You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

Pentashagon comments on Quotes and Notes on Scott Aaronson’s "The Ghost in the Quantum Turing Machine" - Less Wrong Discussion

16 Post author: shminux 17 June 2013 05:11AM

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

Comments (82)

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

Comment author: Pentashagon 21 June 2013 11:30:05PM 0 points [-]

In other words, why couldn't my will be a 'one-way' physical cause, able to cause things in the physical world, but unable to be affected by the physical world?

The simplest examples of one-way causes may be the laws of physics. They cause the physical universe to have its properties but the universe does not cause them to exist or affect their nature. Theoretically there could be other "laws of wills" governing our behavior in a similar way but I would hesitate calling them actual (or especially individual) wills because of their effective non-agency. Agents' behavior is caused by interaction with the physical universe, whereas the nature of laws is apparently not caused by interaction with the physical universe. A one-way will would be completely sensory-deprived and thus lack effective agency.

Comment author: [deleted] 23 June 2013 08:35:25PM 0 points [-]

I think this is a very interesting thought, one famously articulated by Kant: the CI is essentially a law in the style of natural law, only pertaining to the will. He agrees with you that the law can't be identified with each individual will (for one thing, some of us are bad or irrational). This avoids the 'sensory deprivation' problem, but keeps the idea that insofar as we're governed by the law of the will, we're free. The result is that we're free only to the extent that we're good.