Sam Harris on Joe Rogan - Free Will Discussion

[CCoburn]

The analogy I used to give people is that if I walked into a casino, walked up to a craps table, and rolled lucky 7's I could rewind that sequence of walking in the door to the dice landing 10x, 1000x, a googleplex of times, and that stretch of time would be an absolutely flawless replay every single time. Being that walking in the door of the casino and the dice landing are arbitrary start and stop points - there's little reason to believe that the same dynamic wouldn't apply from the very beginning of time to the very end of it.

So you have arbitrary start/stop points. A segment of a larger thing that follows the same rules.
Analogous to segments of Movie. You could even rewind the entire Movie and replay it. So then,
what variance would prevent the Universe from playing the SAME exact Movie every time for all
of Eternity. Of course the Universe could manifest possibly with the initial cause being something
akin to a Random Number Generator every time.

I like this, Eternity/Non-linear time Being the equivalent of an Infinite Movie Library with some sort of
Quantum Movie Selector perhaps. The Movie could be spawned out of some Chaotic event prior to Order.

So yeah, the initial cause and state would determine the entire finite linear time sequence of events.

I also thought about the System Anomaly you mentioned earlier as synonymous with Neo in the Matrix.
A bug within the System, or perhaps outside of it, but I still don't think so.

Maybe in this respect you have made me a Determinist. Even so, the Illusion of Free Will is just so damn good,
that it might as well be. Same with our reality construct.

Adios

[Cybernetic_Jazz]

Maybe in this respect you have made me a Determinist. Even so, the Illusion of Free Will is just so damn good,
that it might as well be. Same with our reality construct.

I don't know if anyone can really live by determinism because part of that determined result involves constant computation about your own life.

Perhaps these are the net positives:
1) More faith that everywhere you find yourself is exactly where you're supposed to be at that moment
2) The 'I do nothing, rather it's the God who sent me' becomes quite literal.
3) There's no such thing as a bum synchronicity and whatever judgment you come on it is the right one for that moment because it's the only conclusion you could have come to.
4) When you're life is short on opportunities you won't nail-bite as much about where you could have been at what time, somewhere within driving or walking distance with no queue to be there, that could have fixed everything - in a deterministic system that other possibility was only hypothetical not real.
5) Criminal justice might be measured much better and the knowledge that nothing comes from nowhere or some 'evil volition' that's self caused would help us craft much (functionally) better rehabilitation programs and patterns.

Net negatives:
1) If you really find yourself in a grueling place with no sense of hope for the future it's an added weight, unless you realize that it just means you're time in that place (long or short) is predetermined, not necessarily a permanence in that place.
2) If someone gets the wrong idea about what it means they could condemn themselves to a meaningless existence summarily without realizing that determinism does no such thing.

There probably are more positives and negatives, I just haven't thought of them all.

[Daremo]

After some thought I decided(or did I) how to respond. Its all pretty hysterical [lol]. The arguement against free will is completely self defeating. On the surface it seems solid in its logical loophole but if it is true then knowing it makes no difference whatsoever. I find it entertaining cybernetic that you are listing pros and cons in a format that would normally be used in making a decision but decisions do not exist so why pretend. Harris also appears to criticize those who believe in free will as if they had the choice to believe otherwise. Its pretty damn funny when you think about it.

It seems to be a line of thought that leads to playing the victim, or helplessness. So I prefer to see it as a joke and not a trick. It is a complete surrender, but its contemplation is a fantastic mental gymnastic. Cyber you said you had a simlar thought in 2009 but by this logic you had nothing you came up with nothing you merely arrived at a point in time and so there was no effort or thought or work you did it was just the right time. To quote firefly though "I smell an aweful lot of if coming off this plan" in regards to how many assumptions must be made in order for this to be true. I am only pointing your statements out as an example of how different this model would be in regards to the human condition not to make it about you personally. We all feel as though we we work problems out as you felt you did in 2009 but in this model no one does work its just merely arriving at a point in time.

I would question evolution if this model is true because our brains are powerful processors of variables for the purpose of making decisions but if there are no decisions to be made then would we evolve in such a way.

Perhaps I am viewing this the wrong way and what is actually meant is that since we can't go back in time and make a different choice about any given thing we don't have free will in the sense that we can't choose all possible outcomes and therefore we are decision limited and not free at all. I guess I can see it from that definition but I think different terms should be used. Some scientists have a spider web model I found interesting where it views us in both 3 dimensions and 4 dimensions including time. Our decisions are limited based on the number of intersecting paths and connections and so we do not have full freedom but a limited freedom.
As far as traveling backward in time and not being able to change anything it does have to be that way or else the present would not have the stability it needs to exist but one of the many if's are the defnition of past present and future in terms of reality. Its also entertaining to me that both speakers are trying to evade magickal/religious ideas labeling them nonsense yet it is completely unavoidable when ideas such as the present moment have been so thoroughly explored by mystics. In the end weather it is true or not has little impact on our reality since it was going to be what it is already and nothing can change it so if it is true does it really make a difference hahahahahaha what a great joke.

