| Pages:
1
2 |
Sickman
Hazard to Self
Posts: 98
Registered: 9-5-2004
Member Is Offline
Mood: Icy and I see!
|
|
Chemistry, determinism, and free will!
Chemical reactions vs free will!
There are scores of chemical reactions and chemical behaviors that have been admitted, empirically, to the collective knowledge of mankind and have
been labeled as "science" and a multitude have ultimately been "limited" by established "laws of science" while other chemical behaviors and reactions
fall under the category of a "rule" with notable "exceptions".
It has been known for along time now (at least since 1828 when Friedrich Wöhler created the organic compound "urea" from inorganic reagents) that the
organic chemical compounds of which living bodies are composed have, in some cases, been derived through synthetic means, thus discrediting Vitalism. Likewise, the Bible boldly states:
In the sweat of thy face
shalt thou eat bread, till thou
return unto the ground; for out
of it wast thou taken: for dust
thou art, and unto dust shalt
thou return. Genesis 3:19 KJB
indicating a view, long held by Bible believers, that the living body is essentially dust and that when a man shall die:
Then shall the dust return to
the earth as it was: and the
spirit shall return unto God
who gave it. Ecclesiastes 12:7 KJB
And so it may arise in modern thought, when the question of free will arises, that our knowledge of chemistry is called into question to produce an
answer to the question: Does free will exist? and if so: to what limit can it be reduced down to?
To put the matter another way, supposing: that people have free will and people's bodies are made of, at least in part, of chemicals that can readily
be produced from inorganic (non-living) reagents, and these inorganic reagents themselves are made up of atoms, do:
1) Atoms have free will?
2) If not, do organic molecules made of atoms have free will?
3) If not, then how do humans, whose bodies are made up of organic molecules, which do not have free will, which are in turn made up of atoms, which
do not have free will, impose their free will upon the atoms of their bodies?
4) Naturally, another question arises: if atoms are restricted by natural laws and common rules, do these cause a human's free will to be restricted
by the atoms that they are manipulating? If so, is the restriction merely superficial? ( the imagination of the human will being unlimited, but whose
practice finds its limits in the atoms it's given to control? )
Some of my thoughts on the matter:
A. If it is true that any given atom will always behave exactly the same under exactly the same conditions then every event can be explained away by
pointing to the conditions under which the event occurred. If this is true then atoms:
1) don't have free will, because their freedom is infinitely reduced by the circumstances of their existence,
2) atoms have free will, but always make the same choice given the same set of choices, which is why their free will cannot be established by any
empirical means. ( this assumption is problematic because it assumes "alternative choices" are possible but can never be observed because of the atoms
unwillingness to ever change their behavior when given the same " alternative choices".
3) Atoms don't have free will, but any agents who do have "free will" and that are, by virtue of their freedom, able to manipulate the circumstances
of atoms, are therefore able to "determine" how the atom(s) shall behave. (this assumption is simple and useful in that it would predict that, when
two free wills are in opposition, that whatever the prevailing conditions the opposing wills create will determine how the atoms
shall behave.
4) Atoms have free will, but it cannot be observed because they always choose to behave according to the prevailing conditions, prevailing conditions
which are determined by agents of free will acting according to their ability.
I do not here deal much with how prevailing conditions are determined by agents of free will, but it is assummed that a given event can be attributed
to a single will acting alone, or two or more in harmony, or two or more in various degrees and arrangments of cooperation and or opposition!
So, Why do atoms seem to behave the same way always under the same conditions?
1) If: because they have to, because their freedom is infinitely restricted by the circumstances of their existence: then what is it
that finally determines the conditions under which they exist?
2) If: because they choose to: then why are they so damn consistent in their choices? (Not neccesarily a fallacy, but is more or less restricted to
faith for lack of empirical observability: nonfalsifiable).
This thread is purposed to open thoughts on the matter of free will and especially address if free will can be directly or indirectly observed in the
behaviour of atoms, at any given scale, and to discuss agents of free will and their ability to effect an atoms behaviour.
|
|
|
Endimion17
International Hazard
Posts: 1468
Registered: 17-7-2011
Location: shores of a solar sea
Member Is Offline
Mood: speeding through time at the rate of 1 second per second
|
|
Gather around, children, it's Bible study time!
|
|
|
Adas
National Hazard
Posts: 711
Registered: 21-9-2011
Location: Slovakia
Member Is Offline
Mood: Sensitive to shock and friction
|
|
I had some problems to understand this, but I will try to answer some of your questions.
