Those 3 attributes will produce a happier life in the long run but i wish i could say that means that there is free will. I go back and forth on the issue of scientific determinism or predestination. At its core i have the concept but my logic circuits at this present time dictate that it is true. — christian2017
The actualist asks what it could mean to say that X was possible if X didn't happen. — frank
It wasn't precluded from happening, given physical facts as they are. Some things are precluded from happening. Those things are (and were) not possible. But not everything possible happens. — Terrapin Station
It wasn't precluded from happening, given physical facts as they are. Some things are precluded from happening. Those things are (and were) not possible. But not everything possible happens. — Terrapin Station
That only works if we presume ontological randomness exists though, right? Because otherwise physical facts determine all outcomes precisely. — Echarmion
my capacity to manipulate that occurrence operates in the realm of 5D experience — Possibility
Every potential event I experience can only have one actual outcome or occurrence, but my capacity to manipulate that occurrence operates in the realm of 5D experience — Possibility
What you’re explaining here is, in my view, a five dimensional subjective experience. The ‘conscious self’ (‘I’) exists as an experience of interacting four dimensional events, both internal and externally observable. The ‘evidence’ I have that my self exists consists of the experience of internal events; your ‘evidence’ that I have a ‘conscious self’ comes from your experience of externally observable events. Yet neither of us are certain that what we experience (‘know’) is ACTUAL, except that we agree on the experience (‘knowledge’) that these events interact with what we can agree is actual by its relationship to mutually observable/measurable data: the body, heart rate, etc.
Thoughts exist in much the same way. They’re ‘real’ because of the relationships that exist between 5D subjective experiences of 4D events interacting with 3D observable objects consisting of measurable data.
It is in this 5D structure of the mind that the experience (knowledge or understanding) of any event in spacetime has the capacity to interact with the experience of any other event. — Possibility
It is here that I think this ‘ontological freedom’ is ours: insomuch as we are aware of, connecting and collaborating with the potential in each experience. We have the capacity to intervene, to prevent predicted events from occurring, to change the causal conditions of future events, even to alter the ongoing effect of past causes, etc. by changing how we relate to the significance of an experience. — Possibility
to prevent predicted events from occurring — Possibility
However, once I am in philosophy mode (haha, whatever the heck that means), I can't help but see questions:
to prevent predicted events from occurring
— Possibility
doesn't knowing the prediction give a "cause" for your changed behavior?
All of my other questions would probably be tied to the idea that if we completely understood thought (along with everything in the first 4 dimensions), MAYBE we could establish a causal chain? — ZhouBoTong
To be fair, overall, I don't find the free will argument to matter as long as everyone admits that MOSTLY we did not have a lot of control in who we are today. We were born with 'x' genes and raised in 'y' environment. Sure free will MAY have played a small role in the development of a few humans (mostly those who are naturally inclined to 'buck the trends' so to speak), but I don't see it as a particularly significant force. — ZhouBoTong
The sizing up of all possible world-lines unto all their ends to see what works the best, and then in 6D jump into the best one? — PoeticUniverse
When we see potential, we not only see what’s possible, but also how it can become actual. — Possibility
my question may due to not getting what you wanted to say:boils down to three assertions — Possibility
Not directly in relation to free will - focusing on possibility only confuses the issue. I’m responding to determinism - ie. a lack of potential. — Possibility
how about the case "I choose not to eat this food"? which of the 3 categories would you place it? — Dzung
As I’ve said before, I don’t think this is a case of EITHER determinism OR free will. We need to get away from this dichotomy and the ‘apologists’ of compatabilism in order to understand and develop a practical model of the will. — Possibility
Free will isn’t a force, it’s a capacity within us to be aware of, connect and collaborate with the potential in our experience of interacting with the unfolding universe. It doesn’t really matter to the past (that’s already been determined) - only to our experience of what lies ahead. — Possibility
, that could help thoroughly explain the idea? Or are you sort of inventing it as you go along? (I hope that doesn't come across negatively, in my mind, all of the now-famous philosophers were "inventing it as they went along")It doesn’t really matter to the past (that’s already been determined) - only to our experience of what lies ahead. — Possibility
Of course. There are often people registering here and posting that ‘free will is an illusion’. When I can be bothered, I ask if if they did so voluntarily. If they claim they didn’t, then I say discussion is pointless as they cannot be persuaded to change their minds. If they say they did, then they don’t have a case. — Wayfarer
at the same time it just makes me want to play video games all day. — christian2017
god playing dice — Wayfarer
Do you understand the reference? Do you know why Einstein said it? Do you know what, if anything, it has to do with determinism? — Wayfarer
What are you calling "potential"? — frank
I don't think I'm following what you're trying to do with dimensions. It appears that you're positing "4D" as a base reality that you engage through experience? And that this adds another dimension? — frank
Potential is defined as an ability to develop, achieve or succeed that has not been realised. Many interpret this as that an acorn becomes an oak tree or else it fails in its singular potential. But the way I see it, an acorn that becomes food for a squirrel is not a failure; it simply realises an alternative potential: one the squirrel was aware of, connected with and collaborated with. Absolute determinism suggests that the squirrel’s acorn was always determined to never be an oak tree, but I disagree. — Possibility
In order for the will to be free, it essentially must be able to manifest uncaused causes. — rlclauer
criminal justice — rlclauer
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.