Octopus Overlords

BooTx wrote: ↑Wed Nov 15, 2017 6:53 pm Is it really belief if you're just hedging your bets to save your ass though?

Can't find a link to it, but there's an old Marc Maron bit about that: "I'm a catholic... just in case"

One of Wife's work benefits is supposed to be free will preparation. When we went through the process, the lawyer talked us into creating a trust to make amending the will easier. Fine, whatever, that's just lawyer crap. We sat at a big table and signed a lot of papers with a bunch of other lawyers as witnesses. Then a few weeks later the law firm told us we couldn't have the papers because the trust part of it isn't free. We would have to pay the difference. So now we have a will, maybe, that's in some kind of legal limbo because they tricked us with the ol' bait-and-switch. My understanding is that we cannot legally die now. I pity our heirs. We tried to be responsible but it got all lawyered up.

Anyway, this proves that there is such a thing as a free will, but you can't trust it.

Kraken wrote: ↑Sat Nov 11, 2017 8:47 pm Free will would require an infinitude of parallel universes, each of them a possible future.

Why does free will require an infinitude of parallel universes? Why not one universe? I don't see any logical requirement for multiple universes. Enlighten me

BooTx wrote: ↑Wed Nov 15, 2017 6:53 pm

Jaymann wrote: ↑Wed Nov 15, 2017 5:47 pmYou Pascally Wabbit! I take it you are referring to Pascal's Wager, which essentially says it is rational to believe in God, since it costs you nothing, but if you reject belief you are risking eternal damnation.

Is it really belief if you're just hedging your bets to save your ass though?

No, you cannot presume upon God.

Grifman wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2017 8:06 pm

Kraken wrote: ↑Sat Nov 11, 2017 8:47 pm Free will would require an infinitude of parallel universes, each of them a possible future.

Why does free will require an infinitude of parallel universes? Why not one universe? I don't see any logical requirement for multiple universes. Enlighten me

Quantum entanglement theory indicates that it is possible that light can go back in time. If light can go back in time, information can be transmitted back in time and the future altered according to free will. If free will is a thing and everything isn't already written in stone.

However, it also appears as if there may be other issues with that:

It relies on a quantum function known as ‘post-selection’ which essentially allows the probability of a future occurrence to be engineered into happening (perhaps we can liken this to a self-fulfilling prophecy). In quantum and mathematical fields, this is known as ‘conditioning a probability space‘. In the laboratory, this has been tested at very basic levels through the grandfather paradox (this paradox highlights one of many problems with time travel) and has reproduced a 25% success ratio in our ‘dimension’. If you were really into your theoretical physics, you could make the assumption that the other 75% manifested in different dimensions or elsewhere in the multiverse.

What the experiment actually showed was the universe’s answer to the grandfather paradox – a sort of self-defense mechanism. Where the photon COULD travel back in time with an engineered ‘quantum gun’, but it COULDN’T kill itself, as the gun could not fire. But when the time travel FAILED, it could fire the gun.

Edit - this is fun, and I love living in the 21st century with such a wealth of information at our fingertips.

Pyperkub wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2017 8:35 pm Edit - this is fun, and I love living in the 21st century with such a wealth of information at our fingertips.

I'm not sure anything but what a *very* small number of experts say about Quantum Whatever counts as "information."

Holman wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2017 8:42 pm

Pyperkub wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2017 8:35 pm Edit - this is fun, and I love living in the 21st century with such a wealth of information at our fingertips.

I'm not sure anything but what a *very* small number of experts say about Quantum Whatever counts as "information."

Eh, it makes sense given my layman's understanding of quantum physics and relativity (well, the alleged defense mechanism doesn't, save to the idea that positing multiple universes, the grandfather paradox solution could be to spin off a separate universe from the moment the quantum gun fired and hit - our universe could never see it, because it had changed, etc.).

And PS, my google-fu (duckduckgo in this case, actually) returned a shit-ton of links, I just perused a few and posted a couple.

Grifman wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2017 8:06 pm

Kraken wrote: ↑Sat Nov 11, 2017 8:47 pm Free will would require an infinitude of parallel universes, each of them a possible future.

