[rant]One of the things that amazes me most is the fact most people believe in free will. Recently I had this discussion with a friend and he basically said that he wouldn't talk to me any more if I didn't recant my views. The virulence with which people defend free will is astonishing to me.
But the fact is, I believe that humans are 100% deterministic.
Every single piece of evidence in the entire fields of psychology indicate that humans are predicatable (because they are formed by phsyical systems, and are hence deterministic.
Psychology is a science. Dr Phil might be doing his best to degrade psychology, but any academic will tell you that psychology is a real science. Every major university teaches psychology. And psychology is not pop-science or soft science. Psychology is literally as hard a science as biology, chemistry or phsyics (hell, with theoretical string theory even physics is pushing the envelope on what is "scientific".)
Want to know why psychology is hard science? Because consciousness and human action is caused by a biolgical computer, call the human brain. We do not understand yet HOW the brain forms consciousness, but I think it's safe to say that most people here accept that the brain is the cause of consciousness.
And the human brain is both physically observable and ENTIRELY deterministic.
Free will simply does not exist. It is amazing that many psychologists and AI specialists still believe in free will. The human brain is made of physical objects--atoms, cells, and neurons.
1. A nerve cell is triggered and sends a message to neurons in the brain.
2. The neurons in the brain are either sufficiently stimulated (which causes them to fire) or they are insufficiently stimulated (in which case they don't fire).
3. If the neuron fires, it sends a message to muscle cells which then contract.
Thats it--all of it. At no point in this simple three step process does the magic of free will play any part.
The single most important requirement of free will is "substrate independance".
The only way "susbstrate independance" can happen is if our mind (soul, self conscious entity, or whatever you want to call it) can control physical reality. To do this, our mind needs to be able to cause individual, or multiple, neurons to fire without any observable or measureable cause whatsoever.
This, in turn, requires a belief in magic. Substrate Independance is literally the belief in magic--mind over matter. Yet there is no scientific evidence for this. None.
Anecdotal evidence, on the other hand, is abundant. We experience making "choices" every minute. We see the results of our actions, which are "caused" by these choices. Of course, they must be, right?
I put it to you that all human experience of free will is an illusion. We experience choice. We experience action. What we lack is the all-important, scientifically verifiable, observable, firing of the neurons in our brain.
In other words, the one thing we never see is the one thing that matters. The only thing that is critical to human behaviour (the ability for neuron cells to send messages to muscle cells) is also the only thing that we are NOT able to observe.
It is easily understandable to realise why humans believe in free will. The one thing disproving free will is the one thing we can never see--until now.
Of course we "experience" free will, but I strongly feel that this experience is caused BY the actions of the human brain. Free will is the result of actions in the human brain. It is not the cause of even a single neuron firing in the human brain.
On the positive side, this means that AI is indeed achieveable. By extrapolation, it suggests (weakly) that any computational system is capable of consciousness. This is only a guess, of course. It could be that "consciousness" can only exist in certain physical substrates, eg carbon and water. Perhaps the "slowing" of energy as it passes through the brain (which is made of water) causes consciousness, in the same way that light "slowing" through glass produces different colours.
In fact, it even suggests it means that "everything" is theoretically capable of consciousness.
AI is a misleading term. I think we can agree that the true goal of AI is not simply "intelligence" but "consciousness". What difference does it make if an intelligent AI or human is a "philosophical zombie?"
The biggest change in our society this century will not be AI, but the ultimate acceptance of people that humans have no free will.
Many will be scared by this belief. Many will reject it simply because our "experience" of making choices so strongly appears to support freedom.
In fact, I believe our ancestors had it right. The word "fate" is rarely used today, but it probably describes our existance better than any other.
I personally think that societies ultimate acceptance of fate holds wonders. There are no evil people--only malfunctioning people. There are no hard workers, no lazy people, no crazy people.
There are only brains that serve the soul well and brains that serve the soul poorly. Every desire, negative emotion and evil experience on the planet can literally be "fixed" through psychology, neuroscience and AI to create a utopia.
AI presents many ethical questions, but creating AI is no more unethical than producing an "unfree" human child.
So, my question is, how many of you believe in free will?
