The illusion of free will

[Magical Realist]

I can't be held responsible for your inaccuracies.
Yes it is.
Prediction applies to a system. You have assumed the system to be "look at the previous digits and try to establish the next state (i.e. predict the Nth digit)".
Other systems exist in which Pi is predictable. And it is so predictable that we can actually establish it with 100% accuracy.
We merely need to use algorithms.
I repeat, if you are referring to the system of using the previous digits to try to establish the next, then yes, as stated up front, it is unpredictable.
But that does not make Pi unpredictable... only that system (of trying to guess digits from the preceeding ones, which will be the system referred to in any quote you try to post).

Pi is a number. It exists as a number independent of any calculation. It is not a system in and of itself. It can not therefore, in and of itself, be "unpredictable".
There exist numerous systems of trying to predict the next digit: one of which is using previous numbers. And in this regard, the next digit is unpredictable.
But there exist systems of establishing the next digit that do not rely on the previous numbers, and they can have 100% predictive ability, which is why we can use them to actually calculate those digits.

But heck, you'll just refer to this as semantic tapdancing.

Uh no..calculating pi in any sense, either by calculating the previous numbers or using an algorithm, is not predicting it. It's determining it. Predicting would be finding the pattern and inferring the digits from there. As in knowing in advance of calculating it out. And as I show there is no such known pattern. The sequence of digits is totally random and unpredictable.

 

[Quantum Quack]

Not sure I'm following all this, but you think it requires creativity to provide evolution? As in biological evolution?
It requires no creativity at all... merely random mutation that get passed on and result in survival in an environment where non-mutated versions can not survive.

so, just to confirm, you agree that random mutation is necessary for successfull evolution and maintenance of infinite diversity?

And what does the word "creativity" mean to you?

 

[Sarkus]

nah! If you were truly interested in the subject at hand, you would define it yourself.

I'm not interested in something you raise but can't be bothered to define.
Otherwise I could happily say that I don't believe nothingness is a possibility. And as such deserves no further consideration.
But this wouldn't suffice for you.
So if you want to discuss it, define it.

At t=0 (duration) the universe... blah blah blah!

Yes, and already responded to in post #252.

well that says a lot hey?

the premise is that "cows can jump over the moon"
If you disagree with the premise then that's ok.... :m:

So do you have issue with the premises? You can show them to be false?
Or are you now merely criticising me for not requiring you to accept the premises, and to leave it to you to decide whether you do or not?
I would add that if one does disagree with them, one should have the decency to explain why so that the premise can be defended.
Again, that is the nature of discussions.

 

[Sarkus]

Uh no..calculating pi in any sense, either by calculating the previous numbers or using an algorithm, is not predicting it. It's determining it. Predicting would be finding the pattern and inferring the digits from there. As in knowing in advance of calculating it out. And as I show there is no such known pattern. The sequence of digits is totally random and unpredictable.

What you describe is certainly one method of prediction. But your continued focus on that as the only method is your mistake.
Pi in and of itself is not a system, and is not either predictable or unpredictable. It is what it is.
Predictability is related to a system, and what you describe is just one system: finding a pattern and using that to establish the next digit.
It is not the only system.

 

[Quantum Quack]

Uhm ... what exactly is your premise to claim that freewill is illusionary?

 

[Quantum Quack]

I'm not interested in something you raise but can't be bothered to define.

so your interest i s only in debating the issue and not the issue itself?
Do you have any interest in the subject of freewill at all?
If so then you can work out the relevance of zero for yourself.

 

[Sarkus]

so, just to confirm, you agree that random mutation is necessary for successfull evolution and maintenance of infinite diversity?

I'm not sure it's necessary, but I think it can contribute significantly to it, yes.

And what does the word "creativity" mean to you?

The conscious effort of combining of things in unusual ways and arrive at something novel.

 

[Sarkus]

so your interest i s only in debating the issue and not the issue itself?
Do you have any interest in the subject of freewill at all?
If so then you can work out the relevance of zero for yourself.

Sure, and ignore the next few sentences I wrote.

 

[Quantum Quack]

Sure, and ignore the next few sentences I wrote.

gladly!

