This might sound crazy right now, but maybe it won’t after you think about it for a while.
Do you have free will?
I think most everyone would quickly answer “yes” to this question without giving it much thought.
You are probably thinking that you could dedide to do anything that you want right now, so you have free will, right? Decide to stand up right now and do 7 upside down jumping jacks to prove that you have free will.
Now I ask you if a coin sorter has free will? A coin sorter takes a coin and drops it into one tube that contains the same coins, it makes a simple decision about what to do with each coin. You could eassily modify that coin sorter to skip the dime tube so that all the dimes were mixed in with the pennies. So of course the coin sorter does not have free will, right? Maybe your brain is a machine just like the coin sorter, but a lot more complex. You can afterall modify the brain to do specific things at specific times. Think of someone being hyptnotized. If that person is told to do something everytime a specific word is mentioned, do they have free will at that point? Certainly not, their brain has been programmed to do something, and they cannot just decide they aren’t going to anymore. You probably are thinking that you have free will everywhere else in your life besides the little bit of re-programming a hyptnotist could do, but could you completely resist being hyptnotized all together. If you had free will, you would be able to resist the attempt of any hyptnotist, wouldn’t you?
I got this idea becuase I read the blog of Scott Adams, He has written several times about the lack of free will. The hyptnotist example was my own idea. He argued that a brain surgeon could modify your brain to restrict you ability to do certain things, just like modifying a simple machine to do (or to not do) specific things. The brain is just a much more complex machine.
Have I convinced you that you do not have free will? At least made you wonder and un-sure?
9 responses so far ↓
1 william // Feb 21, 2007 at 11:14 am
Of course we have free will, and of course a surgeon could modify the brain to loose or change function, but saying that the brain isn’t a much more than a complex machine, is in my opinion is ridiculous. If the brain was as simply defined as a machine, man would have a much greater knowledge about the brain and fixing it when things go wrong.
You can fix a machine to restore it to original function, you can add parts to a machine to make it better, you can replace one part of a machine with a matching part from another machine. Machine’s have specific function, and that function is predictable in a properly functioning machine. The brain does not allow for any of the aforementioned. Machine, in my opinion can and only should be applied or compared to something that is man made.
Your analogy of the hypnotist can be carried over to schools, television, and any other media.
Who is the hypnotist and when does it start. Maybe its not a matter of “reprogramming” as you put it since all that we ever have been is programmed. Schools (a.k.a - “state manufactory of echos”) are a great example, as are commercials, news stations, etc.
Without some degree of programming, communication between individuals would be non-existant or coincidental at best.
Once we get to college we have to opportunity to chose our programming, I guess for the most part in any school situation you have the choice to learn or not. Consequences obviously help administer programming, but you still have the choice.
Anyone or organization that presents biased information is trying to program us - sesame street, the national dairy council, political parties, etc.
Even with all of the outside forces trying to program us, most of us have the ability to determine what sources you will allow to be the hypnotist - so yes, that is free will.
Did I miss your point, I have the feeling I might have…
william
2 warriorzerosix // Feb 21, 2007 at 11:17 am
Philosophically speaking, what you are referring to is called Determinism. Determinism as defined by the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy is “the idea that every event is necessitated by antecedent events and conditions together with the laws of nature… Determinism is deeply connected with our understanding of the physical sciences and their explanatory ambitions, on the one hand, and with our views about human free action on the other.”
I made a long comment on this issue attached to the article “Wanted: A Truly Free Society” that I’ll repost for us here.
