Scientist, after decades of study, concludes: We don't have free will

[rand thompson]

Discussed on Phys.orgby Columnist Corinne Purtill, Los Angeles Times based on findings by Stanford University neurobiologist Robert Sapolsky


Article
https://phys.org/news/2023-10-scientist-decades-dont-free.amp

 

[Jon Pais]

The author of the article writes complete nonsense. She asserts that most people believe in freedom of the will but the ordinary person does not even understand what free will means. Since when was truth ever determined by what most believe anyhow?

“Now if we ask ask whether the will itself is free, we are asking whether it is in conformity with itself, and this of course is self-evident, but it also tells us nothing. As a result of the empirical concept of freedom we have: "I am free, if I can do what I will” and the freedom is already decided by this "what I will.” But now since we are asking about the freedom of willing itself, this question should accordingly be expressed as follows: "Can you also will what you will?" This appears as if the willing depended on yet another willing lying behind it. And supposing that this question were answered in the affirmative, there would soon arise the second question: "Can you also will what you will to will?"
- Schopenhauer, prize essay on the freedom of the will (1839), trans. by John Payne

 

[rand thompson]

The author of the article writes complete nonsense. She asserts that most people believe in freedom of the will but the ordinary person does not even understand what free will means.

“Now if we ask ask whether the will itself is free, we are asking whether it is in conformity with itself, and this of course is self-evident, but it also tells us nothing. As a result of the empirical concept of freedom we have: "I am free, if I can do what I will” and the freedom is already decided by this "what I will.” But now since we are asking about the freedom of willing itself, this question should accordingly be expressed as follows: "Can you also will what you will?" This appears as if the willing depended on yet another willing lying behind it. And supposing that this question were answered in the affirmative, there would soon arise the second question: "Can you also will what you will to will?"
- Schopenhauer, prize essay on the freedom of the will (1839), trans. by John Payne

Jon,

I think people like this try to be a little too clever sometimes in explaining a "thing" that could have been explained more simply. To loosely quote
Albert Einstein;

" If you can't explain it to a 6 year old, you probably don't truly understand it yourself"

 

[Jon Pais]

Jon,

I think people like this try to be a little too clever sometimes in explaining a "thing" that could have been explained more simply. To loosely quote
Albert Einstein;

" If you can't explain it to a 6 year old, you probably don't truly understand it yourself"

Which is why all six year-olds understand the theory of relativity! In fact, Schopenhauer’s writing style is extremely elegant.

 

[rand thompson]

Which is why all six year-olds understand the theory of relativity! In fact, Schopenhauer’s writing style is extremely elegant.

Jon,

I liked that. I may quote you on that.

 

[Karim D. Ghantous]

We do have free will, but many people choose not to exercise it. Or haven't been told that they can. And I'm not talking about your favourite movie or album or wine grape. Some things are not our choice, like our favourite things. But we do have choices to do good things or bad things. Do you give in to your emotions, or do you take control?

Materialists are not very insightful, and I wouldn't call Robert Sapolsky a "genius." He is evidently intelligent, but he is not a genius.

And BTW, as a tangent, oxytocin doesn't cause us to fall in love. Love causes the creation of oxytocin. And I'm not even going to touch upon the spiritual realm here. That's another story.

 

[Sabovic Adis]

Only one free will, or are we allowed to have more of them wills?
Asking for a friend.