Illusion of free will

[searcherman]

This is long, detailed and the guy isn't the most sparkling speaker, but he makes good points.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HUBgBeNLk-w

[AnimatedDirt]

This is long, detailed and the guy isn't the most sparkling speaker, but he makes good points.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HUBgBeNLk-w

Well...I'm not going to listen/watch.

List the "good" points.

[searcherman]

This is long, detailed and the guy isn't the most sparkling speaker, but he makes good points.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HUBgBeNLk-w

Well...I'm not going to listen/watch.

List the "good" points.

Yeah I don't blame you. Also you may be shocked to learn that atheists can be boring. 

In a nutshell he says human nature over time leads to a more humane and cooperative society. While we may have empathy, we don't have altruism. The truly selfish thing to do is cooperate. A team of rule followers will beat a team of cheaters in the long run. This is our evolutionary path, and thank goodness we don't have free will.

[Rostos]

So, hang on, you are telling us to watch the clip so we can look at the arguments and accept those arguments?

But if we dont have free will, then how can i or anyone rationally affirm the evidence and choose to believe that free will is an illusion? Werent some of us determined to believe in free will all the way back from the big bang.

You dont realise how self defeating your argument is.

[searcherman]

So, hang on, you are telling us to watch the clip so we can look at the arguments and accept those arguments?

But if we dont have free will, then how can i or anyone rationally affirm the evidence and choose to believe that free will is an illusion? Werent some of us determined to believe in free will all the way back from the big bang.

You dont realise how self defeating your argument is.

I wanted to warn folks on the length. The premise of the argument is that modern evolutionary science is true. If one doesn't accept that premise it will be boring.

[Rostos]

So, hang on, you are telling us to watch the clip so we can look at the arguments and accept those arguments?

But if we dont have free will, then how can i or anyone rationally affirm the evidence and choose to believe that free will is an illusion? Werent some of us determined to believe in free will all the way back from the big bang.

You dont realise how self defeating your argument is.

I wanted to warn folks on the length. The premise of the argument is that modern evolutionary science is true. If one doesn't accept that premise it will be boring.

You still dont understand.

If free will doesnt exist, then when one looks at the evidences for anything, they cannot rationally affirm the evidence because they were determined to accept a view regardless of the evidence...

You are essentially defeating your own argument.

[Hawke123]

This is long, detailed and the guy isn't the most sparkling speaker, but he makes good points.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HUBgBeNLk-w

Well...I'm not going to listen/watch.

List the "good" points.

Yeah I don't blame you. Also you may be shocked to learn that atheists can be boring. 

In a nutshell he says human nature over time leads to a more humane and cooperative society. While we may have empathy, we don't have altruism. The truly selfish thing to do is cooperate. A team of rule followers will beat a team of cheaters in the long run. This is our evolutionary path, and thank goodness we don't have free will.

And yet, many people behave in exactly the opposite way such a narrative predicts.

[rstrats]

searcherman,
re:  "...thank goodness we don't have free will."

How do you define free will as you're using it in this topic?

[Trinity]

My lack of free will prevented me from watching the video.

[searcherman]

So, hang on, you are telling us to watch the clip so we can look at the arguments and accept those arguments?

But if we dont have free will, then how can i or anyone rationally affirm the evidence and choose to believe that free will is an illusion? Werent some of us determined to believe in free will all the way back from the big bang.

You dont realise how self defeating your argument is.

I wanted to warn folks on the length. The premise of the argument is that modern evolutionary science is true. If one doesn't accept that premise it will be boring.

You still dont understand.

If free will doesnt exist, then when one looks at the evidences for anything, they cannot rationally affirm the evidence because they were determined to accept a view regardless of the evidence...

You are essentially defeating your own argument.

I guess HE was making a macro argument, based on Darwinian science.

[john doe]

This is long, detailed and the guy isn't the most sparkling speaker, but he makes good points.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HUBgBeNLk-w

Gawd help us.  Six minutes in and I can't stay awake .. I lack the will.  Does it get better?

Isn't this guy guilty of scientism?  So much emphasis on macro physics vs micro physics when it is internal states of consciousness which should surely be the center of focus for any discussion of will - free or otherwise.

[bskeptic]

A team of rule followers will beat a team of cheaters in the long run. This is our evolutionary path, and thank goodness we don't have free will.

That may well be so. But that does nothing to stop an individual from carrying out some terrible crime if there is an advantage to it, and they know they may well get away with it. I guess our "evolutionary path" would have little to say about such things. And in fact, it presumably includes many such cases of evil.

[Trinity]

A team of rule followers will beat a team of cheaters in the long run. This is our evolutionary path, and thank goodness we don't have free will.

That may well be so. But that does nothing to stop an individual from carrying out some terrible crime if there is an advantage to it, and they know they may well get away with it. I guess our "evolutionary path" would have little to say about such things. And in fact, it presumably includes many such cases of evil.

Also, the assumption seems to be that cheaters don't follow rules, but that is not necessarily true. Many cheaters, either groups or individuals, have a ''code of honour'' to live by. See for instance the mafia.

As the saying goes, there is a method behind the madness.

[kurros]

A team of rule followers will beat a team of cheaters in the long run. This is our evolutionary path, and thank goodness we don't have free will.

That may well be so. But that does nothing to stop an individual from carrying out some terrible crime if there is an advantage to it, and they know they may well get away with it. I guess our "evolutionary path" would have little to say about such things. And in fact, it presumably includes many such cases of evil.

It says plenty about such things. There are lots of simulations of the dynamics of populations with different numbers of "rule obeyers" and "cheaters". They tend to show that populations drift towards a state where most individuals obey the rules (and work to enforce them), but a small number of people are "cheaters". This is because in a population with no cheaters there are lots of advantages to be gained by cheating, so cheaters will inevitably appear, but the more cheaters there are then the more measures are taken by the "rule obeyers" against them, reducing the benefit of being a cheater, so fewer choose that strategy. And if everyone is just a cheater out for themselves, then if a group of individuals bands together under a set of rules then they will outcompete the cheaters, and their group will grow. So an equilibrium is eventually reached.

[bskeptic]

Isn't this guy guilty of scientism?

I didn't watch all of it, but it did seem to assume materialism as far as I could tell.