[CCoburn]

So even after having said all this, i'm still left wondering. Since the Micro and Macrocosms
are so consistently reflective of one another. That there could exist an amount of Chaos within
the Human Psyche that renders a more dynamic process from moment to moment. Represented
diagrammatically as Trees within Trees. From a single Root. Which further reinforces/integrates
the concept of Fractals into the Universal Paradigm. The same Chaos that prevents the same
exact Universe from being initiated indefinitely. But existing as a dynamic that diminishes the
more static nature of complete determinism. A possible branching out at every choice, until the choice
is made. Similar to the possibilities existing in a Multiverse scenario.

Perhaps emotions and feelings could be part of the dynamics that renders the Microcosmic aspect
less deterministic. Maybe it is true that at different times a choice truly can go any number of ways,
influenced maybe by chaos or otherwise. And I don't think things like rolling dice have unpredictable
outcomes with all other states and variables being equal. The dynamic factor existing in the Human Psyche.
That is what influences the outcomes of the Macrocosm, or initiates a variable vector.

So i'm thinking symbolically the possible choices would look fractally like Trees within Trees, A Branch
being turned off, or collapsing when a Vector is initiated. To the one path before you, until the next junction.

Even if Determinism was totally static after the Initial Cause. I don't think you could structure your life
according to it, since it's impossible to know with certainty the outcomes of choices. You know there is
a path that is set in stone before you, but knowing exactly what that entails is a different matter.

Aloha

[Daremo]

Hey spida first I wanna say I deeply respect your tree of life ritual, I read the first couple pages and I was impressed by the motivation to jump in as well as its value as a lesson in crafting your own rituals its a great work for others to learn from. Learn from experience as all to often talk is cheap. I was hoping for a little more depth and eventually I was losing some in the shorthand but that is not to the detriment of you or your work as I understand the great task and limits of time working and keeping an accurate journal. I mention this because what you said above reminds me of something I was going to mention to you elsewhere and that is the idea that some believe that the tree is not just the 4 worlds but within each sephira and possibly each path is a another complete tree but I did not want to kick you off course with the burden of such an idea. It allows for infinite subdivisions and classification going up or down in this manner which is what you seemed to be describing above. I find it useful atleast to see it this way.
Regarding the idea of the multiverse based on decisions I came across an article describing it in a way I have not seen before, and it made the idea of multiple universe existing and propagating infinitely seem like an oversimplified or misunderstood representation of the scientific theory. It I believe rests in field theory and I should have book marked it my apologies there. It used diagrams to represent that in the fields, the particles exist in every possible location at once which could be misinterpreted as all realites exist, however if we look at it in the sense that certain posibilities have a higher percentage of probability than another then reality is the densest possibility and I conjectured that the other less dense probabilities are actually the astral plane, that which has not fully formed into the condensed physical world we call reality. So reality is the manifestation of probability, not a collapsing wave but an overlaping wave density. Only certain combinations of physical laws can be cohesive those that are not remain astral and those that are manifest.
I say this to run it in line with your thoughts that perhaps thought or emotion can be the destabilizer so to speak of the crystaline outcome of straight determinism. Our minds are electromagnetic fields and as such emit and absorb or transform other wave energy such as light. As we think these thoughts are rearranging the other forces around us in unclear ways but every thought must have an effect on the energy and as the energy that is is altered by thought then thenprobablity wave density will change as well. As an example of some combinations that fail to exist can be seen if we examine self preservation. We have self preservation merely because those creatures that did not gladly let themselves die so it only makes sense that only those with a self preservation instinct would live and so it is rare that we find instances in our current wave density that a creature does not have a desire to remain alive. Anyway just some random musings.

[Cybernetic_Jazz]

Cyber you said you had a simlar thought in 2009 but by this logic you had nothing you came up with nothing you merely arrived at a point in time and so there was no effort or thought or work you did it was just the right time.

You really can't speak about anything at all in this case unless you speak about it colloquially, so speaking colloquially I was indicating that Sam didn't teach me to see the world that way, rather that particular realization hit me in 2009 and it was fascinating when Sam brought it up the same way.

To me the divide, which you're right about, is that while effort occurs it translates and resolves through us, we'd experience it but we would neither be the source of that effort nor the solution sets we think we're choosing.

A side note that might help clarify things - I was debating a guy on this same issue on a different forum and he argued that if you ran into a coworker who spilled hot cocoa on you once that you'd be bound to keep running into them and getting hot cocoa spilled on you. I'd argue the opposite - you don't have the choice not to learn from your environment, or if you don't you don't typically live all that long or stay out of some type of assisted living or mental institution.

