TPF : Free Will vs Determinism

[Gnomon]

Bingo. I've spent days in another thread providing a LITANY of scientific studies that show there is no evidence that suggests this isn't the case. — Garrett Travers

I assume that "this" refers to the poetic & religious notions of human autonomy & moral agency that are rejected as wishful thinking by some philosophical & scientific thinkers. But, their reductionist policy regarding Nature-studies tends to exclude such holistic phenomena as the feeling of personal freedom. So, I don't know where you found a "litany of scientific studies" in favor of freedom from determinism.

However, the book that inspired this revival of the FreeWill thread, does present a plethora of scientific evidence against human autonomy. Since their minds are already made-up, few posters here have read the referenced book, or even the book review on my blog. But there is one side-note in the review that links to an article by Scientific American magazine blogger John Horgan : Free Will is Real. There, he interprets the scientific evidence, if not proving moral freedom, at least not proving that causal immunity is impossible.

So, it's usually left up to theoretical philosophers to prove by argumentation, not evidence, that humans have evolved some independence from Deterministic natural laws. In the article, Horgan confesses that "I can live without God, but I need free will. Without free will life makes no sense, it lacks meaning. So I’m always on the lookout for strong, clear arguments for free will." That's why he interviewed a philosopher who has made a study of scientific evidence, and concluded that "Free Will is Real". Which is the title of his book linked below.


Free Will Is Real :
Philosopher Christian List argues against reductionism and determinism in accounts of the mind
https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/cr ... l-is-real/

Why Free Will Is Real :
List makes the case that free will is real by responding to the three key objections typically proposed in the philosophical literature through the central insight that free will should be considered a ‘higher-level’ psychological phenomenon.
https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/lsereviewofbook ... tian-list/

https://www.emotionsclinic.com/wp-conte ... eewill.jpg

[Gnomon]

OK 'God' is not, but the Eternal Basis may have a way of coming up with something workable although not ideal, which we have to figure out, which may help out with the 'free' quandary of free will. — PoeticUniverse

Yes. Several philosophers, over the ages, have concluded that, in order for anything temporal & temporary to exist, something stable & eternal must exist unconditionally. Ironically, for the Greeks, the notion of conditional space-time came long before we obtained evidence that even the physical universe had a beginning, and will eventually fade away into non-being. For example, Heraclitus ("panta rhei") referred to this ultimate perfection as the "'Absolute' -- the all-inclusive whole or unity that underlies everything -- exists in the unity of opposites, first as a 'Being", and secondly as a constant 'Becoming'" (Philosophy Now, Dec - Jan). Like Plato and Aristotle, Heraclitus didn't refer to this "eternal" essence as a humanoid god, but as an abstract principle (law of laws) of existence.

In my own Enformationism thesis, I came to the same conclusion, but from a different direction. The weird sciences of Quantum & Information, were begging for an Absolute Ground to make sense of the counter-intuitive aspects of "the most successful theory ever formulated". So, borrowing from those ancient intuitions, I began to refer to my "Ground of all Being", with the traditional terms : BEING, LOGOS, and Universal Substance. However, in deference to the most common tradition, I also added the ambiguous label "G*D", to more completely cover the multi-faceted role of what the Information-based thesis proposed : "the Enformer", or "the Programmer". I even equate the "Absolute" with Eastern notions of impersonal "Brahma", and abstract "Tao". Like Infinity & Zero, these absolutes encompass every possibility. So, a simple non-theological description might be just plain "ALL". And a worldview based on that integrated & unified principle is known as Holism.

Heraclitus, also anticipated the Eastern notion of Yin-Yang in his concept of "unity of opposites". This is a way of reconciling all dichotomies by merging antithetical polar opposites into a synthesis of Unity (the One). For example, Hegel, lecturing on Heraclitus explained his notion of Unified Identity : "Subjectivity is the opposite of Objectivity, and since each is the 'other' of the 'other". He went on to assert that "thought itself is the true Being". And in the 21st century, we could substitute shape-shifting "Enformation" (energy / matter + life / mind) as a modern version of ancient Logos and Tao. Like abstract Energy, we don't know what BEING is, only what it does : cause beings & things to exist, and to desist.

Since "Absolute BEING" encompasses all possibilities, including Positive & Negative, Freedom & Determinism, the Yin-Yang notion of Freedom within Determinism could suggest a solution to the "free quandary" in a cause & effect world. Randomness explores all possibilities, but Selection chooses what becomes Actual.

