Edit: I feel I need to clarify what I'm saying here. I don't have a problem with sponsors in general. I don't have a problem with channels endorsing useless products or services - if you decide to put your money in them, that's your business. I don't even have a problem with this channel taking BetterHelp's money per se. What I have a problem with is this channel's role in the 0.1% of viewers who think BetterHelp must be a trustworthy company because their favourite channel recommends it. They need help and are seeking it, but end up with useless self-proclaimed "therapists", some of which are AI, and a bigger credit card bill than promised. Oh, and their personal information sold to social media companies. That is just wrong, and it pains me that a channel which is also one of my favourites, plays a part in that. I was aiming for vague enough not to get sued, but clear and concise. It ended up being just dumb and confrontational. I hope this edit is more useful and somewhat constructive. Original comment: Please, do not ever, _ever_ again take money from that personal information traitor and a senseless scam that is betterhelp. I don't want to have to stop watching this channel because it enables taking advantage of people for the hardships of their life.
Better yet, please inform the audience in your next video that they should never give any information or money to betterhelp. It's the worst possible sponsor you could ever have chosen, and I hope you look into it and hopefully come to the same conclusion.
Don't sully Saul Goodman's Goodname. First lawyer is a clown. The concept of free will isn't on trial the defendant is, and his lawyer just admitted he was guilty. Smooth brain behavior.
@cryotimber Well, ain't that just the crux of the issue? Am I responsible for the outcome of my existence or or am I a helpless pawn lost in an incomprehensible universe? This ain't rocket science it's quantum electro-chromodynamics! ;)
Defense: my client had no choice but to commit the crime. Jury: and we have no choice but to find him guilty - his guilt was determined billions of years ago, so we cannot change it.
Except... It's not "the client" who's "guilty." It's everything that contributed to the crime. The most truthful approach is to account for what's reasonably understandable from what contributed to the crime and enact policy to mitigate it so less crime will come out of it going forward. In parallel, work to understand and reform the "client" so he'll likely not commit a crime again, otherwise restrict his freedom (as long as he's a threat to others) in a way that won't likely contribute to more crime from him or others connected to him (hint: our current legal system is a supercharged crime factory)... Yep, very hard work but the only work that bears fidelity to what's true.
@@Kimoto504 How do you mitigate anything under causal determinism? Thoughts and actions are causally determined in fixed chains under physicalist accounts of mind and universe.
@@Kimoto504 "Except that it IS the client who is guilty", since he undoubtedly (and admittedly) committed the "crime"... What You are claiming (and possibly succeeding) is that the client isn't accountable/responsible for his action (i.e. committing the crime) and hence not "morally guilty"... But from a legal standpoint, and some philosophical ones he most certainly is that as well ... Now don't get me wrong I fully agree that "circumstances" should be taken into account, and might be seen as "mitigating circumstances". And I'm fully aware that many societies have "circumstances" and "legal systems" that put large groups of people into "life circumstances" that are anything but fair and just... BUT trying to correct that should not be confused with trying to switch the causal facts into saying that a perpetrator of some "misdeed" didn't actually perpetrate the offence... Best regards.
It may only be free to a certain extent. For example, your brain seems to play a huge role in things. If we have free will, why can't people who actively do want to get off a drug not get off them? Or why can't I stop eating cheeseburgers yet want to lose weight. Sure, a part of me enjoys eating the food I eat, but sometimes you genuinely do want to stop and lose weight or get clean and yet you can't. Is that free will? Isn't free will me just being able to do something uninhibited? Think of your response when someone offers you a cigarette if you don't smoke. You wouldn't do it most likely, easy no. But if you were trying to stop smoking, why can't it be that easy of a no? Another illustration to demonstrate the brain plays a bigger role, getting bonked on the head can result in entirely different personality change and even genius traits in some cases to pop up. Things you would do that pre-head-bonk you would never do if never bonked on the head. It's like they just became a different person.
Ive seen a few different channels promoting Better Help. Its hard for me to believe more multiple would be sponsored by and promoting them if they were a scam.
Better Help has active lawsuits against them for mishandling (basically, selling) sensitive and private patient information to various big corps. They also don't even really guarantee that people you ask help from have proper experience and training. People have complained of common improper sessions. Moreover, therapists also complained of the platform enabling dehumanizing practices when it comes to dropping a therapist or switching to another one, without proper motivation and conversation. Sounds like a shit service to me.
@@GimmieVidspl0x I would suggest the real problem is that "therapist" is not a protected job title in Yankerica. Specific TYPES of therapist (such as "massage therapist") are, but not generic therapist. Anyone can call themselves that, and it's not illegal. Like "nutritionist". I haven't looked into BetterHelp at all, but if they are saying they will put you in touch with a "therapist" and they put you in touch with someone calling themselves a "therapist" they haven't done anything illegal, they've just preyed on your ignorance.
The cat example is the most lamest thing i ever heard, we all know its either dead or alive. Don't get fooled by a bunch of nerds that think they know better.
Is there anything truly "free of charge" in the universe, without someone paying the bills? Hey, that's a great idea for the next video!!!! @HistoryoftheUniverse 😂
It has been mathematically prove that it is possible to simulate the universe on the surface of a black hole much smaller than the size of the universe.
@@PersimmonHurmo The holographic hypothesis suggests that given a space of some dimensionality you can encode everything in it on a boundary one dimension lower. But critically for an infinite space that boundary is infinitely large and infinitely far away. And encoding is not simulating.
