If we were to know the positions and velocities of every particle in the universe then we could use Newton’s laws of motion to determine their positions and velocities at any other prior or future time and hence there would be no free will.
The quantum stuff is insanity !!! Electrons can jump and disappear anywhere and it’s beyond mind blowing
But you cant know both but only one at a time. So you cannot determine the answer to free will . You are indeterminate in that position lol Cant indeterminism be found at the quantum level?
You always have Free will You can wake up tomorrow and hike that trial or you can do zero and watch tv
Electrons are as small as anything we know about . They may be infinite small A simple photon of light can send them anywhere
Let's remember that gravity is the weakest of the four fundamental forces. When a ball hits the floor it bounces up rather than passing through because there are forces stronger than the one Newton studied.
The anti free will peoplpeople. say that is a delusion . They use neuro science to evidence it. I believe in free will for consciousness isnt matter .
True, Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle undermines determinism because we don't know the precise positions and velocities of the constituents of the Universe. Rather, these properties are replaced by quantum wave functions, which tell us only the probability that any given particle is here or there, or that it has this or that velocity.
After reading a lot of the more comprehensible new physics for the uninitiated, (I only have a History graduate degree and know little math), and also philosophical and neuro-psychology articles, I have concluded at my advanced age there is very little "free will" and most of that consists of choosing from what Chance provides at any given moment since everything is in flux all the time. Spinoza, I think was right about it. Nobody will ever convince me I had real "choices." If salt and pepper was placed in front of me I chose one, none or the other. That's it. I chose a wife from among those available at the time, etc... We all act in this manner. My daughter when she was younger used to complain, "Where are all the marriageable men?" Well, it is all relative to circumstances--Chance. "Free will" is in some part a religious construct. If one is not compelled by Fate (in my mind Chance) to make less than desirable choices, then one must be personally responsible for choice--hence, guilt or not. (Yet the contradiction that "You either have Faith or you do not." Huh? So that means one either by Fate has Faith or not? See, it is not reconcilable. If you are a religious believer but believe that Chance plays an enormous part in human life, you might re-think the weight of your culpability for actions you regret taking or not. The upside is that one becomes much more tolerant and forgiving since Chance is going to determine outcomes. Umm, here is another shot at it: if people willingly embrace the idea of "cause and effect," why then is it so hard to think that all the causes in the past have the effects we think we perceive at present? (Or predict for the future.) There are so many contradictions in Free Will; and so many bad outcomes like injustice, guilt and intolerance which grow from the false paradigm. The idea of Free Will and "accountability" is a strong value in many cultures, especially in the west, shaped by Judeo-Christian values. Media dummies and political and social leaders insist upon clinging to the idea of free will and will not acknowledge Chance as the life determinant. In the East, in some cultures, it is possible to acknowledge that Fate or Destiny or Chance rules lives, but in the west, one must pay and pay dearly for the "choices" one makes. I realize that people who promulgate the cultural norms in part irrationally and cruelly demand harsh punishment for one's actions to preserve order. For example, the media continually show people, including within the judicial system where they know better, demanding "justice" via "harsh punishment" for individuals who have mental illness or were born to act badly or otherwise shaped by their Fates to do evil? "Throw the book at him!" So law enforcement screams at a mentally ill homeless man, "Put down that pen knife or I will shoot!" (to kill you), (kill because that is the way I was trained and also the prosecutors won't charge me because everyone will agree it was in defense of my life or others.) Yes, the herd accepts and in large part agrees with even judicial murder because humans are motivated by self-interest and fear. There are still about 14 jurisdictions in the developed world which still have the death penalty, (though some of that is used to bargain for pleas.) Hasn't anyone read that amorality cannot be changed in people who have it? So why does the value system and the so-called leaders of society persist in ignoring the lack of individual free will? Because most people do not have the wherewithal to comprehend that Free Will is severely limited. Chance determines, but the wiser more informed people can't sell the masses that message. How would they sell the idea that, "Well, what can one do if Chance forms a human into a criminal?" Instead, people have to cling to the idea that regardless of circumstances and scientific reason, everyone is "responsible." Right, Sure. We agree to conform with the fiction, though we know full well that one is born into lucky circumstances or not, for example. I would credit an English physician and author named Tim Willocks for addressing the subject of free will in one of his novels about the St. Bart's Day Massacre in Paris, (paraphrase): "The warp of life is woven from an uncountable number of threads." Chance in my opinion and in the opinion of some physicists, rules us all. We are always dealing with the perhaps not infinite but uncountable number of events, actions and omissions which occurred in the past, and from the current state of what we each perceive as reality, (I realize "the past" and "current" is not accurate in quantum physics, but I have no other thought with with to replace it.) We are also constrained by the fact that "science" has been bound to mathematics, and that eliminates issues like "consciousness," which has yet to be identified with any mathematically explainable or demonstrable source. There was an interesting article by a physicist in Scientific American in my in-box today about that. Oh, and I might mention that neuro-psychologists at the University of Mainz have asserted from their research that about 60% of human thought is not consciously generated. (That is why for example we keep getting the same thoughts over and over again about some things without even wanting them.) I am verbosed out.
