thoughts and behaviour are determined by nature and nurture. This poses the problem that humans have lack of capability to change, at the level of thoughts and neurochemistry. My own view is that human beings have reflective consciousness, which is the foundation of potential change. — Jack Cummins
The idea of 'self' as 'pre-exists' may be problematic because it would mean that no change or modification is possible — Jack Cummins
Can We Change Our Own Thoughts and Behaviour? — Jack Cummins
Dispensa's work sounds consistent with Peter Tse, in his book. "The Neural Basis of Free Will".How useful is this area of brain research to the debate between free will and determinism? I am interested in research and also the nature of personal change and self mastery? — Jack Cummins
I don't think its usefull because free-will doesn't even make sense conceptually. — ChatteringMonkey
We are our will, who would be the "we" apart from our will that wants to change the will. — ChatteringMonkey
Free will is a moral/religious concept. — ChatteringMonkey
Don't be fooled by language, it not because there is an "I" in "I think" that there is some consious agent behind the thinking. — ChatteringMonkey
Most discussion in contemporary philosophy focuses upon the extent to which one generates thoughts oneself. It can be argued that even the wish to change is based upon the flow of thoughts. However, this may sidestep the issue of choice of thoughts and pathways of choice in this process. — Jack Cummins
I'm not sure what you mean by this. The question of free will usually arises when we talk about determinism - if everything is determined by the motion of particles and energy that can (theoretically) be predicted by the laws of physics, where is there room for us to truly act freely. — T Clark
No. It's metaphysics, although it might have moral implications. — T Clark
Yes that is what I meant, there is no I (as a separate agent) doing the thinking, we are our thinking.My thoughts (and feelings, memories, perceptions, and a bunch of other stuff) are me. — T Clark
Not "useful" at all as far as I can tell. Scientific research can inform, even solve, empirical problems but cannot definitively answer philosophical questions (i.e. aporia) or "debates". I think the most rational-pragmatic proposal that reframes this "debate" is compatibilism (i.e. imo, embodied – degrees of freedom – volition ).How useful is this area of brain research to the debate between free will and determinism? — Jack Cummins
It is an odd thought that all the movements of particles/energy in our brains could cause feelings of doubt about the resolution as they all resolve into the only brain state into which they could possibly resolve.The existence of doubt together with our ability to decide when we have doubt means that we, whether a mouse in a maze, a human who wants to invest in the market, etc. are not deterministic agents. — MoK
Agreed.Yes that is what I meant, there is no I (as a separate agent) doing the thinking, we are our thinking. — ChatteringMonkey
Since we are our will, and that is the agency part of us, it doesn't make sense to expect that part also to be determined by us, by itself. We are free to act on our will, not to choose it. — ChatteringMonkey
Truly metaphysical free will would be impossible under determinism, but that shouldn't really concern us as that particular concept of free will is incoherent to begin with. — ChatteringMonkey
As meta-physics is by definition not constrained by anything physical/empirical, it usually ends up being shaped by our moral/religious beliefs, which is typically what we are really after. — ChatteringMonkey
This is an interesting way of looking at it, but I think many would say if we don't determine our will, we don't have free will. You've defined the problem away, but are we automatic programmed machines or aren't we? — T Clark
I don't know what you mean by saying the concept is incoherent. On the other hand, I think the whole free will vs. determinism controversy much ado about nothing. — T Clark
This is not true at all, but it's outside the scope of this discussion, so let's leave it at that. — T Clark
This is an interesting way of looking at it, but I think many would say if we don't determine our will, we don't have free will. — T Clark
Yes. We make all choices, from the moment we are aware that we have options.If you make a choice to control your will in a particular way, then... did you also choose the part of your will that made the choice to control that will? And if you did make that choice, did you choose the will that led to that choice? — flannel jesus
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.