Cool thought

[Mlerner12]

As far as I am concerned, you don't. According to Loki, Freedom is life's great lie and does not exist, except for him. And, you know, Loki IS A GOD, so...

[Dudecore]

I disagree with that. Even the automatic functions of the body can be controlled by will, and have their automation turned off. I can stop breathing right now. It's even possible to increase, slow, even stop ones own heartrate through pure force of will. How is any of that even relevant to the conversation of free will? I'm not following your point, there.

As your fat people analogy, it just sounds like you don't understand what it's like to be fat. While, yes, being overweight is unhealthy and anyone obese would be better off losing weight, it's not so cut and dry as you seem to think. You're talking about breaking old habits and forming new ones, which is not as simple as a "turn off the bad eating habit switch and turn on the good exercise switch." You're getting into an argument of willpower which is a very different (albeit related) issue to free will.

You see what I'm saying, right?

To stop your breathing is to merely attempt to prove you consciousness is in charge, and the heart thing I've never heard of an find it a vacuous assertion. It is quite clear you do not understand what I'm attempting to explain. Perhaps the Internet is not the best place to communicate such important and complex ideas.

As far as I'm concerned willpower is the same as free will. It would have to be. If you are truly free to author your own thoughts, intentions and actions, I find people's inability to change incongruous. What does free will mean to you then? Is it just our ability to measure competing desires? All free will seems to be saying at that point is "I could have chosen (and done) otherwise." But there is only one future, and you're only able to go forward.

New fMRI and other improved measurement techniques are revealing more of the physical workings of the brain, undermining our naive dualism. It all suggests the possibility that human behavior could be predicted much more accurately. In certain brain studies it has been found possible to predict simple decisions some seconds ahead of the apparent time of conscious decision making has occurred.

The problem for free will is that both determinism and randomness make it impossible to exist. And the unfortunate dualist is there wondering "what am I in control of". Also, what does someone without free will act like? If this extra portion of our brains/souls that allows us to alter the cause/effect actions of our brains was specifically damaged in a car accident, or ravaged by a virus - how would that person behave? It suggest there would be no change, certainly were capable of acting without free will.

[Dudecore]

How do you account for planning and actions that are clearly preconceived?

Wonderful question. I would actually ask the same of free will people. How do you reconcile the fact that you can plan and preconceived of making possible choices, ultimately to be let down? How does one find their inability to put down a television remote and go for a walk? If its like Gorzo said, you take Free Will and break it down again into more, different, complex parts.

The future only happens one specific way. When consciousness intervenes and influences ("exerts" control) over one's conscious state - Where does the impetus come from?  What wills this force into existence, and what are it and it's source made of?

Edit: i realized that i perhaps deflected the argument, but it was difficult not to, taking into consideration previous statements I made about a similar question. Essentially planning and being creative, thinking about how to tackle certain things are the product of consciousness. Consciousness is the product of our brains in various states. We're not compelled to plan different ways to conquer things we have no such power to control, so we don't. We do however take pride in the facts that our brains are able to accomplish goals that we perceive as obtainable. It's a bit of a selection bias. Where our remembering self holds onto moments where we felt we willed ourselves to succeed, and simply forget the times we've been unable to do so. Selection bias (confirmation bias) is an important tool for humans - and a necessary element for our learning.

[EvACiDe]

I disagree with that. Even the automatic functions of the body can be controlled by will, and have their automation turned off. I can stop breathing right now. It's even possible to increase, slow, even stop ones own heartrate through pure force of will. How is any of that even relevant to the conversation of free will? I'm not following your point, there.

As your fat people analogy, it just sounds like you don't understand what it's like to be fat. While, yes, being overweight is unhealthy and anyone obese would be better off losing weight, it's not so cut and dry as you seem to think. You're talking about breaking old habits and forming new ones, which is not as simple as a "turn off the bad eating habit switch and turn on the good exercise switch." You're getting into an argument of willpower which is a very different (albeit related) issue to free will.

You see what I'm saying, right?

This isn't quite true. You can control SOME automatic functions such as breathing by pure thought but things such as blood pressure cannot be.

[Gorzo]

I never said ALL of them can be controlled. I just gave a couple examples. That were completely blown off, labeled as 'vacuous,' and then I was told I was unwilling to change, all with an insulting tone

You got me, mr. pot. I'm black.

Come on, DC, you're better than that you don't have to agree with me, but down-talking at me like that accomplishes nothing but to end the conversation.

[Apathy Reactor]

I never said ALL of them can be controlled. I just gave a couple examples. That were completely blown off, labeled as 'vacuous,' and then I was told I was unwilling to change, all with an insulting tone

You got me, mr. pot. I'm black.

Come on, DC, you're better than that you don't have to agree with me, but down-talking at me like that accomplishes nothing but to end the conversation.

This is how I feel about Dudecore and there is a man who can control his body temperature at will. I can control my thoughts as well as my actions. Our future is not predetermined, although it may seem this way because there can only ever be one final outcome in a situation.

[Dudecore]

I never said ALL of them can be controlled. I just gave a couple examples. That were completely blown off, labeled as 'vacuous,' and then I was told I was unwilling to change, all with an insulting tone

You got me, mr. pot. I'm black.

Come on, DC, you're better than that you don't have to agree with me, but down-talking at me like that accomplishes nothing but to end the conversation.

Well im insulted you took it that. I would want nothing more then end this conversation with you.

We know at least philosophically and scientifically that free will is a non-starter. We can see that people think about things several seconds before they actually do them. I believe people struggle to admit this. However our mental life is caused, it cause either by some prior causes or some randomness intruding.