Although I could choose either, it would all depend on circumstances. I might not choose either or none at all, or maybe something else available to me at the time by Chance. I am reasonably sure you believe in "cause and effect." There are lots of reasons choices are made, and most of those reasons are already in play and have nothing to do with us. For example, in the Ohio River Valley, there has occurred a statistically high number of middle aged suicides. People who comprehend these statistics are alarmed. Why? Why would so many people in one geographic area choose suicide? Because of circumstances they had nothing to do with, (i. e. socio-economic collapse--what has happened to communities due to global economic changes and lack of appropriate political responses to those changes.) Aside from that, the response is too glib in light of wisdom and current knowledge. Explanation of human behavior is much more complex. Some people are born monsters, they don't have the degree of choice you propose. I provided several examples which apparently did not resonate. An awful lot of humans have so cemented their positions there is little sense in trying to influence a change in thinking. They oppose information and ideas which do not coincide with their own and seek confirmation. A comment above mine was posted by someone trying to explain the Physical theory which informs this question. For some people, their experiences can be boiled down to fit within simple explanations. That is their view of "reality." But some modern Physics, Psychology, Neuro-psychology and Philosophy do not agree with the simplistic analysis and postulate that what we believe is our "reality" may very well be illusion. In the case of Physics, this information is almost completely absent from public discourse. This is because so few Physicists have chosen to communicate with the mass population about their findings in a manner which can be understood by them. Hence, the post above mine which most people including myself do not fully comprehend. I get the sense of what he is getting at because I have read some quantum Physics for non-Physicists but don't really grasp his point. I once logged onto a Physics forum and asked some questions and was told I couldn't get answers because I did not know the mathematics and the specialized language used. My experience to date has taught me that Physicists speak only with each other. All that said, he or she was correct to allude to a Physical explanation in a discussion about free will. This is a philosophical discussion page, (which is coincidentally informed by Physics and the social sciences.) There is by definition no definitive answer to this question. However, yours is far too simplistic to represent a viable theory. My bet is that most people realize that many many things are not within their control. I mean no offense but I have no tolerance for such retorts.
That's not the same qustion. It's true you can suspect that nobody will stop you, but that has to do with freedom rather than free will. In simplistic terms, I think Free will is more about how a human brain works in order to make that decision. Are we all just meat computers that calculate our next act based on available info? If so, what control does a person actually have? Some religions believe there is a "soul" that can not be detected by science and that has the power to gvie direction, for example.
Problem is you cant measure both location and velocity simultaneously. As with all other characteristics of sub atomic particles like 'spin' QM says you have to choose one measurement or another. Having chosen that one you lose all knowledge of the others. At list I think this is the case. Happy to be proven wrong. Anyone with a physics degree???
Do you know why that is ?? One reason Electrons are so tiny you cannot fully measure one as they are infinite in smallness . As soon as a basic photon touches them they are gone forever
Our brains are able to create 11-dimensional structures, which are quantum in nature. And so we do have free will. Here's a link: https://www.sciencealert.com/science-discovers-human-brain-works-up-to-11-dimensions
