Free Will and Consciousness - Page 3

Og · 01-17-2007, 12:53 PM

Also, I'd call the DISCIPLE thomas a christian (one of the original christians that christ selected) and thomas' gospel has quite a different feel than the other gospels. In fact it wasn't included probably because of supporters of the book of john. The two gospels are quite philosophically at odds. John illustrates this best by telling the story of doubting thomas who had to put his fingers in the holes in jesus' hands to believe! (heh.. a true agnostic)

Some wonderful excerpts from thomas' gospel include:

108 Jesus said, "Whoever drinks from my mouth will become like me; I myself shall become that person, and the hidden things will be revealed to him."

113 "the kingdom of heaven is spread out upon the earth, and people don't see it."

Very buddhist. Very relevant to today's world.

Guess it's not technically catholic canon, still doesn't mean I'm not christian.

**The An-Jel** · 01-17-2007, 02:05 PM

I like what your saying I really do and I understand the arguments you are having within yourself. I haven't gone into science as you have... I was 15 units away from my BS in Physics, I had minors in English, Mathematics (of course), and Philosophy. I kinda did my schooling really really wrong and it ended really really badly. I got the minors but couldn't find the time to study and work for food, rent, etc. for my upper grad units. I wore myself thin. Student loans weren't paying what they should. Horrible situation but I miss science terribly. Enough about me though.

I think if I am interpretting what your saying correctly what you like about religion and why you still "cling" to it is the abstract concept of Hope it brings. That people seem to need to keep on going. The lesser intellectual side embraces religion Wholey because they can't conceive of things greater than themselves without it based on themselves personally. Quite kind of you if that is the case. How do you reconcile all the genocide committed by the precepts of religion. Being a compassionate agnostic on one side and a christian for those that would judge you it seems to me... how do you reconcile that within yourself.

I don't mean to be judgemental if I seem to be that way. I personally don't think there is Free Will in the world. I think it life seems to flow a lot the way you think it does as you've stated. However we have higher thought processes unlike the animals we know here on Earth which enables us to provide and understand more viable ways of looking at our human condition as residents of this Universe and even find out the true mind of God, if it exists. Whatever is out there as humans we can seperate ourselves from our base instincts and "see" what the Universe is truly about.

Is it the Hope that religion brings for the simple impulses and fallible weak minds for the masses? Jesus and the Buddha were a lot alike true but I never heard of the Christian-Buddhist war yet anyway. Oblong and wry comment.

Og · 01-17-2007, 02:40 PM

Cool. I got a BS in physics and a Bachelors of Electrical Engineering. Graduated back in 2001.

I don't really cling to religion at all. Whatever philosophy we have on life, the objective is survival of the species (nature gives no other purpose to being). I'll also be the first one to admit that there are some PLEASURABLE and PAINFUL things in life and regardless of if there is free will or not, "I" still experience them. We still have the experience of time unfolding and one thing that QM tells us is that the future is NOT determined. But the current theological concept of free will doesn't exist (or at least it's poorly defined).

The future is indeterminent. Something has got to get us from here to there. Give us some driving force. We could become fatalists or we could become compassionate empiricists or we could be religious. In any case, it pushes the species forward.

There have definitely been nasty things done in the name of religion and that's mainly because it's a rather nasty and evolved mechanism. But, it's also spurred the explosion of western science in something of a reactionary outcry to about 1100 years of the dark ages (starting in the renaissance).

The thing to realize in the paradigm of free will as myth is that the past couldn't have happened any other way. None of the agents were in control of their actions in any meaningful sense. Choice is a null word. So just look on them with compassion and note their behaviors and use the understanding of the past to move us into the future. It's like being frustrated that the earth orbited the sun then too.. Which is silly.

This is a bizarre mixture of philosophies, but free will IS real. It is as real as money or music or "god" with a little or capital G. So what is left is for us to compassionately apply empiricism for the survival of humanity. We no longer need these isolating group protecting concepts of religion that developed in the past to solidify and protect groups of people (see how the hebrews and yaweh have survived for so long). Yaweh (christian/jewish god) is the glue that holds the hebrews and most of the western european culture together for 2500+ years from egypt into the middle east and then into the roman empire.

The concepts are cohesive forces. Don't blame the people for being "ignorant" of reality. They didn't know what we know about the human brain and Yaweh was pretty darn good for their group cohesion.

Now the trick is to move into a world with our new realization and continue to have group cohesion. To continue to have an internal structure to our planetary society that is run by the ideals of compassion and "the golden rule" which appears in all cultures.

What's cool is that we can move forward with this philosophy in a wonderful way. It's just what the buddhists and the christians have always been yelling about.

Christians say that there's original sin in the realization of good and evil. Buddha says the way to escape samsara (cycle of rebirth) is to disconnect from fear and desire. What this idea of "free will as myth" shows us is that this is just a construct. We can step out of "the matrix" and then return (because life has no meaning elsewhere) and apply our "decisions" for future expansion in terms of empirically analyzed parameters. We don't have to be yanked in one direction or another by the sometimes irrational emotions that are dredged up by good and evil and fear and desire. We can find the middle path through them where they no longer move us (this is the goal of buddhism).

