Fairy nuff, thanks.

Quantum theory doesn't want for mathematical foundations: it wants for a compelling narrative for human minds. — Kenosha Kid

Well said! :up:

Now I lost my train of thought. Anyway, the point is humans can do idiotic stuff, there's nothing remotely stupid about the universe. Between these two (human folly & nature's genius), there's room enough for free will (determinism is intelligent but humans aren't; we try to be, but we aren't)

:rofl:

There are patterns, which suggest determinism, in human thought but these are not all-encompassing i.e. there are exceptions. Most do this or that but some don't fit in - it seems our free will is, in some sense, a matter of how odd, how unique, how noncomformist, how contrarian we are.

it seems our free will is, in some sense, a matter of how odd, how unique, how noncomformist, how contrarian we are. — Agent Smith

Even your oddness, uniqueness, non-conformity, and contrariness, are completely determined. Is it your desire to be unique that doesn't like determinism?

Even your oddness, uniqueness, non-conformity, and contrariness, are completely determined. Is it your desire to be unique that doesn't like determinism? — Raymond

That's one of issues I've been troubled by: heads you win, tails I lose.

Even the heads and tails are determined. Unpredictable maybe but determined.

Yeah, I know.

Then what's the problem?

I find dog behavior interesting. Dogs share a repertoire of behaviors. For instance, most dogs will signal you to keep scratching them if you stop. "More!" they signal. Dogs will signal a need for assistance. "Hey you, the ball is under the couch -- don't just sit there, go get it." Dogs can follow our gaze, and they can follow a point. They all make use of couches in the same way (if they are big enough)--laying at one end with their head on the arm. They show eagerness in the same way: Eyes wide open, mouth half open, tail wagging vigorously.

They don't have much free will. We don't want them to have much free will -- they can cause enough trouble just by following certain determined behaviors, like their need to chew. Like their ability to win at "Catch me if you can", as one chases them when they have gotten off the leash.

What is true of dogs is true for cats, chickens, cows. crows, et al. Not too much invented behavior.

The BIG question is "How much of this characterization of animals applies to us, as well?"

Some, for sure. We do have at least a substantial range of behavior autonomy and invention. But we also have more determined behaviors (like the cartoon). The many truisms or adages about human behavior that we say, like "Be careful how you talk to yourself when you are dealing with a big problem. You can make things better or worse by feeding yourself the right or wrong messages."
"Happy families are all alike; every unhappy family is unhappy in its own way." (Leo Tolstoy). Social workers see the same bad results from bad habits, bad behaviors, bad choices, etc. all the time.

In my opinion, people are more alike than they are different. That's not about free will; it's about how we predictably respond to certain stimuli, even if we do have free will.

You raise a good point.

Animals are slaves to their drives - on occasion I've seen dogs hesitate (almost as if they were asking "should I take that?") when offered a treat, but, invariably, they eat anything dog-edible dangled in front of them.

Humans, distinctively, can say "no" (it looks painful, it must be) to even a million dollars, offered no strings attached. This unqiue ability of humans to refuse/reject even the most attractive of deals is, to me, a marker of some degree of freedom of will. Dogs can't do that; we, on the other hand, can (resist our deeply-ingrained instincts)!

Schopenhauer claimed that though we can do what we want, we can't want our wants; true as that may be, we can, at the very least, refuse to comply to our unchosen wants.

Some might claim that this means nothing at all and that instances of denial of our deepest urges is simply one irresistable compulsion getting the better of another. That's possible of course, but imagine that such urges/wants/instincts are arranged in such a way that none of them wield absolute power (think rock-paper-scissors) over us. We're free so long as our instincts/urges/wants are at odds with each other (think of ourselves as people free to the extent our so-called leaders are bickering about who gets to sit on the throne).

They don't have much free will. — Bitter Crank

After a walk with the dog I tried to leash her for the walk home. She didn't wanted me to do so and ran towards a guy on the footpath. She barked fully-fledged at the poor man. I tried to divert her with yelling and throwing a stick, but she was determined to scare the hell out of him. I know she barks only but the guy didn't agree. A dog should always be kept on a leash. Whatever. Doggy continued her murder spree and attacked a small child on a bike, on the bikepath along the foothpath. Instinctively, the child kept static. I tried in vain to keep the dog away, while the child's father arrived on the scene, riding a bike with two children in a bin on the front. Of course he got as mad as the dog, trying to protect his child. I think the dog did exactly the same. She is young and wanted to show her protective nature towards me. More bikers arrived. Cursing, complaining, and yelling they would return with their vicious dogs to teach doggy a lesson or put her down. I got damned emotional, yelled at doggy and smashed a stick on the stone path. Father even told me not to beat! That made me even more emotional and I yelled at him to not even suggest I beat doggy. Doggy continued barking and only when I threw a stick and ran back on the field we came from, she left the scene behind me.

An exemplary situation of free will. No doubt the word gets spread that an aggressive dog accompanies an equally aggressive guy! Luckily it's barking only. It took me about an hour to leash doggy. Typical case of barking free will.

Schopenhauer claimed that though we can do what we want, we can't want our wants; true as that may be, we can, at the very least, refuse to comply to our unchosen wants. — Agent Smith

I think this is somewhat overly linear thinking. The brain, the unconscious side of it, is teachable. It's not a blank slate, but it can relearn priorities and associations. What is a heroin addiction if not an acquired want (that is, contrary to Schopenhauer, very easily chosen and very difficult to say no to)? But less extreme, habit is an acquired want. I don't care about football and don't want to know who has acquired who for what price with what merit, but it's very easy to imagine making myself care, to the point where I feel I must find out. Nerds are bundles of acquired wants.

Too many unjustified claims but that's ok, mea culpa too.

the principle of least action i — Agent Smith

is proof that at times humans can exercise free will. Of course every now and then, people do take the most efficient path and the path is predictable. When a human takes a predicted path, that is when they aren't exercising free will. Determinism requires predictability. Without predictability, we can only surmise that an actor disobeying the consistent laws of physics is doing so of their own volition as we cannot identify any other source which is plainly pulling the strings. Ironically, logic compels this result.

Now that I think of it, it's actually the other way round.

We had/have free will (our ancestors were inefficiency personified - expending more energy than necessary was the usual deal, and so on).

With the advent of science, and its attempts to emulate nature's efficiency, we're becoming, in a sense, as mindlessly efficient as nature herself i.e. we're losing our freedom to waste energy. We've become calculating machines, figuring out the shortest path, one of least resistance, between two points, very much what an inanimate object would do if left to its own devices.

We want to become machines/robots. Taoism (go with the flow) i.e. the world is becoming sinicized.

Art - superfluous, unnecessary, and extravagant, add stupid to that list, in terms of energy - is an expression of our free will.

Methinks you're trying to eat the cake and have it to. — Agent Smith

How so?

How so? — Artemis

You know how so.