Why does free will require an infinitude of parallel universes? Why not one universe? I don't see any logical requirement for multiple universes. Enlighten me

Because of the many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics. And much damn fine science fiction over the years.

Grifman wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2017 8:06 pm

Kraken wrote: ↑Sat Nov 11, 2017 8:47 pm Free will would require an infinitude of parallel universes, each of them a possible future.

Why does free will require an infinitude of parallel universes? Why not one universe? I don't see any logical requirement for multiple universes. Enlighten me

I said that in the context of time-traveling into the future. If there is only one future and it already exists -- which would seem to be a prerequisite for visiting it -- then our choices don't matter and free will is an illusion. All of our decisions and actions are predetermined. If free will exists, then there is no "the" future to visit. You need infinite universes to hold all possible futures if we are able to visit any of them.

Kraken wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2017 11:51 pm

Grifman wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2017 8:06 pm

Kraken wrote: ↑Sat Nov 11, 2017 8:47 pm Free will would require an infinitude of parallel universes, each of them a possible future.

Why does free will require an infinitude of parallel universes? Why not one universe? I don't see any logical requirement for multiple universes. Enlighten me

I said that in the context of time-traveling into the future. If there is only one future and it already exists -- which would seem to be a prerequisite for visiting it -- then our choices don't matter and free will is an illusion. All of our decisions and actions are predetermined. If free will exists, then there is no "the" future to visit. You need infinite universes to hold all possible futures if we are able to visit any of them.

Why does one future mean our choices don't matter? And the future doesn't exist - it hasn't happened yet. I would say that it is our free will choices that create that future. That's how we got there.

Yes, Unagi, there is.

Nice thread necro, as this is a better place than Racism in America for the discussion. The poll shows 68% believe in free will. I would be interested to hear some rebuttals of Sam Harris' thesis.

And just to get it on this thread :

Below is a clip of Sam Harris actually describing what he even means by Free Will. For instance, this is not a 'you have no control' view or a fatalistic one. It's not about no responsibility, or let's say - a pointlessness to trying to better ones self. It's about the nature of our brain, physics, and our experience of consciousness.

Unagi wrote: ↑Tue Mar 15, 2022 4:16 pm

Unagi wrote: ↑Tue Mar 15, 2022 6:37 pm For instance, this is not a 'you have no control' view

Some may disagree with my take on that, but I believe if you listen/read enough of him on this you understand the nuance of that 'black box of consciousness' they speak of. /shrug

Jaymann wrote: ↑Sat Nov 11, 2017 10:15 pm

Kraken wrote: ↑Sat Nov 11, 2017 8:47 pm There's a religious aspect to the question. If there is no free will, then the universe is a predetermined clockwork.

This. I debated posting in EBG, but figured if the conversation got into this area, it would be moved to R&P anyway.

I mean, you think you debated....

I don't trust anything that's "free" - you get what you pay for.

If there is free will what about the time loop where as everything that has happened cannot be changed?

Unagi wrote: ↑Tue Mar 15, 2022 6:51 pm

Jaymann wrote: ↑Sat Nov 11, 2017 10:15 pm

Kraken wrote: ↑Sat Nov 11, 2017 8:47 pm There's a religious aspect to the question. If there is no free will, then the universe is a predetermined clockwork.

This. I debated posting in EBG, but figured if the conversation got into this area, it would be moved to R&P anyway.

I mean, you think you debated....

That's hilarious. According to Harris changing your mind leads to where you were always going. And flipping a coin is not free will either. And you aren't even obliged to follow the coin outcome. Although if someone put a gun to your head and said, "You WILL follow the coin flip," that could hardly make a case for free will.

I watch videos like this while I'm falling asleep. They tend not to help.

I'm also still trying to sort out Calvinism vs. Arminianism.

She doesn't even talk about how your gut bacteria or parasites are driving your decisions. That freaks me out more than her woo-woo here.

EDIT: I am remarkably consistent. Or my parasites are.

Did she show her woo woo?

