Hacker News Reader

Comment by pineaux | Hacker News Reader

I think the free will debate is not about this. Its more about the question if the mind is part of a deterministic universe, thus being deterministic itself. I dont believe this myself. The universe is quasi deterministic. I would say it's emergent. So there are constantly "random" things that are building on top of the n-1 condition. This random things can be an electron that moves left instead of right. Or it allows a person to make a slight nudge into a direction. Be it consciously or unconsciously. That is my theory. It fits my experience of the world and it doesnt violate any natural laws to my knowledge.

View on HN

I guess my argument and problem is with the idea of a non-deterministic mind. I think it is a non-sensical concept. Even if the mind is free from physical world constraints, it is still subject to it's own nature. If the mind is self direction, the nature of the mind or soul determines its choice.

I dont see how this changes the question of free will from a personal or moral responsibility perspective.

Someone can ascribe no responsibility because actions are just the product of your physical inputs. Similarly, you can ascribe no responsibility because that is how someone's soul is made.

It absolutely impacts the question - because in your example, there is no actual choice available on behalf of the person. All they have is their inevitable fate, as it were, that they are playing out. And while that fate may not be known in advance, it is unchangeable and fixed.

Maybe this is the heart of it.

How does someone with free will choose one option and not another? Is it not their character or soul but determines a choice? How could they choose something different without being someone different.

I'm willing to believe that a Choice can't be predetermined or calculated before it happens. What I don't understand is why the choice would ever be different in an identical universe with an identical person making the decision.

This seems to be a paradox of free will. A person has the freedom to choose between options, but choice and will imply this action is based on something, and not purely random. If Free Will choice is based on something, why would the choice be different for the same chooser.

this is an interesting question. i have asked myself looking looking back at my life if there are any choices that i could have made differently if nothing else changed and i didn't know then what i know now. and my conclusion is that no, i would not have changed anything. wanting to believe that i could have made a different choice is wishful thinking likely influenced by regret about bad choices.

there was no decision that was entirely random yet strongly influencing the future.

however, here is an idea for a possible proof that free will exists: the freedom to believe in god or not. there is nothing in the world or in ones life that can determine that belief. sure, certain experiences can influence that belief, but nothing can determine it. we always have the freedom to either believe or not believe in god. and we can change our mind any time. on the other hand, the choice whether to believe in god or not is able to influence every other choice we make.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com