To be fair though the whole "you have to observe it" for physical interactions to be decided (quantum physics), makes for a really neat way so not everything has to calculated all the time. It's like when your video game doesn't process the whole world or how other games simply calculate the important parts (like how much money was generated), when you come back to something instead of continuously processing. And in general predicting the future in a very limited manner, like a localized area where causes might have an effect might be easier. Yet another really convenient property of the universe. The speed of light which is also the speed limit of information flow. So you only need to calculate the observable part.
As ever, one big problem is "actions based on misinformation". History is filled with examples of both personal and international tragedies which arose from hasty decisions based on misinformation which was sometimes intentional and other times not. "Getting it right" is no easy task in the face of deliberate lies, slander, manipulative shady people on top of all the incidental misconstructions that abound.
@@ExtantFrodo2 You can apply that logic to religion. The ultimate deception. Ironically it is religion that preaches free will, while it simultaneously takes it away by applying man made laws that dehumanize, oppress, and vilify those who don't follow the same beliefs. And to ensure they remain obedient, they use fear. Just a thought
We can't even trust our brains. Just look at optical illusions to see how bad they are at displaying to us objective reality, if there even is such a thing.
I have watched the entire series several times. As it progressed things referenced early on and in other videos come into focus. This is a master class in communication. Thank you
@@colbyr7811 History of the future - coming up. As long as one - learns truthfully - then all - benefit. The heart - responds beautifully - to clear ideas - it feels ennobled and the message - lasts. Fare thee well - in life's journey.
Determinism was conquered by the fact that we can’t predict quantum mechanics. Insofar, our own brain mechanisms are so small we can’t predict our will past what we know we’ll decide based on many factors such as conditioning. But the irony is, our brains work in this undetermined, quantum mode naturally, it is us to see all the possibilities before making a final decision. Look inwards, experience the quantum particle as it splits into millions of options before it collapses into one.
@@ntmtatpeople are just parroting what they’ve heard. People who go to these channels to whine about betterhelp are NPCs. So many reputable channels are sponsored by them(including Vsauce and Kyle Hill), yet these commenters think they know better.
The experience of free will is what the universe gives. Genuine free will is most likely an illusion, but such a statement does not free one from that illusion
Whether it truly exists or not, I agree that we have no choice but to act like it does, even if we consciously tell ourselves that it doesn’t. I mean, what would it even be like to act like you don’t have free will? The question itself is absurd. So it could be an illusion, but we’d never know because the world would appear exactly the same to us whether it exists or not.
@@LukeGeaney its like how can u have free will when everything and i mean some of the most innocuous things imaginable go into each and every choice u make influencing your decisions. Things u have no control over
You and me both. Plus all them other people that appreciate that there are seriously talented people creating such incredible informative, educational and insightful material. We're very lucky in that respect!
Without freewill, everyone is off the hook for the things they do. It's not even worth having the discussion because the implication is nobody is responsible for anything. If that's the case, it's not my fault for being upset that my life is so awful because the universe decided that I should have an awful existence while someone else gets the lottery and gets to have a wonderful existence. It makes you wonder, if that's the case, then why? Why the spite? If there is no consciousness making decisions and it's all random and we're all doing what nature is gonna do anyway since the very beginning of time, then why does it feel like this isn't the case? The simplest answer and the only answer is of course we have free will (even if it's not true). If it was determined tomorrow that we can confirm without a doubt we don't have freewill, then it's not ethical to punish anyone. Murderers are doing exactly what they should be doing. It's like getting mad at a wild animal for doing what they do. I never understood why anybody actually cares about this question or takes it seriously. Yes, we have free will because it feels like we do. If we didn't feel like we did, then we wouldn't feel anything. We'd be observers locked in a cage, forced to experience things against our will. I would say "no, I don't want that" and my body still does it. There has to be a point in which I avoid pain because "I" don't want to experience a bad experience. Life can be boiled down to seeking pleasure and avoiding pain, while non living things like rocks don't care one way or the other. They don't seek anything, and they don't avoid anything. Things happen to them because they can't will, they have no choices to make. But it's a very scary thought, that consciousness could be trapped in a rock and being an observer without the ability to make things happen, so if fall into lava you are released into the lava, or you're sitting in some wasteland for a billion years, being moved around by the enviroment, weathering you down, smaller and smaller, or maybe you find yourself perfectly reserved just under the surface for billions of years in perfect darkness. It's best to be human, for sure. I personally subscribe that existence itself is infinite, that it's not possible to have a finite of anything. It doesn't make sense to have an arbitary limit or border in which things stop existing. If I travel in a straight line, will i reach an edge? No, literally no because light travels slower than the expanse of the universe. So as I travel straight, the universe expands faster than my ability to keep up. I can travel for infinity in one direction, and all matter (even if finite) will find itself remixing an infinite amount of different ways. If the universe is something that breathes in and out, that it expands and contracts and this is the big bang happening over and over and over, it's happening an infinite amount of times. If we live in a universe where it was once so dense that light couldn't escape before the big bang, then how long was it sitting there waiting for something to happen to kick off time and the expansion of space? For infinity? If not then, then where did it come from? You reach a point, where you must surrender to infinity. It's not possible otherwise. Even if infinity is in the future and that's where we're heading, there is an argument to make I have to live this life exactly as it plays out because every possibility must be possible and must play out an infinite amount of times, and this can be scary because it sort of robs you of agency. But I'd make the argument, if you want to do something and you do it, that's free will even if it was gonna happen. What something feels like, is actually very individualistic and personal to the observer. Each one of us, is living in a different universe - our heads. How I experience