Free Will perhaps not dead?

[Skwim]

A Famous Argument Against Free Will Has Been Debunked

Even if this is hardly the only aspect that has seemingly condemned Free Will, I have always been suspicious of such evidence, since we just do not know enough about the workings of the brain yet.

Comments?

Didn't see any debunking at all. In fact, the article even admitted there was no such thing when it said:

"Is everything we do determined by the cause-and-effect chain of genes, environment, and the cells that make up our brain, or can we freely form intentions that influence our actions in the world? The topic is immensely complicated, and Schurger’s valiant debunking underscores the need for more precise and better-informed questions."​

So, the argument continues on. Why? because it has to.

The great determinator is the question "Why." After every claim of operation is made one can always ask "Why that operator and none other." Whatever the reason then functions as the determinant: It determines why X rather than Y occurred, in which case there is no room for free choice: the operation of a free will. Which brings us to the conclusion that free will is simply an illusion.

.


.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I still contend that things such as environment/upbringing, mental illness, hormones, and brain shapes among other things demonstrates that our will is far too constrained to be considered free.

 

[Nakosis]

I still contend that things such as environment/upbringing, mental illness, hormones, and brain shapes among other things demonstrates that our will is far too constrained to be considered free.

Un-constrain yourself.

I think they are a few that try to disentangle themselves from whatever constrained them in the first place.

Perhaps not completely, but to whatever degree one can, they can have more freedom in the options they choose from.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I think they are a few that try to disentangle themselves from whatever constrained them in the first place.

If someone is schizophrenic, for example, there is no disentangling yourself from that.

 

[Nakosis]

If someone is schizophrenic, for example, there is no disentangling yourself from that.

Yes, I thought of that. There are, maybe extreme, examples which would limit what any individual is capable of.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Yes, I thought of that. There are, maybe extreme, examples which would limit what any individual is capable of.

Not even extreme. If we truly had a will deserving of being called free, things like operant and classic conditioning wouldn't work or even be a thing. Manipulation over rides "free will," yet it too is a thing. And even though we call it "free," there are many examples of group conformity that suggest otherwise.

 

[Nakosis]

Not even extreme. If we truly had a will deserving of being called free, things like operant and classic conditioning wouldn't work or even be a thing. Manipulation over rides "free will," yet it too is a thing. And even though we call it "free," there are many examples of group conformity that suggest otherwise.

I find the more aware of manipulation techniques the more one can avoid them.

How easily are you manipulated? Or how free are you from being manipulated?

 

[Stevicus]

How would you know. It's about 95% of the brain acting, doing things you are not consciously aware of.

Contrary to what most of us would like to believe, decision-making may be a process handled to a large extent by unconscious mental activity. A team of scientists has unraveled how the brain actually unconsciously prepares our decisions. Even several seconds before we consciously make a decision its outcome can be predicted from unconscious activity in the brain.
Decision-making May Be Surprisingly Unconscious Activity

This makes sense to me. There are too many unexplained aspects of "free will" to make it any kind of meaningful concept.

For one thing, insomnia. If I go to bed at 10pm and can't get to sleep, am I somehow "willing" myself to stay awake? That's what "free will" would imply, but my body isn't doing what I'm willing it to do.

Another is the fallibility of human memory. Sometimes I misremember things, and sometimes I just plain forget. "Free will" implies that I somehow forgot intentionally.

 

[Willamena]

How would you know. It's about 95% of the brain acting, doing things you are not consciously aware of.

Contrary to what most of us would like to believe, decision-making may be a process handled to a large extent by unconscious mental activity. A team of scientists has unraveled how the brain actually unconsciously prepares our decisions. Even several seconds before we consciously make a decision its outcome can be predicted from unconscious activity in the brain.
Decision-making May Be Surprisingly Unconscious Activity

How would I know what?

Consciousness is a state by definition. Decisions are made unconsciously, and we become aware of (conscious of) them. I didn't need neuroscience to tell me that, just looked within.

 

[Mock Turtle]

Didn't see any debunking at all. In fact, the article even admitted there was no such thing when it said:

"Is everything we do determined by the cause-and-effect chain of genes, environment, and the cells that make up our brain, or can we freely form intentions that influence our actions in the world? The topic is immensely complicated, and Schurger’s valiant debunking underscores the need for more precise and better-informed questions."​

So, the argument continues on. Why? because it has to. .

Their work seemed to offer a plausible explanation of the brain activity that (before their work) seemingly implied some 'other' at work rather than our own consciousness, and where this aspect (or argument) might now be explained. Only this aspect of any free will argument (or lack of it) is under scrutiny here and obviously there are plenty of other reasons to believe one way or the other.

 

[wellwisher]

The modern human brain has two centers of consciousness; inner self and ego. The inner self is older and is connected to our DNA and instincts. The ego is newer and can make choices apart from the inner self; willpower.

The trap that many people fall into is assuming we have one center of consciousness and therefore there is only one choice either conscious or unconscious. A natural animal does not have will power and choice. They only have an inner self and instinct. The secondary or ego is unique to humans.

As an experiment to differentiate the inner self, have someone scare you when you are not paying attention. If this is done properly and you are caught off guard, you will jump and maybe even scream. This can be embarrassing to the ego, since the ego would prefer to display a mask of self control.

However, the inner self can process data much faster than ego and can act before willpower can control the event. If you have an advanced warning, you can use willpower, to mask over the action of the inner self. You will still feel the urge to jump, but you can willfully control the outward expression.

The new fad of assuming infinite genders is all about will power and choice, since the inner self is wired into the body and is defined by our DNA. The ego can override the inner self making the bizarre choice possible. This choice can be assisted by aspects of the unconscious, that are just below the ego, but not directly connected to the inner self; personal unconscious and a firmware modification.

 

[Mock Turtle]

The modern human brain has two centers of consciousness; inner self and ego. The inner self is older and is connected to our DNA and instincts. The ego is newer and can make choices apart from the inner self; willpower.

The trap that many people fall into is assuming we have one center of consciousness and therefore there is only one choice either conscious or unconscious. A natural animal does not have will power and choice. They only have an inner self and instinct. The secondary or ego is unique to humans.

As an experiment to differentiate the inner self, have someone scare you when you are not paying attention. If this is done properly and you are caught off guard, you will jump and maybe even scream. This can be embarrassing to the ego, since the ego would prefer to display a mask of self control.

However, the inner self can process data much faster than ego and can act before willpower can control the event. If you have an advanced warning, you can use willpower, to mask over the action of the inner self. You will still feel the urge to jump, but you can willfully control the outward expression.

The new fad of assuming infinite genders is all about will power and choice, since the inner self is wired into the body and is defined by our DNA. The ego can override the inner self making the bizarre choice possible. This choice can be assisted by aspects of the unconscious, that are just below the ego, but not directly connected to the inner self; personal unconscious and a firmware modification.

I suggest you look more closely at animal behaviour before you seemingly dismiss other species from having any human-like capabilities. We may be more advanced in many ways but we are still part of the continuum - that is, life. Where are the boundaries drawn?