Article <cvma1jdffjhfod2sgp3u1mpqj3u16quhq9@4ax.com>

Deutsch English Français Italiano
<cvma1jdffjhfod2sgp3u1mpqj3u16quhq9@4ax.com>

View for Bookmarking (what is this?)
Look up another Usenet article
Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!news.szaf.org!nntp-feed.chiark.greenend.org.uk!ewrotcd!news.eyrie.org!beagle.ediacara.org!.POSTED.beagle.ediacara.org!not-for-mail
From: Martin Harran <martinharran@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: talk.origins
Subject: Re: Making your mind up
Date: Tue, 09 Apr 2024 16:24:37 +0100
Organization: University of Ediacara
Lines: 222
Sender: to%beagle.ediacara.org
Approved: moderator@beagle.ediacara.org
Message-ID: <cvma1jdffjhfod2sgp3u1mpqj3u16quhq9@4ax.com>
References: <t6801jdmgcgr0fdvm4e9qpp1q18tsodheo@4ax.com> <uupqff$68rm$2@solani.org> <phu11jpedm7que73fh9f4hr6ho837j6roj@4ax.com> <uusjf8$7l2g$3@solani.org> <ocd51jpqnqhdc7t7g7i04ub9hr3phbn98c@4ax.com> <uuuk95$8l91$1@solani.org> <fat91jtecqk56ldqouhgnp7okervabrf1u@4ax.com> <uv3jon$ba50$1@solani.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Info: beagle.ediacara.org; posting-host="beagle.ediacara.org:3.132.105.89";
	logging-data="80259"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@beagle.ediacara.org"
User-Agent: ForteAgent/8.00.32.1272
To: talk-origins@moderators.individual.net
Cancel-Lock: sha1:z0q5A0pZA4F6wX1gDxBrpndTg7Q= sha256:heUn8oEyfGpTF1N6S08YiE6h4YIKoMkhpLV5OxH1VJM=
Bytes: 13352

On Tue, 9 Apr 2024 09:36:07 -0500, DB Cates <cates_db@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>On 2024-04-09 3:40 AM, Martin Harran wrote:
>> On Sun, 7 Apr 2024 12:14:12 -0500, DB Cates <cates_db@hotmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> On 2024-04-07 10:25 AM, Martin Harran wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 6 Apr 2024 17:48:09 -0500, DB Cates <cates_db@hotmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 2024-04-06 2:38 AM, Martin Harran wrote:
>>>>>> On Fri, 5 Apr 2024 16:29:20 -0500, DB Cates <cates_db@hotmail.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 2024-04-05 11:05 AM, Martin Harran wrote:
>>>>>>>> There was quite an interesting discussion a few weeks ago on Free Will
>>>>>>>> vs Determinism but it died a death, at least in part due to the
>>>>>>>> departure of some contributors to the Land Beyond GG. I'd like to take
>>>>>>>> up some of the issues again if anyone is interested.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> One point made by Hemidactylus that didn't get developed any further
>>>>>>>> was the way that we sometimes give a lot of time and effort into
>>>>>>>> making a decision - he gave the example of buying a car. It's also
>>>>>>>> common for someone to want to "sleep it on it" before making a
>>>>>>>> decision where the decision is important but it is not clear what
>>>>>>>> decision is best. If a decision is essentially predetermined then what
>>>>>>>> is the point of that time and effort or sleeping on it?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Do you not see that this argument depends on the belief that there was
>>>>>>> an *option* to make the decision earlier under different conditions
>>>>>>> (lack of 'thinking it over' and/or 'sleeping on it'). IOW that free will
>>>>>>> exists. You are 'begging the question'.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It's actually the complete opposite, I am starting with the assumption
>>>>>> that there is no free will and asking what then is the point in
>>>>>> deliberating over the various options.
>>>>>
>>>>> See, right there. My claim is that 'deliberating over the options' is
>>>>> what you are determined by the circumstances to do and is part of the
>>>>> circumstances that determines what you follow it up with. Assuming that
>>>>> there is some "point" beyond this is assuming that free will exists.
>>>>>
>>>>>    You seem to be taking things a
>>>>>> bit further and saying that if determinism exists then there aren't
>>>>>> any options to begin with but that is just a variation in emphasis, it
>>>>>> doesn't address the question of why we spend so much time pondering
>>>>>> those options when they don't even exist.
>>>>>
>>>>> It's because the "pondering" is part of the determined action.
>>>>
>>>> That just takes us full circle back to my original question - what is
>>>> the point or the value of that pondering if the decision is
>>>> predetermined?
>>>
>>> Why does it have to have a 'point' or 'value'?
>> 
>> I think I've answered that in what I said below about evolution. There
>> is an underlying principle of Cost versus Benefit in Natural
>> Selection; if the benefits from a trait or characteristic outweigh its
>> cost, then that trait Is likely to be selected for; if the cost
>> outweighs the benefits, then it will likely be selected against; if
>> cost and benefit more or less balance out, then it is really down to
>> chance whether or not the trait well survive. As I said already, I see
>> considerable cost involved in this pondering in terms of brain
>> resources, but I don't see any benefits if the decision is determined
>> by external factors. Can you suggest any benefits that would outweigh
>> the cost?