the universe is literally different than how a totally blind person experience's the universe. I have access to experiences that a totally blind person cannot even imagine even if you explain in great detail what looking at a galaxy looks like. You can explain a star, but unless you experience brightness and light, being told about lumination is as meaningless as any fiction trying to describe an impossible thing like trying to describe an exotic color that rests directly in between the cool and warm colors, giving a true middle. I transitionary color, a color you cannot see with the human eye or even measure, could totally exist for another species. I remember feeling bad for insects with very short lifespans, but then someone told me they probably experience time in a distorted way so it feels as long to them, as 90 years feels for us. This seems to be backed up by science, because perception of time seems to be directly linked the heart rate of an animal. If you have very fast heart rate, time appears to move slower but on average your heart will beat the same amount of times as a slower heart beats. A mouse that lives a year has a much faster heart than an elephant, but on average both of their hearts will be the same amount in their lifetimes. For an elephant, time moves fast. As we get older, humans heart rates beat slower so time feels to be moving faster as we get older.... I make this comment, because what I'm really trying to get at is experiences boils down to the individual having the experience and there's no "objective" reality. We are all experiencing a unique thing because only I know what it's like to be me and only YOU know what it's like to be you even if we have identical experiences, how we feel about them is different. We could experience the same thing and I could get great pleasure out of it and you could suffer a great deal of pain. So the argument about free will is as moot of a conversation as exotic colors. I guess it's fun to talk about, but unless we can FEEL it and EXPERIENCE it, it's not actually real. If FEELS like I have free will, so therefore it's real to me regardless if I'm wrong. I cannot be wrong, because how I feel is more real than anything. It's why education is so important and we try and help people escape ignorance. It's why religion fights so hard to invade your world view and change it. God isn't real unless you believe in God. God is super super super real to the a person with faith. It's super important to be mindful of competing ideas and which actually give people the best sense of happiness way more than actual stone cold hard facts. Facts don't make people happy, how people feel about those facts and how it informs them of themselves in relation to everything around them can bring them peace, and so facts can be harmful to one person and liberating to someone else and I think we sort of try and ignore the human element in math. How we feel about results in math is vastly more important than what it says.
Interesting post. As for free will, I think people misunderstand what free will means in the context of men. I believe for us its an evolutionary and biological achievement. For other forces of nature it can be other things entirely and these can overlap. The universe ultimately appears to be infinitely granular (ie...random). Men are affected by this universal force but can also shape it fundamentally. I think this point is often missed or confused. Ironically for men, true free will only becomes possible when he realizes that everything is possible. The purist form of free will is when an individual comes to the deep fundamental realization that everything is possible. When this realization is achieved, the free will of choice becomes the new foundation of our understanding of nature. Every choice then becomes an option with no boundaries or limitations. We become solely responsible for every choice we make from that moment forward. In the context of men, free will is actually just a realization, thats it, nothing more, nothing less. From this realization springs choice and interestingly, defines the force of infinity for what it truly is. Infinity is not a thing. Infinity is actually the open-endedness of all possible outcomes. Its not all possible outcomes. There is a difference.
The universe enables those who need enabling, and rewards those who do not need enabling. Pretty intelligent cookie of a universe. Satisfies both sides of the fence without pandering to one side or the other.
Neither strict determinism nor randomness can provide us with free will: If one thing is like going somewhere by train, the other is sitting within a boat which readomly moves here and there. If free will exists, it - or some kind of "precursor" of it, maybe disguising itself as randomness - must be inherent.
Free will itself needs to be reconnected by the I fluences of the universe. Because if there is influence, the will wouldn't be free. But if that's the case the will doesn't exist in this universe, which cannot be the cases because the will need to interact with this universe. So far everything seems to be connected (like just usual standard model and so on)
Predeterminism, the idea that all events are determined by preceding causes and that the future is fixed, faces significant challenges from modern scientific theories. Quantum mechanics introduces inherent indeterminacy at the subatomic level, where particles exist in states of probability until observed. This probabilistic nature contradicts the notion of a predetermined universe. Chaos theory further complicates the picture by showing that even small changes in initial conditions can lead to vastly different outcomes, a phenomenon known as the "butterfly effect," which implies that precise prediction is impossible. Moreover, sensitivity to initial conditions in chaotic systems suggests that tiny variations can cause dramatic and unpredictable changes, undermining the idea of a fixed future. Additionally, the concept of retrocausality in some interpretations of quantum mechanics and the temporal symmetry in physical laws suggest that future events could influence the past, allowing for actions that effectively cancel out their own logical course
@@TheSilverShadow17"If we choose not to decide, we still have made a choice." And your choice brothers and sisters should be to listen to Rush for all your therapy needs (and avoid those scam companies!).
I love how the theoretical framework for philosophical questions can be approached from the perspective of fundamental physics. Who knows what or when we will find the the final pieces of the puzzle, but for now, this kind of analysis is certainly one of the great tasks of humanity.
You always have the choice to listen and be guided or not listen and be a lost soul in this world but as God's children we all have free will it's our birth Wright as his children to have and be born with free will period. ❤
Even if we do live in an eternal block universe, wouldn't there have been a first time for everything to happen, before everything was frozen. If so, wouldn’t we have free choice, then. And, now, we are just watching it play out over and over...
The lesson from accepting determinism isn't to not punish crime, it's that sometimes restorative justice might be wholly more constructive to addressing it than punitive justice, because more than just people's personal character is involved in decision making. Or that things like reducing lead levels in the water supply might be better policy than trying to regulate religion or speech or whatever.