Smoove_B wrote: ↑Tue Mar 15, 2022 8:18 pm She doesn't even talk about how your gut bacteria or parasites are driving your decisions. That freaks me out more than her woo-woo here.

EDIT: I am remarkably consistent. Or my parasites are.

Serious question. If you 100% flushed them out would you survive?

Oh hell no.
Your mother passed those bacteria on to you and you need em.

Jaymann wrote: ↑Tue Mar 15, 2022 7:39 pm

Unagi wrote: ↑Tue Mar 15, 2022 6:51 pm

Jaymann wrote: ↑Sat Nov 11, 2017 10:15 pm

Kraken wrote: ↑Sat Nov 11, 2017 8:47 pm There's a religious aspect to the question. If there is no free will, then the universe is a predetermined clockwork.

This. I debated posting in EBG, but figured if the conversation got into this area, it would be moved to R&P anyway.

I mean, you think you debated....

That's hilarious. According to Harris changing your mind leads to where you were always going. And flipping a coin is not free will either. And you aren't even obliged to follow the coin outcome. Although if someone put a gun to your head and said, "You WILL follow the coin flip," that could hardly make a case for free will.

Have you seen what passes for the mind's decisions lately? Do you think most people's mind's have a plan?

Jaymann wrote: ↑Wed Nov 15, 2017 5:47 pm

Holman wrote: ↑Mon Nov 13, 2017 11:35 am Since we can't know and since common sense strongly supports the belief in free will, what's gained by presuming we don't have it?

Even more, I can think of all kinds of bad results that likely follow from an ideology rejecting free will. Since we believe ourselves free to believe in free will and to prevent those results, we ought to do so.

It's kind of Pascally.

You Pascally Wabbit! I take it you are referring to Pascal's Wager, which essentially says it is rational to believe in God, since it costs you nothing, but if you reject belief you are risking eternal damnation.

!! So that's where C.S. Lewis got that idea?! Sonofa...I thought that was original. And I also had the same question as someone above about it, and thought it pretty damn superficial. Is that really belief? You're not even tricking yourself into believing, you are just internally saying so. That is weird as hell (to me).

Kraken wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2017 5:33 pm One of Wife's work benefits is supposed to be free will preparation. When we went through the process, the lawyer talked us into creating a trust to make amending the will easier. Fine, whatever, that's just lawyer crap. We sat at a big table and signed a lot of papers with a bunch of other lawyers as witnesses. Then a few weeks later the law firm told us we couldn't have the papers because the trust part of it isn't free. We would have to pay the difference. So now we have a will, maybe, that's in some kind of legal limbo because they tricked us with the ol' bait-and-switch. My understanding is that we cannot legally die now. I pity our heirs. We tried to be responsible but it got all lawyered up.

Anyway, this proves that there is such a thing as a free will, but you can't trust it.

Noice.

Also, www.freewill.com allows you to do a whole bunch of stuff for free. I am currently doing an FPOA (Financial Power of Attorney) on there for my Mom. No idea about trusts though (but I think I saw that as well as an option).

Now back to the topic: The Matrix. There, I said it. It needed saying, and I can't believe this thread has made it to page 2 without a mention. WTF.

Personally, I think our subconsicous minds are certainly moving us in a certain direction, BUT if you actively take the reigns, and recognize that our subconscious is only trying to 'keep us alive' as it were...avoiding risk, maintaining the same patterns of behavior and even existence, you can "take the red pill" as it were. Anyone heard of arriving at work and not really being aware of how you got there? Brain on auto-pilot!

The default, subconscious behavior is MIGHTY strong, and I think most people just go along with it, giving in every day, letting things settle, etc. It's safe, and comfortable, and it "feels" right. Numbing, almost. But of course, that kind of risk-averse, biologically hardwired behavior presumably only keeps us "safe", not happy, and therein lies the problem of modern angst. Maybe.

We no longer have to fear being caught outside the cave after dark anymore, but deep down, we want more than that.

I can accept that. Free will is the alternative to just following orders. It takes effort to to bypass the instinctive response that is ingrained by millions of years, but we're not locked into autopilot.

