Have you went down any internet rabbit holes only to come out with a deep set existential crisis? If so, what are they?

  • Hegar@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    32
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    Free will.

    It’s hard to accept, but free will is just not compatible with reality. It’s like geocentrism. It seems obvious on its face because of our limited perspective, but nothing else in the universe makes sense if it’s true. We live in a mechanistic universe and cause and effect doesn’t suddenly stop when the atoms are part of a human.

    I freaked out for about a week once I came to realize how much of our society is based on a scientific impossibility. Redesigning justice, ethics, healthcare, the very concept of blame, etc. to account for this is a daunting fucking prospect.

    • TheOneCurly@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      Subatomic particles act in insane ways that are absolutely not mechanical or predictible. A very limited size of object behaves “normally”. I think believing that the universe mostly acts like our everyday objects is the skewed perspective.

      • bitfucker@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        Our current understanding is not enough to state that with confidence. We used to be so confident with classical mechanics and even claims that physics is almost complete. God knows how long our current probabilistic model will last before we find another better model. It may be probabilistic, or it may not.

      • Mrs_deWinter@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        5 months ago

        Random behavior of subatomic particles doesn’t make free will any likelier either though.

        If they act at random on a makro level their randomness would average out to zero. And that actually checks out, since the mechanical forces of the atomic and molecular level are known, observable, and provable. An apple drops from the tree to the ground, every time. Causality is still a thing, even if not observable at the subatomic level.

        The only way to imagine a subatomically based free will would be some mechanic over which we, at will, could change the randomness of subatomic particles to behave in a predictable pattern and on a scale that’s grand enough to make the proverbial apple fall upward. Or at least make or synapses do something that they physically speaking wouldn’t have done otherwise.

        Free will is as likely as magic. In fact it would actually be some form of magic - a volitional breach of causality itself.

        • Feathercrown@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          on a scale that’s grand enough to make the proverbial apple fall upward

          Not necessarily. An apple teetering on the edge of a cliff requires no grand change in initial conditions to have two very different journeys. If “you” are a metaphysical entity capable of altering the signals in your physical brain, your brain could deterministically amplify and enact your will, like gravity does to the apple on the cliff. If you have a metaphysical existence, this is a pretty reasonable mechanism for it to work.

      • blackstrat@lemmy.fwgx.uk
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        Not being predictable by us does not mean they offer free will.

        The preconditions are so precise that you’ll never be able to get exactly the same results from trying to do the same thing twice - you’ll never be able to do the same thing twice. But that doesn’t stop cause and effect determining the outcome. There is no place where free will can enter in to any equation at any micro or macroscopic level and just having unpredictable microscopic events doesn’t give you control of your own destiny. This is totally separate from your own perceptions of having choices you make. Personally I find myself doing things I didn’t consciously choose to do. Once you start noticing them you might find more and more.

            • possibly a cat@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              5 months ago

              Culture is not a static system. Elements may be destined to be counter-rational for now, but a better of awareness could also destine us for a more fair and effective system in the future. Just because something hasn’t happened yet doesn’t mean that determinism dictates it never will.

              • Jimmyeatsausage@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                5 months ago

                Absolutely. I’ve gotten myself spun up about determinism before and eventually decided that I’m going to believe in free will for the time being. Much like theism is for many, the idea of free will is kinda comforting for me and it helps me cope with reality to feel like I (and everyone else) has agency. Plus, if I’m wrong it doesn’t really matter and I never could have been right at this point in my life anyway.

                • Feathercrown@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  5 months ago

                  Plus, if I’m wrong it doesn’t really matter and I never could have been right at this point in my life anyway.

                  It’s kind of like the free will version of Pascal’s Wager, amazing

        • stewie3128@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          5 months ago

          That also does not matter. Spinozan Determinism can be summed up as:

          “If it could have happened any other way, it would have.”

          • Feathercrown@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            5 months ago

            Yup. Determinism doesn’t actually change anything-- but it tricks people into thinking it does by giving them permission to remove all meaning from the world. You can accomplish the same thing by believing in nihilism.

        • Mrs_deWinter@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          But if we are truly deterministic beings, the factors determining our environment are incredibly important. Even (not freely) acknowledging that free will doesn’t exist we could very well (not freely) decide that we need a justice system in this society because we (not freely) want less crime, and people will (not freely) do less crime in a society where such a system is in place.

          In the end it doesnt matter if people act based on free will or entirely predetermined. Or society developed as we are, and we put systems into place that seem to work. Sure, someone robbing a bank might do so for reasons that were predetermined in his brain and surroundings, but getting prosecuted for it would in turn become something that codetermines every future moment of his life.

          The only think determinism really changes is perspective. It enables us to say: Okay I understand why I/they/you acted this way, or maybe I don’t understand, but can assume that there were reasons. That’s it. It lends understanding; it doesn’t have to chance anything.

    • Feathercrown@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      Why do people always stop one step too short?

      If there is no free will, the concepts of justice, blame, etc. still survive funtionally intact. If “chemical you” commits a crime, “you” are only not responsible if “you” is a metaphysical entity separate from (and that cannot control) the chemical you. But there’s no evidence that “you” aren’t simply the “chemical you”, and therefore fully responsible for your crimes. If “you” are a metaphysical entity separate from the chemical you, then “you” do actually have free will.

      This is only not true if the metaphysical you exists but cannot control the chemical you, which seems reasonable but like… you can move your arm right now, by willing it to be so. Either metaphysical you has free will, or your conscious experience is the chemical you. Either way, your conscious experience is either the same as or commands your physical form, and therefore is responsible for the actions that you take, and can be blamed and given justice.

    • Berttheduck@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      5 months ago

      There’s a really good Kurzgesagt (in a nutshell) about this topic. (Also their videos are excellent in general, highly recommend their YouTube channel).

      My thoughts on this are: we may not have free will but it still feels like we make choices so I will continue to choose to do things which matters to me and enjoy my time in the universe.

    • BaumGeist@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      5 months ago

      I dislike the conception of Free Will that asserts will is only free if it is not deterministic. Any system dictated by the law of Cause and Effect will necessarily be deterministic, given knowledge of First Cause. Together, those premises imply that the only way to be truly free is in a chaotic universe, i.e. one without a relationship between Cause and Effect, where decisions are completely arbitrary and have no predictable outcome anyway.

      The fact of the matter is that you’re already free to do whatever you want, even if that’s shooting yourself in the foot or refusing the choice entirely and running off to live in the woods, and that’s freedom enough for all practical meanings of the word.