Live data from Hacker News

Benjamin Libet's argument against free will is being questioned

theatlantic.com

41–50 of 84 posts

Re: Benjamin Libet's argument against free will is being questioned

#41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People frequently do things that they don't want to do or didn't plan to do -- most notably drug addicts and alcoholics.

Note that regret isn't the same thing as "my hand moved without any intent from me, WTF?".

But that also happens quite frequently and people rationalize it. Do you make a conscious decision to put your hand in front of your face when someone throws something at you?

Re: Benjamin Libet's argument against free will is being questioned

#42
Ah, the hallmark of 20th century pseudo-intellectualism: operationalize an ill-defined concept (e.g. "free will," "rationality," "empathy"), produce a dubiously reproducible experiment, maybe write a controversial paperback making ridiculously hyperbolic claims, let the press go apeshit, $$$.

Other flavors include: Pluck a plausible, edgy explanation out of a vast hypothesis space (e.g. evolutionary psychology), over-reductively apply a catchy theorem to a vastly complicated domain (looking at you, game theory). Take a thin, ecologically invalid model and claim "that's how the brain works!" (both neural networks and sybolic reasoning systems).

I feel like in this century, we've realized that all of this was maybe useful as a reference point to formulate hypotheses, but become less stupid about the conclusions we're willing to draw (as a population).

The wonderful reality is that we don't really have strong opinions about free will, because we're not sure we really know what that could mean or why precisely it seemed so important a century ago.

Re: Benjamin Libet's argument against free will is being questioned

#43
Our will power is like a muscle and can get tired. What if we have free will that is not actually "exercised" all that often. Say 85% or more of our actions are basically pre-ordained by decisions we have previously fully internalized and so are basically automatic, but which still alighn with our general will. Thats like an inexpensive (cached) result from the will banks. Then actual "exercise" of free will comes about when the patterns for these cache lookups fail and we must decide. But not only that, it is not exercised unless our desire and our will diverge. If I desire a second slice of pie, but my will is to not over-eat, it requires effort (will-power) to follow through with my will. That is the exercise of free will and does not actually happen as often as we might think.

Re: Benjamin Libet's argument against free will is being questioned

#44

Our will power is like a muscle and can get tired. What if we have free will that is not actually "exercised" all that often. Say 85% or more of our actions are basically pre-ordained by decisions we have previously fully internalized and so are basically automatic, but which still alighn with our general will. Thats like an inexpensive (cached) result from the will banks. Then actual "exercise" of free will comes ab…

This is basically a very simplified picture of free will described by Aquinas https://www.iep.utm.edu/freewi-m/#H4

Re: Benjamin Libet's argument against free will is being questioned

#45
post #31

Would love for someone to describe effectively what free will means. Because to me the concept itself doesn't make much sense to me and never has. I don't have free will over my breathing, in one definition (since it can be consider "involuntary"). In another definition I could say I have free will over my breathing because I could hold my breath. What is an example of free will? And what is hypothetical experiment t…

For me, free will is the feeling and belief that if I want my body to do something I have a pretty good chance of making it do that. Additionally, I can decide to train some reflexive behavior and tailor it to be more of what I want my automatic responses to be. It's a feeling of integration between my desires and my actions that doesn't feel like it's driven from outside my body. For example, if I get a muscle twitch or spasm or a limb falls asleep and I can't move my digits then my sense of free will is lessened. When I walk, talk, etc. then the feeling is reinforced.

Re: Benjamin Libet's argument against free will is being questioned

#46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People frequently do things that they don't want to do or didn't plan to do -- most notably drug addicts and alcoholics.

Note that regret isn't the same thing as "my hand moved without any intent from me, WTF?".

>my hand moved without any intent from me, WTF?

This is how addiction actually manifests. Put an alcoholic in front of a glass of whisky and often they will grab and attempt to drink without conscious thought.

Re: Benjamin Libet's argument against free will is being questioned

#48
post #31

Would love for someone to describe effectively what free will means. Because to me the concept itself doesn't make much sense to me and never has. I don't have free will over my breathing, in one definition (since it can be consider "involuntary"). In another definition I could say I have free will over my breathing because I could hold my breath. What is an example of free will? And what is hypothetical experiment t…

the whole concept makes zero sense. when did i decide to enjoy the things that i like? when did i decide how my parents should raise me, or what personality forming experiences i should have as a child? when did i decide to have adhd, which essentially makes me a slave to my impulses and desires (that i again never actively chose)? either our decisions and actions are based on a timeline of prior experiences (plus genetic preconditions), starting with birth, over which we have zero control, or they're totally random, which they are obviously not, otherwise our whole existence would be total chaotic randomness. on the other hand you have people claiming that some higher being instilled some moral code in all humans, and that it's up to us to make the best out of it. in that case, again, those moral standards were not of our choosing.

Re: Benjamin Libet's argument against free will is being questioned

#49

Ah, the hallmark of 20th century pseudo-intellectualism: operationalize an ill-defined concept (e.g. "free will," "rationality," "empathy"), produce a dubiously reproducible experiment, maybe write a controversial paperback making ridiculously hyperbolic claims, let the press go apeshit, $$$. Other flavors include: Pluck a plausible, edgy explanation out of a vast hypothesis space (e.g. evolutionary psychology), over…

You seem to be saying people were idiots for relying on the results of one experiment -- how could they be so stupid? Yet here you are, completely buying into the results of one recent paper as it agrees with your own model of the world (apparently).

As for being edgy, you are taking a condescending position using broad and vague claims that are impossible to refute ("looking at you game theory").

I agree that by itself "free will" is meaningless to talk about unless the term is defined. I'm sure most if not all authors on the subject do define what they mean by free will, eg, Dennett and Harris, but I'm sure there are many others who do.

Re: Benjamin Libet's argument against free will is being questioned

#50

Ah, the hallmark of 20th century pseudo-intellectualism: operationalize an ill-defined concept (e.g. "free will," "rationality," "empathy"), produce a dubiously reproducible experiment, maybe write a controversial paperback making ridiculously hyperbolic claims, let the press go apeshit, $$$. Other flavors include: Pluck a plausible, edgy explanation out of a vast hypothesis space (e.g. evolutionary psychology), over…

> why precisely it seemed so important a century ago.

Free will is a proxy argument in the debate about physical determinism, which is a component when talking about metaphysical and spiritual reality, which comes up in discussions about the existence of God - whom the modern zeitgeist doesn't believe and/or wishes to disprove.

Post reply on HN