Apparently not.

>> 
>>> Pre 'pondering' it is
>>> just the determined results (one of which is the pondering) of the
>>> conditions at that time. Post 'pondering' the determined action is the
>>> result of conditions at *that* time which includes any changes due to
>>> the 'pondering' among other changes.
>>>>
>>>> In evolutionary terms, I can see various disadvantages to that
>>>> pondering. The brain is the most demanding organ in our body,
>>>> consuming around 20% of the total energy used. Pondering a decision
>>>> can often distract us from other important things we should be using
>>>> our brain for and can indirectly have a very negative affect on our
>>>> lives. It seems to me that it would make sense to weed out unnecessary
>>>> demands unless they have a clear evolutionary advantage. I can't see
>>>> any such evolutionary advantage in pondering being added to a
>>>> predetermined process.
>>>
>>> How does 'free will' avoid this problem?
>> 
>> First of all, I don't think that is really a relevant question - I'm
>> not debating this issue to make a case for free will, I'm challenging
>> the robustness of determinism in its own right. I certainly don't want
>> to fall into the trap of claiming that I can prove Theory B is right
>> by identifying shortcomings in Theory A, something for which I have
>> previously criticised ID, particularly Stephen Meyer. [1]
>> 
>> Having said that, I don't think it is a big problem for free will as I
>> can see benefits for pondering in that context. If I have freedom in
>> making my decisions, then that means I am ultimately responsible for
>> those decisions and their outcome. It is obviously beneficial for me
>> to become as good a decision-maker as possible; pondering decisions
>> and all their foreseeable outcomes can help me get better at it.
>>
>Why doesn't that same argument work for the existence of 'pondering' in 
>a deterministic scenario?

What advantage is there in becoming a good decision maker if you
aren't making decisions?


>
>> FWIW, the more I read and debate this subject, the more it reminds me
>> of the Nature vs Nurture debate, the "bit of both" answer also applies
>> here.
>>
>Yep. It's just the spectre (ha) of the supernatural that seems to 
>inevitably arise when 'free will' is invoked that bothers me.

What bothers me is when people dismiss things out of hand just because
they might have even a hint of the supernatural.

>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Tied in with that is our ability to change our minds after we have
>>>>>>>> made a decision - has determinism some convoluted way of working that
>>>>>>>> predetermines what way we will make a decision but also predetermins
>>>>>>>> that we will change it?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Having made a decision plus time (other things happening) have changed
>>>>>>> the environment, so why not a different decision being determined?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We have been redecorating recently. The choice for wallpaper for a
>>>>>> particular room came down to two papers. My wife (who finally decides
>>>>>> these things <smile>) picked paper A and we bought it. Two days later,
>>>>>> she changed her mind and decided she's rather have paper B. We hadn't
>>>>>> even opened the paper so we were able to take it back to the shop and
>>>>>> get it swapped. I can't see any change of environment in that.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Your wife went into suspended animation for two days!? Amazing.
>>>>> Seriously, do you not think it possible, nay, probable that she
>>>>> continued to 'ponder' her decision, observed the room in different
>>>>> lighting conditions, paid heightened consideration to the existing
>>>>> colours in the room, etc. and that this might have led to her changing
>>>>> her mind?
>>>>
>>>> I'm actually pretty sure she didn't do any of those physical things
========== REMAINDER OF ARTICLE TRUNCATED ==========