All of sereboi's Comments + Replies

sereboi-20

that would be funny were it a paradox.

2orthonormal
Well, you may or may not be interested in the site; that's up to you. I do want to point out that the reason I haven't tried to explain except by analogy is that a good explanation of a slippery problem (like a reductionistic account of choice) takes a while to read, and longer to write. I did link it for you if you're curious.
sereboi-30

This makes sense, somewhat and now that i realize your not trying to defend compatibilism and can shift gears a bit. I really think that the whole situation might just be a veridical paradox, both being true equally. So in a way i would like to concede to compatibilism, however compatabilist attempts at solving the paradox are pathetic. Not sure if you have heard of Dialetheism, its a growing western philosophy that recognizes true contradictions. If compatibilism is a true contradiction than there will never be an explanation for how it works. It will... (read more)

9Leonhart
Do they also not challenge Aristotle's Law of Non Contradiction?
2orthonormal
Well, I wouldn't give up that easily! The default assumption should be that there's an underlying consistent reality, that paradoxes are in the map, not the territory (as was the case with the simple "mirror paradox" above). Assuming that an apparent contradiction is fundamental ought to be the last resort. Think about free will for a while— focusing on what the act of choosing feels like, and also on what it might actually consist of— and then check Eliezer's proffered resolution. It's much less naive than you're expecting.
sereboi00

The reason i said "little effort" is to clarify that one could possibly with much concentration have an effect on the subconscious, However the kind of effect im concerned with is the act of everyday choices that happen in nano seconds. I would welcome some data on "much effort" effects as well.

2wedrifid
I understand what you are trying to do, and suspect I even approximately agree with you regarding predictions about just how relevant our conscious thought is to our decision making. I just note that this is a different question to the one you were arguing against. People sign themselves up for rehab. Occasionally it works.
sereboi00

Any shown tangible research that an agent can manipulate and control with little effort their subconscious mind.

The presence of, would imply a host of things from complete agent responsibility in all areas of life.

The absence of it would not only imply severed liability but also complete meaninglessness.

Most branches of existential philosophy solve meaninglessness by stating one has control over their choices and so creating meaning, If one is stripped of that control than meaninglessness truly abounds.

Of course that is unless one believes in God.

2wedrifid
It's that "little effort" part that makes this an entirely different question. I don't use the term myself but "Free Will" is not always used to imply that things are easy.
sereboi00

@ orthonormal

you said- I agree. But I think that there is actually some feature of the (deterministic) act of choosing which leads a person to falsely believe that their choice is nondeterministic, and that by analyzing this we learn something interesting and important about cognition.

Very true. so what do you make of reconciling the two? Do we castigate them both in hopes of finding something out that is hiding in the shadows? The nexus of the matter is "belief" and in order to have a sound belief one should know as many facts about the subject... (read more)

0orthonormal
Hey, I actually meant for the conversation to move to the post you were quoting earlier. Here's my reply to you.
4ata
Please post your comments as replies (click "Reply" on the comment you're responding to) instead of posting them as top-level comments to the post.
sereboi00

@Thomblake sorry about the message thing. Im still getting used to how this site works..

You substantiate analogies with proof. Basically im saying that your analogies don't hold water perhaps i'm using confusing vernacular.

Let me say one thing before moving on. I hate debating just to debate, for me when i involve myself in a debate it is to gain more insight. So i am totally open to your point of view if it sheds some light on this subject, the bottom line is if someone has a solid angle that i'm missing than i welcome it.

Ok that being said. it sounds ... (read more)

2ata
Under your definition of free will, then what observations, if true, would be evidence for its existence? That is, what would free will (as you understand it) actually imply about empirical reality, and what would its absence imply?
sereboi40

thanks thanks for the information, honestly i got to this site cause i get e-mail alerts from google with anything about determinism. So when i read the article i thought it was some regular commentator. i had no idea that it was written by someone in a smaller community. That is why i was so harsh in my opening line...

Well now that i have a better understanding of what this site is about, if i make anymore comments i will word them a bit differently thanks again.

0prase
Now I am curious. First, I didn't know that it is possible to be alerted this way, but mainly: why have you adopted this feature? There is surely a lot of determinism-themed crap around, you have to get tons of e-mail every day. Or am I mistaken about how it works?
sereboi00

Ok i finally get the etiquette thing of this system. :)

Sorry i am a straight shooter. I will work on my wording, however i still stand by my claims of conjecture vrs facts.

Calm down! I'm not saying what you think I'm saying.

First off, I suggested you go and introduce yourself on the welcome thread in part because that's usually good for a few upvotes, and that avoids the annoying feature where people with negative karma can't comment more than once every 10 minutes or so. I think there should be a buffer, because getting a comment downvoted isn't such a rare or awful thing on LW, but in lieu of that it's worth it to make an effort to get some karma at first.

Again, the downvotes are more about style than substance. We don't r... (read more)

thomblake110

this has got to be one of the worst articles ever written on the subject of determinism vrs free will.

Needless hyperbole. A 10-second Google search turned up worse, so I can't imagine you had any basis for this claim. Example. Saying false things to be insulting is not well-liked around here.

You want some scientific proof for Determinism? start with a book called "The Illusion Of Conscious Will" by Wegner. Its a 400 page book that is cover to cover scientific study on the fact that we don't really act freely. Test studies, in Labs!

Sadly... (read more)

7orthonormal
Sereboi, welcome to Less Wrong! Be sure and hit the welcome thread soon. By the way, I notice you're getting downvotes on the comment (not by me); it's probably the tone rather than the content. Like any community, we have our norms of etiquette, and they're usually signaled by voting. More substantively, I think you're answering the question without properly dissolving it, which is necessary in the case of something like free will that genuinely confuses many intelligent people. (I'm not supporting the current post against this comment, just pointing out that your comment by itself won't dispel people's confusion over free will.)