1) Atoms have free will?
- That depends on your wiew. Answer is in the texts below.
2) If not, do organic molecules made of atoms have free will?
- They are some atoms joined together and their behaviour is somehow combined.
3) If not, then how do humans, whose bodies are made up of organic molecules, which do not have free will, which are in turn made up of atoms, which
do not have free will, impose their free will upon the atoms of their bodies?
- You were citing Bible. In Bible is also written, that God gave free will to us. We can feel our free will, because we can decide what to do, but
we decide depending to facts and actions around us or in our minds (because we can think). We don't decide without any "impulse". This is something
like: If you don't give an input to, for example a computer, it can't respond. Our brain is very complex and we decide dependind on millions of facts
and actions, our thoughts and know-hows.
4) Naturally, another question arises: if atoms are restricted by natural laws and common rules, do these cause a human's free will to be restricted
by the atoms that they are manipulating? If so, is the restriction merely superficial? ( the imagination of the human will being unlimited, but whose
practice finds its limits in the atoms it's given to control? )
- I can't respond to this question, because I barely understand it.
So, Why do atoms seem to behave the same way always under the same conditions?
1) If: because they have to, because their freedom is infinitely restricted by the circumstances of their existence: then what is it that finally
determines the conditions under which they exist?
- "their freedom is infinitely restricted by the circumstances of their existence" - that is our freedom too, but atoms are very simple, you can
say that they have "free will", but they can respond to so few stimuli, that I think it's negligible. As I stated before, our minds are very complex,
but we also decide depending on inputs that we can percieve and analyse. You can say we are very limited, but on the other side you can say we have a
lot of free will.
I hope my responses gave you the answers that you wanted.
Rest In Pieces!
|
|
|
Pulverulescent
National Hazard
Posts: 793
Registered: 31-1-2008
Member Is Offline
Mood: Torn between two monikers ─ "hissingnoise" and the present incarnation!
|
|
Well, just to throw a wanner in the sporks, I believe that (in the absolute sense) free will cannot exist since every thought, action or
circumstance is ultimately dependent on what went before!
But the 'problem of life' is certainly a vexing one . . .
And let's face it --- we can't even properly define what life is any more than they could in Ancient Greece, FFS?
Thought provoking stuff, though, Sickman!
This, BTW, looks like the start of a looong thread?
[edit] We're hostages, all of us, and that can never change!
P
[Edited on 4-1-2012 by Pulverulescent]
|
|
|
Pulverulescent
National Hazard
Posts: 793
Registered: 31-1-2008
Member Is Offline
Mood: Torn between two monikers ─ "hissingnoise" and the present incarnation!
|
|
Hmmm! That scraping noise, BTW, is Rosco sharpening up his oft wielded, decidedly non-metaphysical 'weaponry'! 
And sorry Rosco, the temptation was just too great!
|
|
|
jamit
Hazard to Others
Posts: 375
Registered: 18-6-2010
Location: Midwest USA
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
 The question of free will only applies to conscious animal and human beings and
not to simple atoms and molecules. Even though all living things are made of molecules, there comes a point when a complex set of molecules reaches a
point of being "conscious". It is at this point that the question becomes meaningful to ask whether something possesses free will. All living things
possesses free will to varying degrees... That my take on the subject.
|
|
|
neptunium
National Hazard
Posts: 985
Registered: 12-12-2011
Location: between Uranium and Plutonium
Member Is Offline
|
|
i dont beleive in free will for anybody or any atoms ...
but since i am a simple man who dont understand the complex behaviors of humans i would go with what i do know and somewhat understand..
QUANTUM MECHANICS.
the set of rules and laws established at the big bang havent changed and although simple in nature they gave rise to infinite complexity .