Sometimes in the course of existence you have to understand some pretty harsh realities. Whenever is the day you realize god does not exist - it may hurt, but you'll be better. Now imagine your brain is like someone at a computer: determining what you feel, and do, and say, and want. Then lets say for the sake of inclusion, occasionally this person threw some dice and introduced from random effects (on behalf of your genes and whatnot). We'd have a pretty simple to understand model of how determinism works, and see how there is no room for free will.

Neuroscience is born of the fact that everything we experience, care about, every instance of something mattering for us is in essence a state of our brain.

[Dudecore]

In either event. About to install iOS 7. So I may not be seen or heard from again (at least temporarily).

[Piotr]

I love this topic. And the answer is "no". We do not have free will, it is an illusion (and powerful at that). We are not little causal agents, were not the authors of our brains - we are in essence the sum of all our experience, genetics, upbringing, social strata and some luck throw in.

"If the scientific community were to declare free will an illusion, it would precipitate a culture war far more belligerent than the one that has been waged on the subject of evolution." - Sam
Harris

Luck. You can affect that. Just use the skill, Luke.

[Piotr]

But there is only one future, and you're only able to go forward.

According to current physics, is that indeed true?

[Dudecore]

I love this topic. And the answer is "no". We do not have free will, it is an illusion (and powerful at that). We are not little causal agents, were not the authors of our brains - we are in essence the sum of all our experience, genetics, upbringing, social strata and some luck throw in.

"If the scientific community were to declare free will an illusion, it would precipitate a culture war far more belligerent than the one that has been waged on the subject of evolution." - Sam
Harris

Luck. You can affect that. Just use the skill, Luke.

To a degree. But in which ways is someone responcible for being bald, middle-aged and bankrupted by the death of a spouse? In some ways were extremely lucky to even be born in this century, and much of our success can be attributed to the helping hands of other.

We couldn't say a migrant worker in Iraq as having chosen their fate in any real way. Their war torn country almost assures they'd be unable to be lucky enough to escape given their circumstances. Still, there will always be folks who say "pick yourself up by your boot straps". Those folks are actually overlooking the deterministic factors they have in store.

But there is only one future, and you're only able to go forward.

According to current physics, is that indeed true?

Well we're operating under the assumption that everything has happened in the past has indeed happened. If we want to go with a multiverse angle, we certainly can philosophize.

[Gorzo]

I never said ALL of them can be controlled. I just gave a couple examples. That were completely blown off, labeled as 'vacuous,' and then I was told I was unwilling to change, all with an insulting tone

You got me, mr. pot. I'm black.

Come on, DC, you're better than that you don't have to agree with me, but down-talking at me like that accomplishes nothing but to end the conversation.

Well im insulted you took it that. I would want nothing more then end this conversation with you.

We know at least philosophically and scientifically that free will is a non-starter. We can see that people think about things several seconds before they actually do them. I believe people struggle to admit this. However our mental life is caused, it cause either by some prior causes or some randomness intruding.

Sometimes in the course of existence you have to understand some pretty harsh realities. Whenever is the day you realize god does not exist - it may hurt, but you'll be better. Now imagine your brain is like someone at a computer: determining what you feel, and do, and say, and want. Then lets say for the sake of inclusion, occasionally this person threw some dice and introduced from random effects (on behalf of your genes and whatnot). We'd have a pretty simple to understand model of how determinism works, and see how there is no room for free will.

Neuroscience is born of the fact that everything we experience, care about, every instance of something mattering for us is in essence a state of our brain.

Now when you word it like this, it's much clearer to me what you mean, and I can agree with you (mostly) on these things. I think we may disagree on what free will means, though determinism and free will are not mutually exclusive the way I see it.

I do have to disagree that atheism makes you automatically better off, for example, but that's a different discussion. It may be better for you, and many people, and I support that 100%. But many people find comfort in their religious beliefs. There's nothing wrong with that, and it improves their lives. And I support that 100%, too. It's important to remember that everyone is different, and there's a reason pretty much every language has a version of the phrase "different strokes for different folks." Your way (nor my way) isn't the right way for everyone. Don't expect it to be.

[Dudecore]

I do have to disagree that atheism makes you automatically better off, for example, but that's a different discussion. It may be better for you, and many people, and I support that 100%. But many people find comfort in their religious beliefs. There's nothing wrong with that, and it improves their lives. And I support that 100%, too. It's important to remember that everyone is different, and there's a reason pretty much every language has a version of the phrase "different strokes for different folks." Your way (nor my way) isn't the right way for everyone. Don't expect it to be.

It was just an example of a something that is uncomfortable to consider for people who have held certain beliefs for some time.

I feel as though the idea in the "utility of belief" is rather silly (in the face of all the evidence to the contrary). People who believe that religion is useful, and gives certain folks a moral compass. It does disturb me when non-religious people say "well you and I don't need religion, but those OTHER people do." I think that believing in religion is closing yourself off of human creativity and collaboration - as if it were the only system of morals to ever exist. Be it as it may, I did make a joke in another thread that got out of hand. I'm not staunchly anti-religious, just wish for more out of people.

[Birdbrain]

Why do we say "my brain"? The brain is calling itself "my brain"? Does this make any sense? How should the brain refer to itself if it doesn't have free will?

[Dudecore]

Why do we say "my brain"? The brain is calling itself "my brain"? Does this make any sense? How should the brain refer to itself if it doesn't have free will?

Because of subjectivity.