DonaldMcIntyre comments on Is Determinism A Special Case Of Randomness? - Less Wrong

-4 Post author: DonaldMcIntyre 04 May 2015 01:56AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (88)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: DonaldMcIntyre 05 May 2015 03:50:24AM *  1 point [-]

Thx for the complete answer I like your thinking process!

Note that fundamentally random processes viewpoint and hidden variables viewpoint are equivalent -- they produce the same predictions -- so choosing one is the matter of convenience.

I agree that they are equivalent in that they denote a lack of understanding of the underlying mechanics, but in the case of randomness, even though it could be an illusion, I still subjectively (naive view) favor the existence of randomness (and probability) in the base physical mechanics because I fail to see a connection between certainty and our brain's apparent non-bound decision making.

Nevertheless I am open to the option that physics is only deterministic and that such a process may recreate our consciousness (I have to think more about that though).

Comment author: estimator 05 May 2015 08:52:40AM 1 point [-]

As others already mentioned, introducing fundamental randomness doesn't help in resolving free will problem -- whether or not physical processes are truly random, you have no control over them.

You may want to read LW free will sequence.

Comment author: TheAncientGeek 05 May 2015 10:55:06AM 0 points [-]

As others already mentioned, introducing fundamental randomness doesn't help in resolving free will problem -

Opinions vary. Naturalistic libertarianism is a thing.