Atoms dont have free will our mind is "wired" to ask questions and make hypothesis on the behaviors of particles .
sometimes things happen that arent suppose to but they do anyway ..again quantum mechanic can address that problem in the probability chapter .
lots of crazy things in that quantum physics...makes you really wonder who the hell is in charge here... if anyone !
it would be silly in my view to denied atoms free will and to beleive we have one ...just like a building doesnt have free will neither does the
bricks its made of..
there is only 4 laws to govern the universe ... it is not negociable.
|
|
|
Pulverulescent
National Hazard
Posts: 793
Registered: 31-1-2008
Member Is Offline
Mood: Torn between two monikers ─ "hissingnoise" and the present incarnation!
|
|
| Quote: | QUANTUM MECHANICS.
the set of rules and laws established at the big bang havent changed and although simple in nature they gave rise to infinite complexity.
|
So according to the 'Big Bang Theory', infinite complexity came directly from absolute homogeneity ─ how did that work?
P
|
|
|
Endimion17
International Hazard
Posts: 1468
Registered: 17-7-2011
Location: shores of a solar sea
Member Is Offline
Mood: speeding through time at the rate of 1 second per second
|
|
Because of the uncertainty principle, we can not check whether we have a free will. Therefore, even if we don't (probably, because our mind is
extremely complex particle interaction, and to predict its actions would require gathering all of the information of its particles in one point of
time, which is IMPOSSIBRU), it doesn't matter. It's as we truly have it. Simple and elegant.
|
|
|
Pulverulescent
National Hazard
Posts: 793
Registered: 31-1-2008
Member Is Offline
Mood: Torn between two monikers ─ "hissingnoise" and the present incarnation!
|
|
| Quote: | | Because of the uncertainty principle, we can not check whether we have a free will. |
Hmmm! Our possession of free will, or lack thereof would, at the time, likely have been purely incidental to Heisenberg's own lines of thought . . .
But, the ever-evolving human brain might, in some way, be seen as an ongoing, determined attempt by matter to understand itself?
P
|
|
|
phlogiston
International Hazard
Posts: 1376
Registered: 26-4-2008
Location: Neon Thorium Erbium Lanthanum Neodymium Sulphur
Member Is Offline
Mood: pyrophoric
|
|
Quantum mechanics also says that atoms DO NOT behave the same every time, even under exactly the same conditions. Whenever you measure a small
particle's properties, it will 'decide' at that moment what the result is going to be. Quantum mechanics only predicts the range of possible outcomes
of measurements and their relative probabilities. Some very improbably things can happen, they are just very unlikely (e.g. an electron spinning
around an atom in your brain can decide to jump to the moon for instance).
So, you could perhaps interpret that as free will. Atoms, and all particles are free to decide what they do and where they go at any time and there is
not a single person in the world that can currently predict what its 'decisions' are going to be untill you measure the outcome. (and in fact, several
lines of evidence suggest that it is actually impossible to do so even in principle).
-----
"If a rocket goes up, who cares where it comes down, that's not my concern said Wernher von Braun" - Tom Lehrer |
|
|
Endimion17
International Hazard
Posts: 1468
Registered: 17-7-2011
Location: shores of a solar sea
Member Is Offline
Mood: speeding through time at the rate of 1 second per second
|
|
Quote: Originally posted by Pulverulescent  | | Quote: | | Because of the uncertainty principle, we can not check whether we have a free will. |
Hmmm! Our possession of free will, or lack thereof would, at the time, likely have been purely incidental to Heisenberg's own lines of thought . . .
But, the ever-evolving human brain might, in some way, be seen as an ongoing, determined attempt by matter to understand itself?
P |
Attempt to understand itself implies an innate mind and free will, and if you use that "solution", you're back at the start again, and you don't solve
anything. Plus you can't prove it, therefore it's useless.
I like to jump ahead and use the phrase "it happens to be". Matter happened to condense and organize itself in a way to produce conscious stuff.
Funny and interesting, all it took were basic laws and particle quantum numbers... and enough time.
| Quote: Originally posted by phlogiston | Quantum mechanics also says that atoms DO NOT behave the same every time, even under exactly the same conditions. Whenever you measure a small
particle's properties, it will 'decide' at that moment what the result is going to be. Quantum mechanics only predicts the range of possible outcomes
of measurements and their relative probabilities. Some very improbably things can happen, they are just very unlikely (e.g. an electron spinning
around an atom in your brain can decide to jump to the moon for instance).