UNITY OF OPPOSITES INCLUDES
FREEDOM AND DETERMINISM
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/0d/ab/f7 ... b209af.jpg

[Gnomon]

I argue that agency, choice, and control are emergent, higher-level phenomena,
Hope so!
I just moved my coffee so I can't knock it over. — PoeticUniverse

Smart move! Some advocates of Panpsychism imagine that all elements of reality are conscious agents. But my interpretation of "Universal Information" (ratios ; relationships) could be called "Evolutionary Panpsychism". In that case, "psyche -" refers to the mind-stuff (Logic : Memes) we now know as "Information" (meaning-to-Self & power-to-inform non-self), not as wandering souls. This interpretation makes Reincarnation and Karma unlikely, but useful as what-if metaphorical models to mull over.

Moreover, the current peak of emergent agency is the self-&-other-control of homo sapiens. Which is limited to internal self-control, plus the intention to control external non-self via natural & technological extensions of body and senses. For example : You imagined a future state in which your elbow knocked the cup over, then exercised your statistical freedom to move your hand in order to change that possible future state from probable mess (90%) to less likely (10%).

Emergence :
Emergence is a continuous process that appears to be sudden only because the mind reaches a tipping-point of understanding between an old meaning and a new meaning, causing a phase-change from one logical category to another.
BothAnd Blog Glossary

PS__If the esoteric topic of Emergence, Phase Transitions, and Quantum Leaps interests you, PM me for a link to a brief idiosyncratic model of Evolution by transitional stages.

Humans design in top-down waterfall phases,
but Evolution emerges in bottom-up stairstep
stages of development
0. Omega Point :
Who knows?
9. Reiterate
Ongoing Emergences
8. Artificial Forms :
Machines, Computers
8. Metaphysical Forms:
Reasoning & Designing
7. Organic Forms :
Life, Minds, Societies
6. Physical Forms :
Stars, Galaxies, Planets
5. Matter :
Primitive Particles
4. Energy :
Unformed Plasma
3. Quantum Field :
Statistical Possibilities
2. Big Bang :
Start the computation
Set initial conditions
1. Singularity :
Design, Codes, Laws
0.Infinity :
Eternal Logos

[Gnomon]

↪Gnomon :lol: tears — 180 Proof

Come-on now! Big philosophers don't cry over spilled mockery :joke:

[Gnomon]

I argue that agency, choice, and control are emergent, higher-level phenomena, — PoeticUniverse

Speaking of "Emergence" and other mysterious appearances. I just came across an article by Tom Siegfried of Science News, that may shed light on another controversial concept that we have discussed on this and other "Science vs Pseudoscience" threads. For instance, I often use the Aristotelian concept of "Potential" in my posts as reference to things that are "not yet actual", such as wavefunctions that are potential particles. He calls this "a new philosophical framework". The paper's authors propose that we "expand the definition of reality" to include things that have "not yet become actual". Hence, "These potential realities do not exist in spacetime, but nevertheless are “ontological” — that is, real components of existence." They understand that it's a difficult concept to grasp for those with a Classical physical worldview.

However, a similar concept has been proposed by biologist & neuroscientist, Terrence Deacon, in his book Incomplete Nature. There, he introduces the notion of Constructive or Constitutive Absence, as a "state of things not yet realized". He suggests that is a "defining attribute of life and mind" as well as of "ententional' phenomena, such as functions, thoughts, adaptations, purposes, and subjective experiences". Deacon's Absence also seems to be similar to Aristotle's Potential.

Coincidentally, the Science News article says, “This new ontological picture requires that we expand our concept of ‘what is real’ to include an extraspatiotemporal domain of quantum possibility,” Which some posters will reflexively label as "bunk" or "category error". But another recent post on the Immaterialism thread linked to a novel idea from physicist Sean Carroll : Effective Field Theory. He refers to this field of Potential as more fundamental than a virtual Quantum Field, and labels it as the "underlying reality". Really???

I may get deeper into the spooky Power of Absence later in this thread about how the human Will could convert ideal Potential into real Actual. But, meanwhile, I'm aware that these cutting-edge scientific theories are making it harder to distinguish Science from Pseudoscience. Yet that's the price we pay for cutting reality down-to-the-bone and beyond.