This is why I like the quote from the gospel of Thomas so much about the kingdom of heaven being laid out upon the earth but no one sees it. Modern neuroscience and empiricism shows us the way to nirvana and the kingdom of heaven (which are all metaphors internal to humanity and all simply describing an approach to life)

We can compassionately notice and reject unhealthy elements to our society because we recognize the goal of survival and propagation. And we can experience pleasure in the process

Because regardless of if we're in control or not, we certainly experience whatever it is that life is.

See the link to Metta in my signature. I call myself a christian because it's my culture. But I call myself lots of things.

**The An-Jel** · 01-17-2007, 03:03 PM

Smiles here. I like your idealism, really pretty cool. Now the very foundation of religion these days and as far back as 900 AD I think is that it is for power and control. Keep the public weak. I was going to mention this in my prior post cause I knew you would bring it up legitimately I might add. It's the next step logically. Being a neuroscientist I assume that you understand a creatures need to control it's environment. Survival and propagation of the species go hand in hand with this type of control. I think we can call it for no better word POWER. Those with the POWER will not let anyone underneath them have it if they can help it. Darwin you know. I think your looking at a future hundreds of years in the making. Unfortunately POWERS that be whether they are religious or not will base their survival and control on Darwin's theory not what is right or wrong.

I was studying incidently to be an Astronomer. Purest part of Physics I have uncovered so far. I never really understood the need for Physicists to fight for their theories to keep going when they are wrong... or the need for a scientist to fight with a bunch of businessmen to fund them. By human nature it should be natural.

Og · 01-17-2007, 03:51 PM

Quote:

Those with the POWER will not let anyone underneath them have it if they can help it. Darwin you know. I think your looking at a future hundreds of years in the making. Unfortunately POWERS that be whether they are religious or not will base their survival and control on Darwin's theory not what is right or wrong.

These top heavy power structures aren't stable. And the people developing these sciences realize this. It's why the political left-leaning-ness increases as a function of your education in america (i.e. academics are the biggest liberal commies you'll find). And it's cool that the public is not so week here in america and that this is where the vast majority of the world's education is located (university level).

And yes, I believe it is going to be centuries in the making. The human race is a huge thing, but it's the transition that IS coming. And I don't think that the major components of it are that far off given the rate that computers and technology is advancing and how insanely awesome the Internet is. This is why I'm going into popular science and education given my background once I get my PhD. I think it's insanely important to begin to form the public into a receptive body to these ideas. The idea of free will as myth is going to smack our society in the face when the first computer gains consciousness.

I think democracy is great for a society that we have. I think it's the pinnacle. But I think it's evolving and as time progresses, we're going to have to adapt to progress with it. As compassionate empiricism becomes the way for us to move forward, our leadership is going to have to be one that works like a democratic leadership (i.e. for the benefit of the entire population) yet is governed by people who are eminently qualified for the job through a peer reviewed and critical selection process.

We'll have a gov't with economic engineers in charge of economic policies and environmental regulation on all "civilian" projects such as corporations and whatnot. We'll have psychiatrists and scientific philosophers and evolutionists and structural biologists in charge of policies for public health and population regulation.

We'll basically develop a brain for our collection of brains and it will direct us around and we'll be able to interact with it in meaningful ways and it will work for the good of all involved and of those to come. It really has to do with the buddhist idea of Metta (see my signature for a link). Use that concept to drive us into the future.

But that's way down the line. We're not going to change many peoples' minds. Fundies of all faith based religions are going to violently resist it and do a whole frankenstein lynch mob on the first artificial constructed consciousness. They're just going to have to die off and let new minds in to see new things I guess. But feel compassion for them. There's ultimately no choice in the matter. What happens will happen.

As for my optimism, the other option is fatalism which seems silly. All the experiences are new to me, and I think it's neat to explore reality and I'm excited to see what's at the end and dis-integrate into the whole again.

"Free will as myth" is what I think should be on the flag of the new world nation

But the transition is coming and radical religious folks seem to be solidifying and becoming louder and louder with these new available communication technologies. We've got to start educating people so that these intolerant fundies don't have such a well funded pulpit.

**The An-Jel** · 01-18-2007, 01:52 AM

I love it... I love what it is your saying. Socially however I doubt it works that way. What is going to happen... it isn't a Democracy here in America it is a Capitalist state with the facade of Democracy to keep us going is what I see. Scientists should be in charge... but a person like a Scientist has to remember a bored mind is a violent mind... why does the entertainment make so much money? Because the majority of the masses need to be entertained or they reach into their animalistic impulses and find their own entertainment.

I like everything your saying BUT the supreme capitalists... that means your bosses incidently unless you are somehow individually wealthy that I don't know... I really hope you are... I like your concept of the world better. Here is the real deal... the ignorance of the powers that be... the meal ticket that owns each and everyone of us for "collateral" meaning dollars. For jobs, for worth... they through slight of hand and the politics of business will destroy any kind of rational future to be birthed. They seperate the races still, they seperate the classes, they keep millions of people suppressed, they keep life styles and the individual cloaked around each other. They want people seperated and they will... I am pretty convinced about this... destroy the populace to keep it this way.