So, you could perhaps interpret that as free will. Atoms, and all particles are free to decide what they do and where they go at any time and there is
not a single person in the world that can currently predict what its 'decisions' are going to be untill you measure the outcome. (and in fact, several
lines of evidence suggest that it is actually impossible to do so even in principle). |
That, plus chaos. I'd say chaos plays a major role.
|
|
|
neptunium
National Hazard
Posts: 985
Registered: 12-12-2011
Location: between Uranium and Plutonium
Member Is Offline
|
|
chaos is just another way to say ...its far too complex to predict...
all we can do is assign probability to any given event to happen or not.
but it doesnt mean it couldnt be ...in theory.
we could sit here and argue for hours about our faith and thoughts on the matter ,as of today we cannot prove or even detect how many attempt and how
long it took the universe to create this one where conscious beings are thinking about it...
i am sorry i lack the ability to express myself on a keyboard ...i wasnt paying attention at school in grammar and spelling...kept it for math physics
and chemistry..
|
|
|
AndersHoveland
Hazard to Other Members, due to repeated speculation and posting of untested highly dangerous procedures!
Posts: 1986
Registered: 2-3-2011
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Could it be possible that physical reality is actually a representation or manifestation of something else? In which case, both determinism and free
will could potentially simultaneously hold true. One way of viewing this is that, although our actions were predetermined by natural laws and seeming
randomness, the exact order of the sequence of events that leads to our decission is itself caused by our spirit.
Free will, free from determinism, simply has no place within the scientific understanding of reality. The only possible understanding of free will
from a scientific perspective is that free will itself is predetermined.
As there currently is no way to directly correlate any understanding of spirit with observed reality, the subject of free will is best left out of a
science forum.
|
|
|
phlogiston
International Hazard
Posts: 1376
Registered: 26-4-2008
Location: Neon Thorium Erbium Lanthanum Neodymium Sulphur
Member Is Offline
Mood: pyrophoric
|
|
Recently, strong evidence has appeared suggesting that free will and consciousness may be illusions, actually.
In one such sttudy, volunteers were asked to press any of two buttons at random whenever they decided to. They also had to indicite to the researchers
as soon as they made the decision to do so and their brains were being scanned with fMRI. The scans revealed identifyable patterns several seconds
before the subjects indicated having reached a decision... The researchers were able to predict the decision and even which button the subject was
going to press several seconds before the subject him/herself!
It strongly suggests that the 'decisions' you think you make are actually formed through some subconscious process that may very well be
deterministic, and you are only made aware of it later on, and then perceive the illusion that you made that decision consciously.
-----
"If a rocket goes up, who cares where it comes down, that's not my concern said Wernher von Braun" - Tom Lehrer |
|
|
Endimion17
International Hazard
Posts: 1468
Registered: 17-7-2011
Location: shores of a solar sea
Member Is Offline
Mood: speeding through time at the rate of 1 second per second
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by neptunium | chaos is just another way to say ...its far too complex to predict...
all we can do is assign probability to any given event to happen or not.
but it doesnt mean it couldnt be ...in theory.
we could sit here and argue for hours about our faith and thoughts on the matter ,as of today we cannot prove or even detect how many attempt and how
long it took the universe to create this one where conscious beings are thinking about it...
i am sorry i lack the ability to express myself on a keyboard ...i wasnt paying attention at school in grammar and spelling...kept it for math physics
and chemistry..
|
Chaos means "it's too complicated to predict" but uncertainty principle says that you can't predict it precisely at all. It is truly impossible.
All we can do is to talk about probabilities of certain events, even if the chance is almost 0 or almost 1.
You're wrong about the universe part, though. We now know the time spans of Solar system formation, chemical and biological evolution. It's not
precise, but it doesn't matter.
| Quote: Originally posted by AndersHoveland | Could it be possible that physical reality is actually a representation or manifestation of something else? In which case, both determinism and free
will could potentially simultaneously hold true. One way of viewing this is that, although our actions were predetermined by natural laws and seeming
randomness, the exact order of the sequence of events that leads to our decission is itself caused by our spirit.
Free will, free from determinism, simply has no place within the scientific understanding of reality. The only possible understanding of free will
from a scientific perspective is that free will itself is predetermined.
As there currently is no way to directly correlate any understanding of spirit with observed reality, the subject of free will is best left out of a
science forum. |
No, you're wrong. The subject of free will is in the domain of science and is being studied.
"Spirit" is not, because it doesn't have a definition. I could invent a word like snoquar and say "it's that... something... something that makes the
heat go around... you know... snoquar".