No, the lesson from accepting determinism (without going the compatiblism route) is that systems of justice are fairly meaningless. They exist for the same reason that the crime does: because that's how the physics says it has to happen. None of it matters. It isn't an excuse to not punish crime, because the punishment is just as deterministic as the crime is. All it's telling you is that it doesn't matter what you choose, because you will only ever choose one thing. There was never a reality where anything else happened.
30:21 _Quantum mechanics ... might just hold the keys of unlocking free will._ As far as we know, no. It unlocks true randomness. If a particle is in a status of having, say, spin +½ in x direction, there is no way to predict the outcome of spin measurement in z direction since spin +½ in x direction is a superposition of spin +½ and spin -½ in z direction. However, the outcome is real random, snd randomness is not free will choice.
We have some kind of free will and control with some randomness mixed in..but probelm happens when we mistake with free will with a free choice. We have free will buy we doesn't have free choice we are like bloggers who can't be choosers. And our attraction and aversion are totally based on our genetical programing and some nurture and environmental programing. So complete free will is lie. Like how you forced me to comment on your video it's not my free will.
Heyyy 53:36 you finally get around to addressing something you've been recklessly ignoring for almost an hour, the dominant position on free will across all of philosophical history... oh, but only one second further in and you've already fucked it up: compatibilism was neither invented by Hume and Hobbes (plenty of Medieval and even Classical philosophers have supported some variety of it), nor is their variety of it at all representative of the contemporary thinking on the topic, which is wholly unlike theirs.
Time is illusory, just like space, solidity and everything else besides Pure Consciousness. What people call 'movement' is an illusion. Nothing ever truly moves, every moment is like a frame in a television show. When you watch a television show, it looks like you're seeing moving images, but the images you are seeing are not moving at all. You are seeing one frozen image after another in rapid succession, so it looks as though you are seeing moving images (even though you're not). Time is like that. Every moment in our lives is like a frozen image, an eternity of its own. And it is possible to both 'rewind' and 'fast-forward' these frozen images - this is known as 'time travel'. Everyone is Pure Consciousness, which is infinite and eternal, experiencing life in a temporary human form. You can call Pure Consciousness 'God' if you want, but I don't, because the word 'God' has limiting religious connotations that I would rather avoid. Pure Consciousness has free will, but when it assumes temporary human forms (which are us), it experiences predetermined lives. Everything you experience in your life (right down to the most trivial details) was chosen by your true self, Pure Consciousness. Even when some guy on the street punches you in the face. You chose to be punched in the face for whatever reason. I know this is hard to accept. I genuinely do. But it's true all the same. So at the physical level of 'reality', there is no free will. But at the most fundamental level of 'reality', there IS free will.
I think the bigger question is: what even IS free will? like... think about it... is there a concrete definition of it... one that doesn't demand further questions... it's one of those questions that fries your brain if you think about it too long
Call when you break down the individual Words Free and will and get the individual definitions then it's obvious to see that it doesn't exist because you have limited Universal potentiality that you can choose from and it matters not your choices because all of the choices are pre-programmed to send you in the same direction regardless of your choice so it doesn't really matter about the end outcome... just as objective reality doesn't exist everything we have here is a shared subjective reality and that is the best we have for in order to have objective reality you need to have an observer that exists from the beginning of time all the way to the end of time and even if such hypothetical Observer exists the End of Time hasn't came yet so therefore everything is strictly subjective here and objective reality fundamentally cannot exist...
Yes, this is the first question that needs to be answered, and most philosophers for most of history have answered that free will, properly analyzed, has nothing to do with whether or not determinism is true. Or rather, if anything, it *depends* on determinism being adequately close to true, because the randomness of indeterminism is a much greater threat to freedom.
free will has no area of dispute with determinism. free will is merely the observation that whatever you consider your "self" to be is the thing in control of your behavior. if that self is the sum of all variables that preceded it, or if it somehow wills itself into existence, it makes no difference. this is not a debate between free will and determinism. it's a debate between fatalism and non-fatalism, or alternatively a very low-level application of determinism vs a version of determinism that wasn't conceived of by a child with only enough scientific knowledge to know that science is most often composed of statements that are true, and nothing else. they think that because the universe operates as if it were running on a program, that everything must be hardcoded from the start, when the truth is that dynamic code is far more common within the universe than they give it credit.
True free will doesn't exist, it literally can't. To decide what to think of next, you'd have to know all of the possible things to think of, be able to make a choice, and THEN think it. It's a paradox, and true free will CAN'T exist.
This was so well done, I've watched everything you guys have produced, some videos more than once, and I have enjoyed and learned so much. I don't know why you don't have millions of subscribers, but I for one really appreciate the hard work and consistent excellence. I love the choice of content, the imagery, the long form presentation, and even the narrator's voice! I hope all is well with you and yours, I look forward to more of your work, take care
Such a exciting videos of this Chanel. But voice and music in background always make you yaun and put you in sleep. I want this video stimulate me insted of puting us in sleep. I need strong dose of caffeine and red bull if I want to finish this videos watching fully without yauning and feeling sleepy.