Quantum mysteries dissolve if possibilities are realities :
three scientists argue that including “potential” things on the list of “real” things can avoid the counterintuitive conundrums that quantum physics poses.
https://www.sciencenews.org/blog/contex ... -realities

Constructive Absence : a form of causality dependent on specifically absent features and unrealized potentials

Effective Field Theory :
In physics, an effective field theory is a type of approximation, or effective theory, for an underlying physical theory,
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussi ... ent/651352

↪

[Gnomon]

We see that the All had to employ the opposites of matter and anti-matter, which in addition to being mirror opposites have opposite electrical charge; so now we know that the All couldn't have done it with just one type of matter. We can surmise that other opposites were also of necessity, such as positive kinetic energy and negative potential energy. — PoeticUniverse

Yes. I envision the "splitting" of the BigBang Singularity as an ovum (egg) dividing. First one cell becomes two, and then two become four, thus the bifurcation continues doubling at an exponential rate. Each pair are twins, but opposite. And the tension between positive & negative poles creates minor differences, that eventually become significant enough to call them separate categories or species or organisms.

The result of this rapid doubling & opposing is the emergence of a complex multicellular universe with a variety of organizations, such as stars & galaxies & planets & living things. That creative polarization continues today, because it is necessary for change & evolution. Oppositions are dynamic, whether they attract or repel each other. So, we call those pulling or pushing relationships "forces" or "energy".

It's the internal tug-o-war that makes the world go around. But it also pulls things apart, which we call "entropy". That negative force would quickly dissolve all organizations of matter, if it were not for the opposing force that I call "Enformy" (the power to enform ; to organize). It's the self-organizing force that reductive scientists call "negentropy". But as a holistic philosopher, I prefer to focus on the positive.

For example, amid all this deterministic cause & effect -- due perhaps to an incidental swerving curve -- some looping effects bend back on themselves, creating positive feedback, and novel effects that never existed before. Thus oppositions are necessary for the creation of difference and for the "endless forms most beautiful" that Darwin extolled. In my thesis, I call that pushing & pulling creative force : EnFormAction.

EXPONENTIAL CELLULAR DIVISION
https://cloudfront.jove.com/files/ftp_u ... 00fig1.jpg

[Gnomon]

Kevin Giorbran had an idea, in ‘Everything Forever’, but he killed himself, so I can’t get any more out of him… — PoeticUniverse

I read Giorban's book several years ago, and it blew my mind. Sadly, he exercised his FreeWill with the ultimate personal choice : "to be, or not to be?" So he went on to explore that eternal state before he could break his ideas down for me. Consequently, much of the book went over my time-bound Something-Right-Now mind. Some of his interpretations of "Timelessness" seem to imply some kind metaphorical time-travel. That sounds like Deacon's Constitutive Absence. But I don't know if he meant for that block-time imagery to be taken literally.

Excerpts from reviews of Everything Forever :
"The past and the future are quantum potentials, and conscious beings are continually creating the most likely futures and the most likely, consistent pasts. Meaning arises as a result of the decoherence of these potential states."

"I particularly enjoyed the section on how the future helps arrange the present."

[Gnomon]

Since mechanistic models only consider the extrinsic force exerted on one part by another in a deterministic system, they overlook the spontaneous propagation and self-persistence of constraints that organize our world while leaving it open to further organization. ___Terrance Deacon — PoeticUniverse

Deacon put his finger on the crux of this FreeWiil debate. Those who hold a "mechanistic model" of the world are self-blinded to the Holistic & Organismic functions of a system with the creative internal "constraints" that we know as Natural Laws. Those limits on random freedom tend to guide the cause & effect chain in a pre-determined, non-accidental direction. The result of that internal guidance system is the patterns within randomness that we interpret as order & meaning.

PS__Unfortunately, some of us go to the opposite extreme by creating a spiritualistic model of reality, in which souls can overcome the gravity of their body.

[Gnomon]

So now I have as much free will as there can be. Hurray! — PoeticUniverse

Yay! You have become a guided mission within the mostly random flux of natural causation. What makes the difference is Intention & Selection.

[Gnomon]

The inevitable future of equilibrium symmetry carefully designs/forces the stable particles with properties that will produce the periodic table, molecules, even DNA. — PoeticUniverse

As you implied in a previous post, the universe has a "broken" symmetry. Perfect symmetry would not allow for change & positive evolution. Perhaps that imperfection of determination is what allows us to freely choose "which branch of a bifurcation to take".

In physics, symmetry breaking is a phenomenon in which (infinitesimally) small fluctuations acting on a system crossing a critical point decide the system's fate, by determining which branch of a bifurcation is taken.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symmetry_breaking