Philosophy Discussion Forums | A Humans-Only Philosophy Club

[Bahman]

I am not talking about the decision made in the past but the decision we make now. Do you believe that options are real when we are making a decision? Do you believe in determinism?

As I've clearly stated, I believe options are real regardless of whether the universe is deterministic. I'm not sure why this is difficult to understand. I used the example of the past tense because options made in the past are clearly "determined", yet the word is still used appropriately.

As I defined determinism in OP there can be only one outcome (one option) in a deterministic world so you cannot possibly have options. Let's, put it this way, there is a system in the state of X and this system changes to the state of Y. X uniquely defines Y in a deterministic world. What happens when there are options: The system is in the state of X and there are at least two possible outcomes (options), let's call them Y and Z. So in a deterministic world there is only one outcome possible which is different from when there are options.

[Ranvier]

How would it be possible to escape determinism when causality is true?

The obvious is often the most difficult to substantiate. These are two distinct concepts: "cause & effect" and "determinism", which shouldn't be conflated. As we focus in on the question of cause for a given effect, we'll find the true answer. However, as you zoom out in your perspective, you'll realize that the same cause could result in two or more different effects or that you can achieve the same effect with many different causes. As you continue to zoom-out in your perspective, you'll realize very rapidly that the computational power required to calculate probabilities grows exponentially with every "click" of zooming-out. The probabilities become unfathomable, where it would require a very long computation to come up with a relatively "true" answer, even for a simple question: "What would happen if you tell a random person on the street 'I love you', what would be their reaction with some level of certainty"? Similarly would be true with computing how a vase would shatter when dropped on the floor, predicted with any level of precision. Would it shatter exactly the same way each time? The answer is no, because ambient room temperature, atmospheric pressure, humidity etc. are constantly changing. It would be nearly impossible to calculate by considering all the possible variables.

[Ranvier]

It's not even the length of time required to calculate all these probabilities but how could possibly information be collected about the quantum state of every subatomic particle of the system?

[Carter Blunt]

Determinism doesn't mean there's only one "choice" that exists, it means there's only one choice that will inevitably be selected. This topic is just going around in circles. What's the point?

[Carter Blunt]

It's not even the length of time required to calculate all these probabilities but how could possibly information be collected about the quantum state of every subatomic particle of the system?

Why does it need to be "collected"? Absolutely no one needs to know what subatomic particles are doing, for them to be doing it.

[Carter Blunt]

"The idea that determinism is true therefore is prohibited by the obligation to answer the why question of consciousness."
It's an accident. I hope.

[LuckyR]

Determinism doesn't mean there's only one "choice" that exists, it means there's only one choice that will inevitably be selected. This topic is just going around in circles. What's the point?

Correct on both counts. Currently and for the foreseeable future, animal decision making is essentially a Black Box, that is no one knows how it works at the granular level. For the decision maker the process subjectively appears to not be predetermined, though it is possible that within the Black Box, that it is predetermined.

Since we can't see within the Box it is completely logical and thus practical to assume Free Will exists since it is consistent with our subjective experience and just move on, since additional pondering if Free Will doesn't exist cannot be resolved and ends up as useless speculation.

[Ranvier]

How do you make a choice?

Do you make choices or is it all deterministic?

[Ranvier]

Determinism doesn't mean there's only one "choice" that exists, it means there's only one choice that will inevitably be selected. This topic is just going around in circles. What's the point?

Correct on both counts. Currently and for the foreseeable future, animal decision making is essentially a Black Box, that is no one knows how it works at the granular level. For the decision maker the process subjectively appears to not be predetermined, though it is possible that within the Black Box, that it is predetermined.

Since we can't see within the Box it is completely logical and thus practical to assume Free Will exists since it is consistent with our subjective experience and just move on, since additional pondering if Free Will doesn't exist cannot be resolved and ends up as useless speculation.

Indeed

[Ranvier]

Determinism doesn't mean there's only one "choice" that exists, it means there's only one choice that will inevitably be selected. This topic is just going around in circles. What's the point?

Yes, there is only one of "you" at any point in time, if that should be your definition for "determinism".

[Ranvier]

Why does it need to be "collected"? Absolutely no one needs to know what subatomic particles are doing, for them to be doing it.

Next time you wish to achieve the one desired outcome, you should have no difficulty in achieving that outcome. I'm sure you'll "now" exactly what to do.

[Bahman]

Determinism doesn't mean there's only one "choice" that exists, it means there's only one choice that will inevitably be selected. This topic is just going around in circles. What's the point?

Have you ever seen a falling apple stop from falling, pause for while (because it might face an extra option rather than falling), and then fall again?

[Ranvier]

Determinism doesn't mean there's only one "choice" that exists, it means there's only one choice that will inevitably be selected. This topic is just going around in circles. What's the point?

Have you ever seen a falling apple stop from falling, pause for while (because it might face an extra option rather than falling), and then fall again?

Drop an apple and a feather together, allow both to hit the surface of water. Same cause, entirely different effects.

[Ecurb]

I am not talking about the decision made in the past but the decision we make now. Do you believe that options are real when we are making a decision? Do you believe in determinism?

As I've clearly stated, I believe options are real regardless of whether the universe is deterministic. I'm not sure why this is difficult to understand. I used the example of the past tense because options made in the past are clearly "determined", yet the word is still used appropriately.

As I defined determinism in OP there can be only one outcome (one option) in a deterministic world so you cannot possibly have options. Let's, put it this way, there is a system in the state of X and this system changes to the state of Y. X uniquely defines Y in a deterministic world. What happens when there are options: The system is in the state of X and there are at least two possible outcomes (options), let's call them Y and Z. So in a deterministic world there is only one outcome possible which is different from when there are options.

Did you read my post? I clearly stated that although the outcome is destined, "option" is still a meaningful and reasonable word describing the process of choosing by an individual. It describes the mental processes of the chooser. Of course, now I'm merely repeating myself. If you didn't get it the first time, you probably won't get it now. When "opted" is used in the past tense, only one outcome is possible. Yet we still use the word. Are people who use the past tense "opted" irrational idiots? I don't think so.

[Bahman]

Determinism doesn't mean there's only one "choice" that exists, it means there's only one choice that will inevitably be selected. This topic is just going around in circles. What's the point?

Have you ever seen a falling apple stop from falling, pause for while (because it might face an extra option rather than falling), and then fall again?

Drop an apple and a feather together, allow both to hit the surface of water. Same cause, entirely different effects.

This is not a related answer to my question.