective and in flux depending on how good other people can predict, so person A for example makes accurate prediction so you have less will but person B can't make predictions so all of a sudden now you have more free will? Are we even talking about a persons ability to make their own choices or how knowledgeable other people are?
The issue of free will dissolves once "you" realize that there's nobody there to have free will in the first place
>>16809531Okay, buddhist, go reincarnate into a worm somewhere else.
>>16808940Determinism vs randomness has nothing to do with free will
>>16808809Imagine ever watching this dorks channel. I got a 99 asvab 148 gt. And I loved the vast majority of my time in as a combat engineer. But who is this nigger fooling? He wasn't intelligence.