You are the solution... they will answer in animalistic, ape-like violence to keep it. Take a look at what the world is like right now. You are a neuralscientist... you can see it! What do you think the apes are going to do if rationality comes to play. Your compassionate, your reasonable, your imaginative, and far more beautiful than the average businessperson. They only think about power and what it can do for them. While I think scientists are an answer... are you married?... if so to what type of person... scientists have this habit of focusing on everything else but the real world because reality is by far more desirable than the milling masses waiting for reality to bring on the rapture or some kind of nonsense like that.

Quote:

We'll have a gov't with economic engineers in charge of economic policies and environmental regulation on all "civilian" projects such as corporations and whatnot. We'll have psychiatrists and scientific philosophers and evolutionists and structural biologists in charge of policies for public health and population regulation.

Incidently if you read this again... as selfish as you need to understand people are... this statement is silly.

Og · 01-18-2007, 11:38 AM

I know this, I know.

People are selfish. I am selfish. I get it. I don't have any illusions on this one.

The thing is that the realization that we really have no self (i.e. no free will) is coming. The realization is here because of what modern technology and medicine and science tell us about the brain and the behavior of its components. We're going to create "conscious" computers within my life time. It's going to be as irrefutable as the germ theory of disease or that we all have DNA.

I'm not saying all this is happening overnight, but the realization is coming with evidence that it has never had before. Irrefutable evidence.

We live in a time where our understanding of the world is drastically changing. More than any other time in the history of the planet. DNA, human genome, Internet, MRI, computation, evolution, modern neuroscience, and things like cellular automaton mathematics are all arising.

I think it's safe to say that we can't go on like we used to. And given the intelligent minority's understanding of the above sciences, I don't think we'll have much to worry about where violence from the ape-like conservative style minds are concerned.

We are the nervous system for the planet. I don't know lots of details about this as I'm just getting involved in a lot of it over the past few years, but a change is coming. And it involves these realizations.

I think it will most fundamentally involve free will as myth.

**The An-Jel** · 01-18-2007, 02:59 PM

I am kind of conflicted between the struggle of just being a victem of my instincts and my actual train of thought being independant of my instincts. I see most of the world as a mass of emotions and instincts... I know that 90% of the masses follow this basic pattern. Probably even a higher percentage but then I am an optimist. Food, water, shelter, and propagation of the species= the Big 4. Everything in between are just means to these ends.

What I think will launch your "revolution" will be the discovery of alien lifeforms on a planet. It will change humans view of God... launch Agnosticism... more likely Aetheism initially... religion will change and lament of course they will change their views like they have for centuries. Most of the reason I wanted to keep on studying Physics is to help in the endeavor of freeing mans mind to bigger and better things. All it takes is the discovery of a single microbe anywhere but on Earth and that is the end of "God's" will as humankind designed it. Once again people like Galileo will solve the psychopathic behavior of the apes on this Earth and spin them in the right direction. I really want to be one of them hehehe.

I am kind of twisted by the concept of free will. While I am inclined to believe it is an actual myth... I have met people so offset from the basic instincts yet use them at their own pleasure and discretion that I am inclined to believe in free will. I find even in myself that the basic instincts are not so overwhelming that I must obey them like a common animal.

God is a generic reason to embrace our instincts and our "developed" brains as Ultimate. The Truth will come in the next fifty years if the religious right will let us live long enough to discover it.

Og · 01-18-2007, 03:28 PM

Quote:

I find even in myself that the basic instincts are not so overwhelming that I must obey them like a common animal.

This would be the nature of the human condition. Doesn't mean that free will has anything to do with it. Just means that our behavior is more complex than other animals. We happen to have something like 3x the neocortical volume compared to chimps. Or something like that.

Complex and hard to predict is not the same as free

I tend to think that the first intelligent alien life form that we'll encounter will be one of our own creation (i.e. conscious computers). I just don't see any real way we can break the light barrier. It seems so universal to the universe. That whole special relativity thing and how it's experimentally proven is really a downer for faster than light travel.

**The An-Jel** · 01-19-2007, 01:02 AM

Quote:

That whole special relativity thing and how it's experimentally proven is really a downer for faster than light travel.

I have my theories on gravity and the ability to travel in space. It isn't as it appears to be and while I love Coprinicus, Gallileo, Newton, and Einstein and their respective genius I do not submit myself to it totally.

AI seems more realistic than finding actual intelligence in the universe. The nice thing is to offset all the religions as a whole would be to find a single lifeform no matter how insignificant or even the of said lifeforms carbon trails. Thats the end of religion as we know it. Huge Gigantic Universe... I am sure there is a microbe of life out there besides on this tiny insignificant rock floating in the cosmos.

Here is my problem with AI as an "Alien Lifeform." The AI will be designed by a template of humans. I will see them gathering information based on the information provided to them by the history of mankind. I see them becoming the us that we wish we could be.

Quote:

Complex and hard to predict is not the same as free

Absolutely... thats what makes the whole issue questionable and your work all the more fascinating to me.