An answer to why there can never be a truly free society: free will does not exist. Make free will walk and I’ll buy you an ice cream. People in our American society all generally desire the same thing, to be the best at what they do – to live the American Dream to its fullest. And whether its being the ruler of the most powerful nation on Earth, or stealing as much capital as humanly possible from their fellow American, people simply want. Therefore, depending on whatever force drives people, they are placed on a pre-determined path toward greatness or nothingness. They disillusion themselves into believing they’re making the choices that will affect the outcome of their lives, but sadly they’re just marching along to the beat of destiny’s drum. The people who sit at the top of their respective heaps are nothing more than examples of luck in not only making the socially accepted (or deviant) choices, and the will of society. If people had real control over their lives, anybody could truly be whatever they wanted or do whatever they wanted. However, it is not only the duty but the responsibility of the people to keep each other in check. And it is the will of the American people to set forth laws and norms to keep ourselves restrained. Furthermore, the idea of a truly free society is not only socially irresponsible but frightening to beings that belong to the capitalist regime of the United States of America. I’m not current on the Why are Native Americans So Special? rants, but if you want my take on that one, (since it fits in nicely right here) here it is: Native Americans are special because from the advent of the United States, because when our European ancestors first laid eyes on them, they were frightened, not by their seemingly savage behavior, but by what a far closer representation of what a “free society” really looks like.
Buy the ticket, take the ride. You know where it goes; because you’ve seen others go before. The only difference this time is that it’s you this time, and in this time. You think you control the ride, but don’t be surprised because the ride was built before you were born, or even purchased the ticket.
Do I believe in Determinism? On the one hand, I think it has its merits, and it appeals highly to my cynical side by giving an excuse for why shit happens. On the other hand, it deeply offends whatever humanistic values I possess. Once in awhile I think people need to have ideas that they at least define as creative and new and those ideas need to be given a nurturing environment to create growth in individuals. For these reasons, I can’t really go one way or another on this issue; the response was just to refute the original article, it doesn’t necessarily mean I believe what said, rather, it was simply a counter-idea. I think free will fosters hope in people, and sometimes, hope is all people really need.
3 warriorzerosix // Feb 21, 2007 at 11:26 am
Sorry about the crappy use of language in that article, I didn’t proofread that rant worth a damn…
4 AgentCrazyDiamond // Feb 21, 2007 at 11:35 am
The point was just to make a person think a little bit. Could it be possible that we don’t have free will? maybe.
Part of your argument is that we we choose our programming when we get to college, and that we have the ability to determine what sources you allow to get to you. I don’t believe that you can KNOW that you are choosing something, it might feel to you like you are making a choice, but there is absolutely no way you can prove to me that you (or anyone ever) has made a choice.
If I put 2 different kinds of pie in front of you and you take one, it may feel like you made a choice. But that “choice” was made based on a whole ton of input into your brain and you don’t know that your brain could have made the other choice given the input that lead up to your “choice”.
But still that argument sounds something like “we have free will because we have free will.”
Arguing that a machine can be fixed to restore its original function is more an arugment about the current state of medical technology today than anything else. Man can be fixed to some degree, and certainly a whole lot more than could be done 1000 or even 100 years ago. How about a clone, is that man-made enough to not be excluded from being labeled as a complex machine? People can get “addons” that improve their function. Artifical limbs, braces, breast implants, glasses, corrective eye surgery, and of course all kinds of organs can be transplanted.
5 william // Feb 21, 2007 at 12:07 pm
I was referring specifically to the brain. Transplants don’t qualify something as a machine, unless you consider your body a machine… but, if you follow the guidelines in my definition of a machine - specifically “You can fix a machine to restore it to original function, you can add parts to a machine to make it better” - getting a transplant might extend the life of the recipient (which anyone would agree as better), but it doesn’t restore the body (or machine if you so desire) back to it’s original state, I guess the “better” is argueable according to my definition.
And yes prosthetics are man made and all the rest of the things you list (except eye surgery) - so by my definitions they are machines controlled by the brain. I guess I have read about computer-like chips that can be placed in the brain to allow for enhancement of natural ability.
Also, a clone isn’t any more man made than a plant. You bury a seed in the ground, give it the proper resources and it will grow.
With cloning, you extract the DNA, use the proper resources and you’ve got yourself a clone.
It is starting to sound like the brain is being considered as some sort of separate entity from the body.
Give you and your brain more credit!
I think that is how I feel about this, but now I’m not sure… maybe your right…
I’m so damned confused!