To believe in free will is to assume such powers of agency as to constitute a true _first cause,_ in defiance of causality itself. Obviously we're nothing so unnatural as walking causality violations. Also remember Godel's incompleteness theorem, and that there's a key distinction between information that is indeterminable insofar as being unavailable, in contrast to being truly indeterminate - acausal determinants being a contradiction in terms. A favourite example here is that of a split-brain patient, after severance of the corpus callosum as drastic but effective therapy for life-threatening seizures; in examination following recovery, the patient, via stereo headphones, was asked into one ear to take a sip from the glass of water on the desk before her. Having complied, the question was then put to the opposite ear of why she'd performed this action, replying "because i was thirsty".. a perfectly plausible posteriori rationalisation.. and all that free will can be. Popper would remind us that an intrinsically unfalsifiable hypothesis isn't even strictly scientific. But as far as illusions go it's a perfectly agreeable one, and more importantly we still need to be held accountable for our actions, and protect society from those who do not, hence this realisation of what free will is and isn't has little more than philosophical bearing - there's nothing else to do but continue going along with it regardless, *the social imperative* certainly being no farce.
if free will is not being affected by anything other than yourself, couldnt reality in and of itself be considered free because nothing outside of reality even exists so reality is only affecting itself, i.e. free from outside influence because there is nothing outside of reality. following this line of thinking, couldn't this recursive, reflexive property of reality distribute or cascade down to observers like ourselves
Hard disagree to it being little more than philosophy. Accepting the absence of free will is the antidote to hate. It makes negligence obsolete. It makes punitive intent anathema. There is so much hatred in the world because we believe people are bad because they should have acted differently than they did and because we believe that they could have in that moment - not any other moment, but the one in which acted that way.
The belief in free will is actually a strong argument for its existence in some measure (in my opinion). A version of yourself that doesn't believe in free will will think and act differently than a version of yourself that does believe. The possible thoughts and actions of a mind that believes in free will is much more varied and unpredictable than a mind that doesn't. The laws of nature can't direct or predict how you create an abstract painting, what philosophies you will hold, what music you listen to, how you dream at night (if you dream), which groceries you buy at the store or even how you die. Of course the unpredictability varies from person to person based on their measure of awareness and mental structure--some people may be more deterministic than others. When we weigh decisions on our minds and hold to them, especially despite any struggles or obstacles we encounter because of them, our decisions go on to influence the quasi-deterministic aspects of our subconscious, giving us control of our tendencies. Many of our decisions have no rational or evolutionary reasoning to them, especially if we choose to believe in free will. Edit: when we choose to believe or disbelieve in free will, we may be proclaiming our own capacity for experiencing free will.
Think everyone misses the true flaw with the cat experiment. .. it's, is the cat an observer? I would think it is. So, us opening a box is irrelevant. The outcome was already observed by the cat. We could try without a living object. But then is life the only observer able to produce an outcome.. if so then the universe was and wasnt until life was developed... which was and wasnt. Because how was the process of creation to life processed. Without an observer. So either the universe doesnt need observation to force an outcome or there is a godlike figure observing the universe. I think its more with light and time. If it can be observed then it has its state chosen. Not that it is observed. So the state of the cat is choosen the moment the bomb does or doesn't go off. Opening the box doesnt matter at all.
You've arrived at the proper conclusion but let me clarify a few points. The things that everyone misses about Schrödinger's thought experiment are that: a) it was meant to show how absurd quantum physics is when combined with classical physics, b) the universe doesn't "know" it is or isn't being observed. Observation simply means measurement - and we can only measure something by applying some force to it (even looking at a thing requires a photon to interact with that thing first). It's this application of force - an interaction between particles - that causes the wave function to collapse.
Amazing! Imagine Kurzgesagt (didn't check the spelling) made a video inspired by this in just two weeks! :Edit for people interested - the video is called "Are you an NPC?" and was uploaded June 11th
Mr. David Kelley created the series and narrates. The scripts are written by some of the finest astrophysicists in the field. Each episode is a _thrill!_
About us: The Entire History of the Universe (or History of the Universe) is a youtube channel with a simple, if ambitious aim: to tell the story of how our universe began, grew, and will grow for trillions of years to come. Started by David Kelly, the joint creator behind History of the Earth and Voices of the Past (with his brother Pete Kelly, creator of History Time and the other “History Brother”), History of the Universe is based out of Spain. But David is English. Inspired by Cosmos and BBC´s long running Horizon series, our aim is to convey how wild our universe is on the largest and smallest scales, in a way that is understandable to anyone.
37:45 _... and you can follow classical physics to track its progress and predict its future behaviour._ No, not even close! You just located the particle in the place of one detector cell, having its momentary position for a point in time. At this point, the particle is in a superposition of _many different momenta_ which takes away the predictability. You didn't turn it into a classical particle since no such thing exists. You literally say it yourself by mentioning Heisenbergs relation of uncertainty (a more precise translation of 'Unschärferelation').
@@b.gizzlles”half the time” it isn’t there so it’s not a reliable observer. To be an observer means being able to observe all possible configurations without annihilation. I can’t observe my own death any more than the cat can.
Like I said. Control/ Free will is an illusion. Idas will come to your mind and you will do stuff. You can't control what comes into your mind. Think about it. It's all programed.
@@TheSilverShadow17 like I said. Control /Free will is an illusion. Ideas will come in your mind and you will do stuff. You can't control the way you think. it's all programed for you. If You can't control if you going to wake up tomorrow. What makes you think you can control the decisions you make. You just going to make a decision because you was programed to make that decision. Free will is not a thing.
Na, ppl are surprisingly predictable. This has never been more evident than now with so many ppl connected by the internet. Ppl behave like a wave, one that can be predicted. Content creators take advantage of this fact by causing millions of ppl to watch their videos. They pretty much have it down to a science. Some creators are just better at it than others. Same thing with trends. More trends than you think are purposely triggered and that’s with our rudimentary understanding of human behavior. Ppl that understand how this works continues to get better and better at it. Same principle applies to advertisement, elections, popular music, you name it. I swear it’s like ppl genuinely don’t think for themselves anymore, or maybe they never did. As different as we all may seem, we’re pretty much identical.