I'm pretty sure of this still - that there's no way to imagine or envision a world where there's libertarian free will. There's a definite experience of it, and departing from speaking of life in the context of that experience such as 'I thought', 'I decided', 'I solved' might be innaccurate but it's all we have to communicate. That and - you still do have to deal with the consequences of your decisions whether you ultimately have any choice in the matter or not, for practical purposes there really isn't any other choice. That and victimhood roughly amounts to a great deal of pain, subjugation, and a life dominated by external circumstance - it's not a place a person can stay comfortably unless it really is either their physical or neurological limit or unless they're dealing with a crippling past or a crippling view of life (which I don't see determinism to be that - it is that only if you draw the conclusion that not choosing where you end up means it'll automatically be the worst place possible, if most people don't suffer that fate than it's most likely not your fate either).

[Daremo]

My ability to quote is difficult since I use my phone, my punctuation and such clearly suffer as well apologies as it makes it a little trickier to make it cohesive. I hope you get that i wasn't implying you were choosing to be a victim or helpless for adopting your stand point, I wouldnt lump you in that category, and your right if it is true people could go one way or the other, but the idea of determinism in the extreme appears to be a surrendering and this definitely has value on the spiritual path as we often seek to surrender ourselves to something greater, its just one of those circumstances that requires great caution. I agree as well that total libertarian freedom is probably a rediculous idea as well but as you have probably guessed I see value in exploring the extremes but I tend to search for answers somewhere inbetween.

I really think you are digging in the right place and everyone could benefit from the examination of this topic regardless of where they take thier final stance and exploring this duality is probably going to have a serious impact on the direction humanity moves or whether or not it moves. It depends on what rigid view points get nudged out of the way and how it changes our psyche. The consequences of such discussions have a much farther reach than they did when our ancestors tackled them and it is an age old question but it seems like a greater number of people that influence our direction could be paying closer attention to these arguements. I hope it helps us step outside of ourselves to see things from a distance and different angles.

I think I understand your anecdote about the coffee spill that change and adaptation are a part of the crystaline structure otherwise it wouldnt work, and it reminds me of the nature vs nurture arguement but again its divided into 2 extremes and I rest in the middle on that topic as well. Maybe i have spent to much time doing then middle pillar ritual [grin].

[Cybernetic_Jazz]

I really think you are digging in the right place and everyone could benefit from the examination of this topic regardless of where they take thier final stance and exploring this duality is probably going to have a serious impact on the direction humanity moves or whether or not it moves. It depends on what rigid view points get nudged out of the way and how it changes our psyche.

That's where if I bring up a potentially explosive idea I feel like I have an equal obligation to temper it by suggesting the equilibrium that's in it's implication - past that I'd agree that people could come to some equally dangerous and incorrect conclusions. That seems to be what Dennett is worried about - ie. extreme nihilism and reduction of the value of human life as a result.

Maybe i have spent to much time doing then middle pillar ritual [grin].

From my experience you'll *know* when you've done too much middle pillar.

[Daremo]

I don't know if you watch futurerama or not but there is a pretty funny episode that goes into this topic where a robot is let off for a crime because he can't do anything other than what he was programmed to do so he has no free will and therefore couldnt be held responsible so he goes on a walkabout and finds out his maker left room for a free will upgrade. He forces his maker to give it to him. It functions on quantum mechanics and is just a switch to turn free will on or off but due to quantum indeterminancy you don't know when its switched on or off but this unknown was enough to allow atleast the illusion of free will because the truth or facts were unknown. Its a good example of just how fragile the whole idea is and how small of a thing can tilt it one way or the other. Frank herberts Dune is another good example as paul atredies starts to feel trapped by his ability to see the future clearly and no longer feels he has any choices. "To know the future is to become its prisoner" Sorry i like fiction becuase it often presents a great deal of possible truth in its musings and explorations of imagined realities.

[CCoburn]

Thanks Daremo,

Yeah, I'm aware of the Fractal nature of the TOL. Oddly enough though, I wasn't thinking
about that with my post here. Perhaps my Psyche is synchronized at a subconscious level.
Anyways, you could just say that every Sephirah contains all of the qualities of every other
Sephirah, but just of a different manner, or Density. Hence the Trees within Trees. That extend
inward and outward indefinitely. A splendid Fractal indeed! That displays the reflective nature
of the Micro and Macrocosms.

I'll probably copy your post over to my thread eventually where it would be better suited. I may
want to comment on some other aspects of it, who knows.

Peace Brother!

[Cybernetic_Jazz]

I'm actually kinda surprised no one's touched the Jordan Peterson stuff I posted - that's even more interesting than this.