 

[Sarkus]

Uhm ... what exactly is your premise to claim that freewill is illusionary?

That cause and effect holds with the effects being governed either by determinism or probabilistic determinism. If one holds uncaused events to arise (rather than being due to hidden variables) then these are random.
These are documented in various wordings throughout the thread.

 

[Quantum Quack]

@Sarkus
What questions do you have about your own belief's in the nature of freewill? [illusion or not]

 

[Sarkus]

The use of the Pi digits was only to exemplify the issue of determined indeterminism to the debate... why have you missed this?

I haven't missed this. I simply ignored that issue due to the impossibility of determined indeterminism. The two are mutually exclusive as philosophical notions.
What you mean is determined underdeterminism, which results in an unpredictable system if you try to guess the next digit from what has gone before.

 

[Quantum Quack]

That cause and effect holds with the effects being governed either by determinism or probabilistic determinism. If one holds uncaused events to arise (rather than being due to hidden variables) then these are random.
These are documented in various wordings throughout the thread.

So how does "nothing" figure in this premise? [aka a blank piece of paper or an empty form field in a discussion forum or a future yet to arrive or a past that no longer exists]
or the white space between the virtual letters on this virtual page

 

[Sarkus]

@Sarkus
What questions do you have about your own belief's in the nature of freewill? [illusion or not]

Primarily whether it is a separate state of affairs to self-awareness or not, or whether the two are effectively the same thing (e.g. can't have one without the other).
Other than that it is just regarding the soundness of the justification behind it.

 

[Sarkus]

So how does "nothing" figure in this premise? [aka a blank piece of paper or an empty form field in a discussion forum or a future yet to arrive or a past that no longer exists]

It figures the same place as rubber ducks, the price of eggs, and my receding hairline. Unless you can show how it is relevant, where should it figure?

 

[Quantum Quack]

It figures the same place as rubber ducks, the price of eggs, and my receding hairline. Unless you can show how it is relevant, where should it figure?

Maybe your thoughts would benefit by including the notion that self determination relies on unconditional inspiration and not obligatory cause and effect?

How does Inspiration differ from deterministic causation/effects?

Can the inspiration of a sun set be considered as a determining cause?

 

[Quantum Quack]

It figures the same place as rubber ducks, the price of eggs, and my receding hairline. Unless you can show how it is relevant, where should it figure?

ha .. at least you have ....hair! yet my having next to no hair causes what? [ I have a pretty good idea what it inspires ]

 

[Quantum Quack]

@Sarkus,
Have you considered that the reality or not of free will MAY only be found possibly, with the use of deductive reasoning and not inductive reasoning. Meaning that like zero it can only be founded by default of everything else being excluded?
ie:

We have 2 red hats, we have also 2 blue hats.
Question: How many yellow hats do we have?

 

[Magical Realist]

What you describe is certainly one method of prediction. But your continued focus on that as the only method is your mistake.
Pi in and of itself is not a system, and is not either predictable or unpredictable. It is what it is.
Predictability is related to a system, and what you describe is just one system: finding a pattern and using that to establish the next digit.
It is not the only system.

If the sequencing of pi digits weren't a system, then it wouldn't relate to chaotic behavior. In fact, recent research indicates that it does:

"Bailey says: "At the very least we have shown that the digits of pi appear to be random: because they are described by chaos theory."

Practical spin-offs of this seemingly arcane research include random number generators and cryptography."--

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/2146295.stm

 

[wynn]

Have you ever considered that the ability to freely choose between alternatives is different to the provision of choices available to choose from?

Yes, this is a vital difference.

Many people (esp. those who are skeptical about free will) tend to think of free will as the provision of choices available to choose from. To such people, the ability to choose from whatever options are available (and note that whenever there is a sense that a choice could take place, there are at least two options to choose from) does not seem like free will.

Also have you considered the possibility that even if fully predetermination exists, freewill, autonomy of choice, agency etc could be predetermined into the scheme of things?
That the existence of freewill and freedom to choose accordingly is predetermined?

It comes down to how we define "free will" to begin with ...