People are easy to predict, but you can't predict what all the people will do every time. Group averages are easy, but individuals are a bit harder to predict but not impossible.
Have too warn you all about better help that sells your data including chats with your therapist to companies. No hate for the sponsor but I think people should know that.
So much for many worlds interpretation of multi verse theory. Butterfly effect, add one molecule at the formation and youll upset the entire timeline. If all big bangs are the same , like type 1a , then every universe us completely identical in every way. Lol.
I like to imagine my ethereal self made a choice as well. When asked if it would like to play a round of the divine game of life, I responded “let’s do it!” Maybe it happened, maybe it didn’t, but believing the former took place gives me a better outlook. It gives me a sense of autonomy and confidence. Which is better than feeling like I had no choice and I’m stuck here.
I actually think about stuff like this all the time, and it completely transformed how I see “bad” people. If you were born as them, you would have the exact same thoughts and do the same things by definition. They didn’t choose to be themself, therefore, it’s not their fault. We should discourage harmful actions, but we should also understand that they didn’t choose to be this way. Therefore, it is completely unethical and unproductive to punish “bad” people for the sole sake of retribution. We are really behind on how we handle people we don’t like. They need to suffer after all, because you suffered because of them, regardless of if it would make the world a better place or not. It just feels right. We don’t like to think of these people as human, and we like to believe we have free will. It’s like we’re hardwired to think this way, since it makes us feel better about our existence. I just hope we will come around someday.
15:34 "If causal determinism is true, then free will is an illusion" -- this, this right here, this is where you fucked up, and I called it before even hitting play. You are just assuming an incoherent analysis of the very concept of free will, without even trying to give an argument for it.
What? His reasoning seems logical to me. Or do you think that free will and determinism can coexist? I think they cannot, because if your will is determined, it isn't free
To give my honest answer, I truly have zero clue if the universe is deterministic or non-deterministic because we have no hard evidence or proof thus far. As stupid as this comment is, I chose to write it down just because.
30:18 of course, quantum woo to the rescue! /s Tell me, given an indeterministic interpretation of quantum theory, does every single electron have "free will"? No? But they're intedeterministic (we've stipulated)! So why not? What is missing? Maybe... just maybe... you have no fucking clue what free will even is, and that leads you to this absurd conclusion?
Every decision you make is reaction based on a past experience that happened to you. Plus to believe that your decisions has any sort of significant impact on the entire universe is very egocentric.
Then again, I've made mistakes and bad decisions but at least I know that I'm the one bearing the responsibility for them, as it was I who did that. No-one else.
@colbyr7811 haha, well then, I would recommend Cool Worlds (also calm narrator, long physics videos). For some more existential stuff, check out Aperture
That doesn't mean you didn't make those stupid decisions, or that you have no burden of self-evaluation and change. The key difference between us and other animals is that we are capable of such complex self-analysis, and our survival as a species is dependent on our using it.
@@robinpage2730first off, that's exactly what it means. Secondly, what you said about us and other animals is just something you pulled out of your ass.
I've made some pretty dumb decisions in my lifetime but I know that I ultimately made them myself, and many of which I regret. Everyone makes mistakes no matter how much of a goody 2 shoes one is. Mistakes are unavoidable period.
"You can choose a ready guide in some celestial voice If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice You can choose from phantom fears and kindness that can kill I will choose a path that's clear, I will choose freewill"
I'll admit that I made a lot of bad choices, but that's because I ultimately did all of that myself. I regret my mistakes, but can't avoid them either way. There's always another chance that another mistake will be made regardless.
you chose to come and say this but you could not choose wanting to choose that. you are bound to doing only what you want, if you want to do another thing instead then you will have to want to do the other thing instead more and want to not do the other thing. all along the way your wants were what they were at each particular moment causing you to make a choice. say you would want to choose to want a different thing. then you will want to want to choose a different thing. there will always be one want that precedes which you will never have control over. thus freewill cannot exist
Free Will must exist or nothing can exist. Thats not the delusion, its the thinking that Free Will is freely attainable without the conscious use of the Will.
@@Johnny_Shields Free Will means having the ability to be in charge of your own consciousness. To direct attention, to choose thought. Thats what I meant by not freely attainable without conscious use of the Will. Meaning you're free to think about what you want, but unless you consciously, or deliberately make those thoughts and direct them where you want you're not necessarily utilizing Free Will and are open to mind control.
Quantum mechanics doesn’t mean free will exists. Just because the wave function collapses doesn’t mean we have any control over how it collapses. The universe may not be deterministic, but that doesn’t mean that humans can affect the results of fundamentally unpredictable processes.
Imagine sitting there in the courtroom listening to the defendant lawyer yapping on about why the origins of the Milky Way and the sun's nuclear fusion reaction explains why his victim is not guilty for a murder. Talk about grasping for straws xD
At one point, I was heavily disturbed by the likelihood that all human actions could be deterministic. I learned about Spinoza's philosophy and much about his life, albeit from secondary sources, and how his deterministic view actually led him to peace with his religious prosecutors because it was simply fate that they would prosecute him. Upon learning this, I understood that a deterministic view of the world did not have to be pessimistic or something that detracts from human meaning, but something that points us to a direction of absolute acceptance of life and of others. There is peace in accepting fate. Amor fati.
"There is peace in accepting fate." Even in that sentence you seem to imply a bit that there is some choice and that you made it to accept something. When I hear people that deny free will talk, they sooner or later contradict themselves because living like everything is determined is absurd.
