Quote:
Originally Posted by Commenter 42
Except free will doesn't exist. We know it doesn't. That was an exerpt from a longer discussion, which can be found here.
It's not my assertion, or my argument that free will doesn't exist; it's a proven fact, like gravity.
|
I respectfully disagree.
The way I see it, there is no way of measuring one's subjective experience in the same way that we study the perceived physical world. Lets say we study the brain in order to determine whether free will exists or not.
The problem however that we run into is that no matter how much we try and correlate the firing of neurons to our subjective experience, correlation does not ultimately imply causation.
Even if our subjective experience is the result of the brain, it is not the brain itself. I am imagining a bluebird flying across a beautiful field of sunflowers, can scientists ever find this image anywhere in my brain?
They might be able to see neurons firing up, but is the image itself anywhere to be found in the non-physical form that I see it to be? No, because the image is not physical in any way (just like God), and it is outside the realm of science, which is solely considered with studying the physical world we all observe, nothing less, nothing more.
Similarly, saying that God is not real because of a lack of physical evidence in my opinion is akin to saying that ideas don't exist just because they can't be found in physical form. By this logic too, why would anyone think that others with subjective experiences like ours even exist? You can't physically see anyone else's subjective experience, and all you have to go on is correlating physical expressions with a person's assumed mind, which is a fallacy of implying that correlation equals to causation.
Perhaps I am totally wrong, but this is the best I understand at this stage of my life. Perhaps I will change my beliefs in the future, using my free will