Any attempt to drive in undefined, theologic (theology is a branch of philosophy, not science!) concepts in a rational discussion about brain
functions will fail. It's not scientific, and anyone's personal beliefs, no matter how irrational might be (because they really stretch from "my late
dog takes care of me from heavens" to "I'll get served by 72 virgins if I die defending some dogmas"), can not be the basis of a rational discussion.
| Quote: Originally posted by phlogiston | Recently, strong evidence has appeared suggesting that free will and consciousness may be illusions, actually.
In one such sttudy, volunteers were asked to press any of two buttons at random whenever they decided to. They also had to indicite to the researchers
as soon as they made the decision to do so and their brains were being scanned with fMRI. The scans revealed identifyable patterns several seconds
before the subjects indicated having reached a decision... The researchers were able to predict the decision and even which button the subject was
going to press several seconds before the subject him/herself!
It strongly suggests that the 'decisions' you think you make are actually formed through some subconscious process that may very well be
deterministic, and you are only made aware of it later on, and then perceive the illusion that you made that decision consciously.
|
This might seem like a sad thing bursting our ego, but unless someone is doing the experiment, we're perfectly fine with that illusion. It has the
same consequences as free will.
|
|
|
Sedit
International Hazard
Posts: 1939
Registered: 23-11-2008
Member Is Offline
Mood: Manic Expressive
|
|
Sickman did you by any chance read a post of mine over at the Zones a few years back?
Knowledge is useless to useless people...
"I see a lot of patterns in our behavior as a nation that parallel a lot of other historical processes. The fall of Rome, the fall of Germany — the
fall of the ruling country, the people who think they can do whatever they want without anybody else's consent. I've seen this story
before."~Maynard James Keenan
|
|
|
neptunium
National Hazard
Posts: 985
Registered: 12-12-2011
Location: between Uranium and Plutonium
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by Endimion17 | [rquote=231930&tid=18428&author=
You're wrong about the universe part, though. We now know the time spans of Solar system formation, chemical and biological evolution. It's not
precise, but it doesn't matter.
. |
i wasnt talking about the time spam of our present universe but how many universes preceeded this one .
our 13.7 billion years could be the last episode of a long line of failled universes from which we cannot collect data or execute measurement because
they are outside this space and time .
not always easy to formulate an idea clear in my mind but confusing on the keyboard!
|
|
|
Sickman
Hazard to Self
Posts: 98
Registered: 9-5-2004
Member Is Offline
Mood: Icy and I see!
|
|
I do not believe so. "W i l l" you post a link to it so that I can read
it?
Anyway, does a human sperm cell and or a human ovum have free will?
If not, then is free will obtained at the moment of conception?
Futhermore, do individual cells in my body have free will? I'm thinking here of involuntary processes in the body that don't appear to be controlled
by me diliberately: examples: heart beat, digestion, and most importantly, cellular respiration.
If the behaviour of atoms, and by extension any structure made entirely of atoms, is purely the consequence of happen stance, and if happen stance
itself is not governed by any agents of free will then we truly are just a bunch of MINDLESS FREAKING ROBOTS. If that were true then life is utterly
meaningless, and would be a "cause" to dispair. However, I believe I do have free will, and that it is not merely an illusion, and I take the
responseability very seriously. However, I do not attribute free will to mere chemicals: I don't consider concentrated sulfuric acid to be willfully
malicious, but that doesn't mean I don't try hard to avoid getting the stuff all over me!
Now consider this, suppose we have two chemical solutions that when added to each other are anticipated to react to form a completely new compound,
never before synthesized. Now suppose that the atoms have free will:
How will the atoms choose to behave under circumstances that they have never encountered before? Total unpredictability? Possibly! I do love
chemistry, it's what I "choose" to love.
|
|
|
Sedit
International Hazard
Posts: 1939
Registered: 23-11-2008
Member Is Offline
Mood: Manic Expressive
|
|
Nope can't do that sorry.
But I was just wondering because I posted the exact sort of thing debating the absence of freewill due to the fact that no matter what matter and
energy obeys the laws of physics meaning as physical being all past present and future had to be determine at the start of the big bang no matter how
complicated that future may be.
Knowledge is useless to useless people...