And if you do believe in free will, what arguments would you use to make your case?
But the fact is, I believe that humans are 100% deterministic.
Every single piece of evidence in the entire fields of psychology indicate that humans are predicatable (because they are formed by phsyical systems, and are hence deterministic.
Psychology is a science. Dr Phil might be doing his best to degrade psychology, but any academic will tell you that psychology is a real science. Every major university teaches psychology. And psychology is not pop-science or soft science. Psychology is literally as hard a science as biology, chemistry or phsyics (hell, with theoretical string theory even physics is pushing the envelope on what is "scientific".)
Want to know why psychology is hard science? Because consciousness and human action is caused by a biolgical computer, call the human brain. We do not understand yet HOW the brain forms consciousness, but I think it's safe to say that most people here accept that the brain is the cause of consciousness.
And the human brain is both physically observable and ENTIRELY deterministic.
Free will simply does not exist. It is amazing that many psychologists and AI specialists still believe in free will. The human brain is made of physical objects--atoms, cells, and neurons.
1. A nerve cell is triggered and sends a message to neurons in the brain.
2. The neurons in the brain are either sufficiently stimulated (which causes them to fire) or they are insufficiently stimulated (in which case they don't fire).
3. If the neuron fires, it sends a message to muscle cells which then contract.
Thats it--all of it. At no point in this simple three step process does the magic of free will play any part.
The single most important requirement of free will is "substrate independance".
The only way "susbstrate independance" can happen is if our mind (soul, self conscious entity, or whatever you want to call it) can control physical reality. To do this, our mind needs to be able to cause individual, or multiple, neurons to fire without any observable or measureable cause whatsoever.
This, in turn, requires a belief in magic. Substrate Independance is literally the belief in magic--mind over matter. Yet there is no scientific evidence for this. None.
Anecdotal evidence, on the other hand, is abundant. We experience making "choices" every minute. We see the results of our actions, which are "caused" by these choices. Of course, they must be, right?
I put it to you that all human experience of free will is an illusion. We experience choice. We experience action. What we lack is the all-important, scientifically verifiable, observable, firing of the neurons in our brain.
In other words, the one thing we never see is the one thing that matters. The only thing that is critical to human behaviour (the ability for neuron cells to send messages to muscle cells) is also the only thing that we are NOT able to observe.
It is easily understandable to realise why humans believe in free will. The one thing disproving free will is the one thing we can never see--until now.
Of course we "experience" free will, but I strongly feel that this experience is caused BY the actions of the human brain. Free will is the result of actions in the human brain. It is not the cause of even a single neuron firing in the human brain.
On the positive side, this means that AI is indeed achieveable. By extrapolation, it suggests (weakly) that any computational system is capable of consciousness. This is only a guess, of course. It could be that "consciousness" can only exist in certain physical substrates, eg carbon and water. Perhaps the "slowing" of energy as it passes through the brain (which is made of water) causes consciousness, in the same way that light "slowing" through glass produces different colours.
In fact, it even suggests it means that "everything" is theoretically capable of consciousness.
AI is a misleading term. I think we can agree that the true goal of AI is not simply "intelligence" but "consciousness". What difference does it make if an intelligent AI or human is a "philosophical zombie?"
The biggest change in our society this century will not be AI, but the ultimate acceptance of people that humans have no free will.
Many will be scared by this belief. Many will reject it simply because our "experience" of making choices so strongly appears to support freedom.
In fact, I believe our ancestors had it right. The word "fate" is rarely used today, but it probably describes our existance better than any other.
I personally think that societies ultimate acceptance of fate holds wonders. There are no evil people--only malfunctioning people. There are no hard workers, no lazy people, no crazy people.
There are only brains that serve the soul well and brains that serve the soul poorly. Every desire, negative emotion and evil experience on the planet can literally be "fixed" through psychology, neuroscience and AI to create a utopia.
AI presents many ethical questions, but creating AI is no more unethical than producing an "unfree" human child.
So, my question is, how many of you believe in free will?
And if you do believe in free will, what arguments would you use to make your case?
It is hard science. But if you plan on studying it, expect to hear a mammoth amount of bullshit as well.