Peace in accepting fate??? If you mean by that the acceptance of anything and everything, without discrimination, then perhaps you're right. It also means that goals are unnecessary, and that solving problems has no purpose.. We should simply sit on our laurels and accept whatever happens! True inner peace (?).
I think most of the people who claim to believe that free will doesn't exist would also claim to believe that consciousness doesn't exist, if they believed it were incompatible with materialism. I don't think any sane person could believe either thing, even if they say they do, think they should, and want to.
There is no link between free will and determining guilt in a court. People are prosecuted for their act and the prejudice resulting of said act. It would be like having a machinist refusing to replace a defective piece because "it cannot be responsible of creating a failure, it has no free will!"
No one ever said to not punish criminals. This viewpoint merely allows some to be more empathic with said criminals, realizing that it's not their fault.
@@snarckys3063 It is appropriate. The original argument is that guilt is made upon intension through free will, and, by extension, without free will, no one would be guilty of anything. What I am saying, is that there is no relation between guilt of an action and free will. (I could provide a more concrete example, but RUclips won't let it out) If you can find a piece of machinery (which has no free will since it is an object) to be faulty and discard it because it is not doing something it is supposed to do, then you can also find someone guilty of doing something regardless of them having free will or not strictly through what they actually did. This is not complicated at all, really.
@@pnut3844able "No one ever said to not punish criminals." Wrong. Many religious people criticise atheism precisely on the basis that it, and I quote, "denies the free bestowed upon us by God." Even in this comment section you can see plenty of people bringing this up in a way or another. Also, even if it may help being "more empathic" towards said criminal, your point is not addressing the point the video was making in its analogy (where the accused is smiling, thinking he'd get away by demonstrating he had no free will).
I can choose to become a hateful jackass but that'll send me down the wrong path and end up bringing up self hatred in the process. I have the option to decide to do myself a favor to become better or risk losing it all for hellbent hatred.
Most philosophers across most of history disagree vehemently. Either the universe is causally deterministic or it's not, but neither has anything to do with whether or not anybody has free will, because free will isn't about whether or not choices/actions/etc are determined at all, but the specifics of *how* they are determined.
The only sense in which anything can possibly be in anything’s control, and so the only possible sense that can be made of the very concept of control, is when the thing that is controlled (call it B) is limited in its possibilities by the thing that is controlling (call it A), despite any other influences to the contrary. That requires that an adequate degree of determinism be true, otherwise attempts at such limitation will just randomly fail; but that it is A specifically that determines B, rather than something else, otherwise A cannot be said to control B. When it comes to free will, as understood by contemporary compatibilists, what matters is a kind of *self-control* where what you do is controlled by what you think you should do, in contrast to situations where you think you should do one thing but find yourself doing another thing and wishing you wouldn’t but being unable to stop yourself and immediately regretting it. In that latter case, you lack free will; conversely, free will is the ability to prevent the latter kind of thing from happening. It’s only when you have that ability that it does any good to tell you that you did right or wrong, or in other words, that you deserve to be praised or blamed, because if your thoughts about what you should do aren’t in control of what you do, changing your mind about what you should do is not only useless but possibly needless, because maybe you already agree but couldn’t control yourself! Deserving blame or praise is just what moral responsibility is, so this is precisely the sense of free will that moral responsibility hinges on. And not only is determinism not a threat to it, but the right kind of determination is *necessary* for it.
The problem is that free will and responsibility are not the same thing. If you accept that we don’t have free will in this context, that normally means that you are essentially a meat robot, responding to a combination of internal and external stimulus, correct? If so, then a negative consequence can be a strong external stimulus to discourage the unwanted behaviour in the future, so punishment is still effective. Accepting responsibility, and expressing and feeling genuine remorse can indicate a change in internal state that would result in different behaviour should the external stimulus occur again, with or without free will.
@@pnut3844able did you watch the video? The introduction’s premise was a court case where the defence lawyer said their client wasn’t responsible (which means they would not be punished).
You don't make any sense, and you are completely missing the point by trying to make a moral argument about the subject. That's not the point, quit being off topic.
Yes. but time does not exist beyond our understanding of it as a way to transverse this existence, The past, present and future all exist, so it makes it predetermined, but at the same time, we made all of our choices at the instance of existence.
free wills true however the universe does push you in certain ways sometimes more than others when you go against it stuff never goes right. karma wouldnt have a job without free will lol universe will put u were ur meant to be tho
" We record that which they send before (them), and that which they leave behind], and all things We have recorded with numbers (as a record) in a Clear Book (universal record)" (Quran: Yasin 12)
well after spending an hour writing an explanation, only to loose it all with a computer crash... all i will say is this.. the fact that consciousness evolved as a mechanism to affect probable outcomes in favour of the organism proves free will and disproves super determinism and pure causal determinism... just think it though...
Depends on your point of view. All maps of the earth suffer from the same problem... They could have started with the first maps being inverted from what we have now.
There isn't free will. Most of your life is determined by genetics. If you're a tall guy or pretty girl congratulations you won. If ur a sub5 guy sorry you lost.
Edit: I feel I need to clarify what I'm saying here. I don't have a problem with sponsors in general. I don't have a problem with channels endorsing useless products or services - if you decide to put your money in them, that's your business. I don't even have a problem with this channel taking BetterHelp's money per se. What I have a problem with is this channel's role in the 0.1% of viewers who think BetterHelp must be a trustworthy company because their favourite channel recommends it. They need help and are seeking it, but end up with useless self-proclaimed "therapists", some of which are AI, and a bigger credit card bill than promised. Oh, and their personal information sold to social media companies. That is just wrong, and it pains me that a channel which is also one of my favourites, plays a part in that.