"I see a lot of patterns in our behavior as a nation that parallel a lot of other historical processes. The fall of Rome, the fall of Germany — the
fall of the ruling country, the people who think they can do whatever they want without anybody else's consent. I've seen this story
before."~Maynard James Keenan
|
|
|
hkparker
National Hazard
Posts: 601
Registered: 15-10-2010
Location: California, United States
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by phlogiston | Recently, strong evidence has appeared suggesting that free will and consciousness may be illusions, actually.
In one such sttudy, volunteers were asked to press any of two buttons at random whenever they decided to. They also had to indicite to the researchers
as soon as they made the decision to do so and their brains were being scanned with fMRI. The scans revealed identifyable patterns several seconds
before the subjects indicated having reached a decision... The researchers were able to predict the decision and even which button the subject was
going to press several seconds before the subject him/herself!
It strongly suggests that the 'decisions' you think you make are actually formed through some subconscious process that may very well be
deterministic, and you are only made aware of it later on, and then perceive the illusion that you made that decision consciously.
|
I wonder how strong the correlation is here. If it was observed 100% of the time that would be pretty damning evidence but if one person was able to
decide to choose against what his brain suggested that would throw the study out.
My YouTube Channel
"Nothing is too wonderful to be true if it be consistent with the laws of nature." -Michael Faraday
|
|
|
Sickman
Hazard to Self
Posts: 98
Registered: 9-5-2004
Member Is Offline
Mood: Icy and I see!
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by Sedit | Nope can't do that sorry.
But I was just wondering because I posted the exact sort of thing debating the absence of freewill due to the fact that no matter what matter and
energy obeys the laws of physics meaning as physical being all past present and future had to be determine at the start of the big bang no matter how
complicated that future may be. |
My world view does not include the big bang theory.
However, for the sake of argument, let us suppose that there was a big bang:
1) Did nothing explode because it wanted to or because it had to?
2) If nothing exploded because it had to then what could possibly have been the circumstances that would cause nothing to explode?
3) If nothing exploded because it wanted to then how did circumstances, that before prevented it, now, allow it?
4) If nothing exploded because it wanted to then free will did exist at one point, but now is everything just a product of the exercise of that free
will.
5) If nothing exploded because it wanted to did it lose its free will when it became the cause of everything: an eternal slave of that one choice?
I think the big bang theory is not the best explanation for the origin of everything, or for that matter, the origin of anything.
|
|
|
Endimion17
International Hazard
Posts: 1468
Registered: 17-7-2011
Location: shores of a solar sea
Member Is Offline
Mood: speeding through time at the rate of 1 second per second
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by neptunium | i wasnt talking about the time spam of our present universe but how many universes preceeded this one .
our 13.7 billion years could be the last episode of a long line of failled universes from which we cannot collect data or execute measurement because
they are outside this space and time .
not always easy to formulate an idea clear in my mind but confusing on the keyboard!
|
I understand, it happens to me sometimes, too.
| Quote: Originally posted by Sickman | I do not believe so. "W i l l" you post a link to it so that I can read
it?
Anyway, does a human sperm cell and or a human ovum have free will?
If not, then is free will obtained at the moment of conception?
Futhermore, do individual cells in my body have free will? I'm thinking here of involuntary processes in the body that don't appear to be controlled
by me diliberately: examples: heart beat, digestion, and most importantly, cellular respiration.
If the behaviour of atoms, and by extension any structure made entirely of atoms, is purely the consequence of happen stance, and if happen stance
itself is not governed by any agents of free will then we truly are just a bunch of MINDLESS FREAKING ROBOTS. If that were true then life is utterly
meaningless, and would be a "cause" to dispair. However, I believe I do have free will, and that it is not merely an illusion, and I take the
responseability very seriously. However, I do not attribute free will to mere chemicals: I don't consider concentrated sulfuric acid to be willfully
malicious, but that doesn't mean I don't try hard to avoid getting the stuff all over me!
Now consider this, suppose we have two chemical solutions that when added to each other are anticipated to react to form a completely new compound,
never before synthesized. Now suppose that the atoms have free will:
How will the atoms choose to behave under circumstances that they have never encountered before? Total unpredictability? Possibly! I do love
chemistry, it's what I "choose" to love.
|
So a beaker of sulphuric acid and an oxygenated, heated to ~37 °C, and nourished lump of immensely complicated molecules/ions arranged as colloidal
machines through which ionic impulses rush we call "the brain" is the same thing? Because that's what I read from your statement.