William
6 AgentCrazyDiamond // Feb 21, 2007 at 12:42 pm
Ok, so we are talking about only a brain, forget about the other parts of your body. remove your brain from you body and they are both useless. just like removing the engine from a car renders them both basically useless. put the engine back in the car and drive to work. put the brain back in body and go for a walk and do some math or whatever your into. It may not quite be medically (or ethically) possible today, but someday it will be.
So we disagree on the definition of machine. The first definition that dictionary.com gives is:
an apparatus consisting of interrelated parts with separate functions, used in the performance of some kind of work.
Organs are interrelated parts, and even within organs are interrelated parts that have seperate function.
None of the definitions require any improvement or ablility to be restored to original state.
You argue that clones and plant are not mad-made, and does that mean they aren’t machines? weather they are man-made or not i don’t think has anything to do with machine status, but where do you draw the line between what is man made and what isn’t. All the raw materials use to build what you would call a machine are not man made, they are earth-made, right?
I give my brain a lot of credit, but saying its a machine I don’t think takes any credit away. Personal computers are amazing “machines” that have awesome power compared to a coin sorting machine. Brains are awesome machines that have awesome power compared to a computer. All are machines, just different.
Some machines get rusty, some get Alzheimers.
And who says you can’t improve a brain anyway?
7 william // Feb 21, 2007 at 8:47 pm
The reason I said only the brain is because it and the liver are about the only organs in our body that cannot have their functions replaced by a man made machine.
The heart/pacemaker, valve replacement, etc. Kidneys/dialysis, and functions of many other organs can be bypassed through other means.
I was simply giving you my definition of machine, and why the brain should not fall into that category. I’m not saying that looking at the body as though it is a machine is wrong, its just not right for me.
And as far as all the materials being used to make a machine are earth made, this is another argument, but NO they are not all earth made. Anything that has had its molecular structure changed from that in which it would be normally found in nature is man made - ex) plastic - enough said.
And as a matter of fact there have been brain transplants (maybe just 1 I didn’t check - I saw something about it on discovery health once) and entire head transplants (at least with a monkey). None have been considered a success as far as I’m concerned.
Finally, replacing organs by transplant is not as easy as swapping an engine. Without extreme intervention, a body that has had an organ from another body will reject that organ without man made intervention.
I guess my point is this, if a machine could be made that could replicate the functions of a human brain (or any living creatures brain for that matter) it would be well under way and we would have heard something about it.
Scientists tried to build a machine that would replicate a liver (an organ nowhere near as complex as the human brain), and they determined it wasn’t realistic, no machine could efficiently replicate the liver - they no better than to try and build one that could replicate the brain, because it’s not possible.
“So put that in your light bulb and smoke it”.
william
8 AgentCrazyDiamond // Feb 22, 2007 at 11:18 am
I think our argument is fading further and further away from the original topic. Weather or not a human body is considered a machine is not the point. I did have a link to an article about the monkey head transplant. The point there is that it is only our current state of medical technology that you are arguing about. Someday things will be possible that are not possible today. Check this out
The point is that your brain takes a certain set of information (including every experience you’ve had in you whole life) and applies it to the current situation in a manner that will yield the exact same result every time.
Of course without time travel, every time is only once. So without time travel and a 3rd party to observe this time travel and what happens, it is impossible to prove that you do have a choice in things. of course its impossible to prove that you don’t as well.
Think about this. Imagine you went back in time. The current day is the day that you decided you were going to go to Minnesota to go to school. You have absolutely no knowledge of anything that has happened between now and then. What happens next?
9 william // Feb 22, 2007 at 1:21 pm
First of all, I agree that this has gone well off the beaten path, I acknowledged that I took it here beginning with my first comment, I’m good at that.
Second, my friend, I wouldn’t put so much faith in science. I don’t believe that man will ever be able to take the head from one body and attach it to another, and have fully viable organism. (This is just my opinion of course).
Third, you speak as though time travel doesn’t exist - haven’t you ever seen the documentary called “Back to the future”?
I understand what you are saying, and I agree with it for the most part.
There, you win.
willima
Leave a Comment