Free will can be translated as the ability to make choices free from influences we have no control over. — TheMadFool
Computers routinely make choices. — TheMadFool
Very strange that no one challenges it. — Rich
Computers don't make choices. They are programmed by humans who do make choices when writing the programs — Rich
Free will is central to morality, which in turn, necessitates the choice to do good rather than bad. Yes, there's a whole lot of philosophy dependent on free will me thinks. Anyway, I hope you understood why I think choice is absolutely fundamental to the concept of Free Will. — TheMadFool
The punchline here is that, given choice can be programmed, — TheMadFool
For my part, I entirely drop the notion of Free Will add it muddles the problem. — Rich
The computer is not making choices in the manner the human agent does — Rich
My turn to say this is odd. I think the value of human life, for what it's worth, rests on Free Will. To choose to be good rather than bad. — TheMadFool
How do you know that? — TheMadFool
Excellent way to approach it.Well, I'm working at this problem indirectly. Free will is central to morality, which in turn, necessitates the choice to do good rather than bad. — TheMadFool
You have not stated your premises for this assertion, but I'm guessing a dualistic set of premises, in which case you're right.Computers don't make choices. They are programmed by humans who do make choices when writing the programs. — Rich
guessing a dualistic set of — noAxioms
A physical monist says choice is a purposeful selection of action, which is what a machine (thermostat say) does and a rock doesn't. — noAxioms
No, I may set the threshold but don't actually tell the thermostat when to turn on the heat. I simply design the thing to make its own choice based on a comparison between the temperature and the setting . I arrange it so it is capable of making that choice, but if the choice is mine, I would have no need of the thermostat, and there would just be a manual toggle on the wall.A machine doesn't make choices. The choices are made by the human that programs the machine. Just like a hammer doesn't make choices. The choices are being made by the human that is using it. Similarly, a piano don't make choices. The pianist is making the choices. Tools used by humans are not human. — Rich
At the root of that series of choices are inputs over which you had no control — CasKev
You have that choice — Rich
So said, computers too make choices — TheMadFool
If x > 1 then 4/x else goto line 10 — TheMadFool
Not really asking how it makes you feel. That road leads to solipsism since even I don't have choice since I don't make you feel that way when I pick vanilla. You can presume I have similar feelings, but there is no way to apply the rule to anything nonhuman. I want a definition of will, not of human will.I feel will as a force being generated from within me which creates the impetus to move in a particular direction, together fulfilling the choice. It can be imagined as a directed wave. — Rich
Not really asking how it makes you feel. — noAxioms
Only if you use inconsistent definitions. If going to line 10 is the right thing to do in this case, and there is no inhibition to the PC going there (such as there is no line 10), then this is an example of free will in my view.If x > 1 then 4/x else goto line 10
If choice is programmable then free will becomes nonsense. — TheMadFool
The will is free if the desired choice can be effected — noAxioms
Again, you are describing human will. I have no way of applying that elsewhere. If humans are special, then that's a premise, and you have to tell me why. If they're not, then the introspection is useless in determining what else has will.Will is a feeling that the body generates. That is how we know it and observe it. Sometimes its effects can be observed by others as one exerts themselves. It is strange that feelings are made subservient to words or other symbols. Will is directly experienced. — Rich
You seem to be under the impression that I'm asserting something. I'm just putting out a set of premises that I think works. If you disagree, tell me where my definitions run into conflict.Will is neither free nor does it have control of outcome. One can only try to make the choice. There are all manner of constraints and influences that affect outcomes. One can only attempt to move in a particular direction. Two football lineman exhibit this type of tug-of-war.
Insofar as responsibility is concerned, that is a issue of human condition. Since outcomes are unpredictable, responsibility is purely subjective which is why we have courts to adjudicate. — Rich
You seem to be under the impression that I'm asserting something. I'm just putting out a set of premises that I think works. If you disagree, tell me where my definitions run into conflict. — noAxioms
The point is choice-making is programmable. — TheMadFool
This is one of those areas where the philosophy of mind matters.The point is choice-making is programmable. That nullifies the discriminating power of human ability to choose to make the distinction free will as opposed to no free will.
That effectively makes free will an impossible concept to even think of. ''Free will'' can't be defined and is meaningless 4 ÷ 0. — TheMadFool
A tool follows instructions, humans do not. — Rich
The computer may or may not have one of those, but if it does, it is apparently not capable of altering the determined course made by the program, and therefore is not free. — noAxioms
Is that a categorically true statement? No, because it's impossible to know we aren't programmed. Think of God as the programmer and the human mind as a computer. — TheMadFool
God made me do it or Natural Laws made me do it is not considered a viable defense strategy. — Rich
EDIT: Free will and choice making ability are not connected in any real sense. — TheMadFool
as is generally understood, the ability to make choices can't distinguish the presence or absence of free will because it's programmable. — TheMadFool
To the extent I'm aware, free will is an unsolved riddle. Nobody knows whether it's real or illusory. — TheMadFool
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.