It can't be the same and it isn't the same on so many levels.
Not only you fail to understand biology, but your last paragraph shows that you fail to understand chemistry. Today, supercomputer clusters can show
what happens in a reaction between huge proteins.
"Chemical solutions in a beaker" is something far from being impossible to deduce. Reactions between atoms, molecules and ions are extremely simple
and can be easily predicted. Computers have been calculating such things for the past 30+ years and there's a whole branch of chemistry that deals
with it.
That's unfortunate, because it's not up to you what the collection of scientific data shows.
| Quote: | However, for the sake of argument, let us suppose that there was a big bang:
1) Did nothing explode because it wanted to or because it had to?
2) If nothing exploded because it had to then what could possibly have been the circumstances that would cause nothing to explode?
3) If nothing exploded because it wanted to then how did circumstances, that before prevented it, now, allow it?
4) If nothing exploded because it wanted to then free will did exist at one point, but now is everything just a product of the exercise of that free
will.
5) If nothing exploded because it wanted to did it lose its free will when it became the cause of everything: an eternal slave of that one choice?
I think the big bang theory is not the best explanation for the origin of everything, or for that matter, the origin of anything.
|
You fail at cosmology and astronomy, too. The big bang theory has nothing to do with anything "before" zero time. The domain of that theory is <0,
plus infinity>, and I'm using angle brackets on purpose.
I always say that if one wants to express a valid opinion, one has to learn the basic facts first.
You repeat the elementary fallacies and errors I've seen numerous times.
[Edited on 6-1-2012 by Endimion17]
|
|
|
Sedit
International Hazard
Posts: 1939
Registered: 23-11-2008
Member Is Offline
Mood: Manic Expressive
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by Sickman | | Quote: Originally posted by Sedit | Nope can't do that sorry.
But I was just wondering because I posted the exact sort of thing debating the absence of freewill due to the fact that no matter what matter and
energy obeys the laws of physics meaning as physical being all past present and future had to be determine at the start of the big bang no matter how
complicated that future may be. |
My world view does not include the big bang theory.
However, for the sake of argument, let us suppose that there was a big bang:
1) Did nothing explode because it wanted to or because it had to?
2) If nothing exploded because it had to then what could possibly have been the circumstances that would cause nothing to explode?
3) If nothing exploded because it wanted to then how did circumstances, that before prevented it, now, allow it?
4) If nothing exploded because it wanted to then free will did exist at one point, but now is everything just a product of the exercise of that free
will.
5) If nothing exploded because it wanted to did it lose its free will when it became the cause of everything: an eternal slave of that one choice?
I think the big bang theory is not the best explanation for the origin of everything, or for that matter, the origin of anything.
|
It seems to me that you are complicating an already complicated question.
It boils down to this. If there is free will then you by the power of your mind alone should be able to cause Water to separate into hydrogen and
oxygen or the reverse of such prevent the two from reacting by shear will.
Can you place Chlorine and Zinc inside of a vessel and by will power make it not react at all?
I have concluded that will power does not exist, what you think was your will was just what your enviroment around you directed you to do. The
jumbled, filtered mess of energy that is your thought process just distorts reality until you feel like you are making your own decisions.
Knowledge is useless to useless people...
"I see a lot of patterns in our behavior as a nation that parallel a lot of other historical processes. The fall of Rome, the fall of Germany — the
fall of the ruling country, the people who think they can do whatever they want without anybody else's consent. I've seen this story
before."~Maynard James Keenan
|
|
|
Pulverulescent
National Hazard
Posts: 793
Registered: 31-1-2008
Member Is Offline
Mood: Torn between two monikers ─ "hissingnoise" and the present incarnation!
|
|
| Quote: | | . . . you by the power of your mind alone should be able to cause Water to separate into hydrogen and oxygen or the reverse of such prevent the two
from reacting by shear will. |
Look Sedit, just because a thing hasn't yet been done doesn't nececelery mean that it cannot be done!
You believe it's impossible to do what you've described simply because that is the universally accepted view!
Yes, we should listen carefully to what is said by others but at the same time, nullius in verba!
P
|
|
|
| Pages:
1
2 |
|
![[*]](images/xpblue/default_icon.gif){kind=icon}