Blackhawk wrote: ↑Wed Mar 16, 2022 9:35 am I can accept that. Free will is the alternative to just following orders. It takes effort to to bypass the instinctive response that is ingrained by millions of years, but we're not locked into autopilot.

Exactly. As usual, you condense my rambling, poorly written ideas down into a concise, well-formed phrase (assuming you were respdonging to me!)

Ok. None of that is what Sam Harris is getting at.

He knows that a lot of us aren't going to bother watching the video.

It's a free will thread, not just a Sam Harris thread.

Well. It’s not a Sam Harris thread at all.
I just asked for people to address (or take a moment to expose themselves to) his specific take on Free Will.

Sorry

If you don’t want to watch it or don’t want to talk about it, that’s fine - I assumed people wouldn’t want to talk about it in the Racism thread.

I'm just giving you hell. I assume Blackhawk is as well.

For those who insist they have free will, I would ask you how you address one issue:

How do you explain the fact that scientists can scan your brain and determine what choice you will make before you consciously make a choice.

Jaymann wrote: ↑Wed Mar 16, 2022 1:03 pm For those who insist they have free will, I would ask you how you address one issue:

How do you explain the fact that scientists can scan your brain and determine what choice you will make before you consciously make a choice.

Pre-cognition?! Source?

Carpet_pissr wrote: ↑Wed Mar 16, 2022 1:07 pm

Jaymann wrote: ↑Wed Mar 16, 2022 1:03 pm For those who insist they have free will, I would ask you how you address one issue:

How do you explain the fact that scientists can scan your brain and determine what choice you will make before you consciously make a choice.

Pre-cognition?! Source?

Article here.

Isgrimnur wrote: ↑Wed Mar 16, 2022 12:57 pm I'm just giving you hell. I assume Blackhawk is as well.

Um no, pretty certain he’s not. Well, not in an amicable way.

Carpet_pissr wrote: ↑Wed Mar 16, 2022 8:37 am

Jaymann wrote: ↑Wed Nov 15, 2017 5:47 pm

Holman wrote: ↑Mon Nov 13, 2017 11:35 am Since we can't know and since common sense strongly supports the belief in free will, what's gained by presuming we don't have it?

Even more, I can think of all kinds of bad results that likely follow from an ideology rejecting free will. Since we believe ourselves free to believe in free will and to prevent those results, we ought to do so.

It's kind of Pascally.

You Pascally Wabbit! I take it you are referring to Pascal's Wager, which essentially says it is rational to believe in God, since it costs you nothing, but if you reject belief you are risking eternal damnation.

!! So that's where C.S. Lewis got that idea?! Sonofa...I thought that was original. And I also had the same question as someone above about it, and thought it pretty damn superficial. Is that really belief? You're not even tricking yourself into believing, you are just internally saying so. That is weird as hell (to me).

Of course, as French Catholic, Pascal is at this very moment burning in the fires of Zoroastrian hell.

Holman wrote: ↑Wed Mar 16, 2022 2:25 pm

Carpet_pissr wrote: ↑Wed Mar 16, 2022 8:37 am

Jaymann wrote: ↑Wed Nov 15, 2017 5:47 pm

Holman wrote: ↑Mon Nov 13, 2017 11:35 am Since we can't know and since common sense strongly supports the belief in free will, what's gained by presuming we don't have it?

Even more, I can think of all kinds of bad results that likely follow from an ideology rejecting free will. Since we believe ourselves free to believe in free will and to prevent those results, we ought to do so.

It's kind of Pascally.

You Pascally Wabbit! I take it you are referring to Pascal's Wager, which essentially says it is rational to believe in God, since it costs you nothing, but if you reject belief you are risking eternal damnation.

!! So that's where C.S. Lewis got that idea?! Sonofa...I thought that was original. And I also had the same question as someone above about it, and thought it pretty damn superficial. Is that really belief? You're not even tricking yourself into believing, you are just internally saying so. That is weird as hell (to me).

Of course, as French Catholic, Pascal is at this very moment burning in the fires of Zoroastrian hell.

You mean he rejected his own wager?

P. S. So it is fortuitous that my intestinal parasites directed me to post this thread in R & P.