I was aiming for vague enough not to get sued, but clear and concise. It ended up being just dumb and confrontational. I hope this edit is more useful and somewhat constructive.
Original comment: Please, do not ever, _ever_ again take money from that personal information traitor and a senseless scam that is betterhelp. I don't want to have to stop watching this channel because it enables taking advantage of people for the hardships of their life.
Better yet, please inform the audience in your next video that they should never give any information or money to betterhelp. It's the worst possible sponsor you could ever have chosen, and I hope you look into it and hopefully come to the same conclusion.
Y would u look for an online therapist?
@@michaeldaignault6917What's the point of your question? Clearly some people do.
Yes, commenting under this so it gets more attention
@@michaeldaignault6917?
The lawyer at the start was pulling some Saul Goodman type shit
Saul Goodman, who worked a burger franchise at MIT...
there is the chewbaka technique and now there is the HOTU technique
Don't sully Saul Goodman's Goodname. First lawyer is a clown. The concept of free will isn't on trial the defendant is, and his lawyer just admitted he was guilty. Smooth brain behavior.
@cryotimber
Well, ain't that just the crux of the issue? Am I responsible for the outcome of my existence or or am I a helpless pawn lost in an incomprehensible universe?
This ain't rocket science it's quantum electro-chromodynamics! ;)
You're literally using that word wrong, word crimes in action 🤦 go listen to weird Al
Defense: my client had no choice but to commit the crime. Jury: and we have no choice but to find him guilty - his guilt was determined billions of years ago, so we cannot change it.
Except... It's not "the client" who's "guilty." It's everything that contributed to the crime. The most truthful approach is to account for what's reasonably understandable from what contributed to the crime and enact policy to mitigate it so less crime will come out of it going forward. In parallel, work to understand and reform the "client" so he'll likely not commit a crime again, otherwise restrict his freedom (as long as he's a threat to others) in a way that won't likely contribute to more crime from him or others connected to him (hint: our current legal system is a supercharged crime factory)...
Yep, very hard work but the only work that bears fidelity to what's true.
Exactly what I was thinking!
@@Kimoto504 How do you mitigate anything under causal determinism?
Thoughts and actions are causally determined in fixed chains under physicalist accounts of mind and universe.
@@Kimoto504The "client" is a part of that.
@@Kimoto504 "Except that it IS the client who is guilty", since he undoubtedly (and admittedly) committed the "crime"... What You are claiming (and possibly succeeding) is that the client isn't accountable/responsible for his action (i.e. committing the crime) and hence not "morally guilty"... But from a legal standpoint, and some philosophical ones he most certainly is that as well ...
Now don't get me wrong I fully agree that "circumstances" should be taken into account, and might be seen as "mitigating circumstances". And I'm fully aware that many societies have "circumstances" and "legal systems" that put large groups of people into "life circumstances" that are anything but fair and just...
BUT trying to correct that should not be confused with trying to switch the causal facts into saying that a perpetrator of some "misdeed" didn't actually perpetrate the offence...
Best regards.
I'm not convinced free will exists. However, I live my life with the assumption that it does because I don't have a choice.
It may only be free to a certain extent. For example, your brain seems to play a huge role in things. If we have free will, why can't people who actively do want to get off a drug not get off them? Or why can't I stop eating cheeseburgers yet want to lose weight. Sure, a part of me enjoys eating the food I eat, but sometimes you genuinely do want to stop and lose weight or get clean and yet you can't. Is that free will? Isn't free will me just being able to do something uninhibited? Think of your response when someone offers you a cigarette if you don't smoke. You wouldn't do it most likely, easy no. But if you were trying to stop smoking, why can't it be that easy of a no?
Another illustration to demonstrate the brain plays a bigger role, getting bonked on the head can result in entirely different personality change and even genius traits in some cases to pop up. Things you would do that pre-head-bonk you would never do if never bonked on the head. It's like they just became a different person.
I have choices and make decisions on my own behalf. There's nothing telling me I'm not.
well said
@@TheSilverShadow17 someone didn't watch the video
@@pnut3844able I was simply pointing out what I think, is all.
Fyi better help is a scam
How is it a scam? Ive never tried it btw
Ive seen a few different channels promoting Better Help. Its hard for me to believe more multiple would be sponsored by and promoting them if they were a scam.
Your claim has no weight.
Dont take his word for it. Look it up@@43gddfhfdh34
Better Help has active lawsuits against them for mishandling (basically, selling) sensitive and private patient information to various big corps. They also don't even really guarantee that people you ask help from have proper experience and training. People have complained of common improper sessions. Moreover, therapists also complained of the platform enabling dehumanizing practices when it comes to dropping a therapist or switching to another one, without proper motivation and conversation. Sounds like a shit service to me.
FTC Gives Final Approval to Order Banning BetterHelp from Sharing Sensitive Health Data for Advertising, Requiring It to Pay $7.8 Million
That's messed up.
@@owenkanaal3457They were probably making bookoo bucks selling your medical info to insurance companies and anyone else who would pay them for it.
Apparently they also do not have a credential testing process, all you have to do to be a 'therapist' is sign up
@@GimmieVidspl0x I would suggest the real problem is that "therapist" is not a protected job title in Yankerica. Specific TYPES of therapist (such as "massage therapist") are, but not generic therapist. Anyone can call themselves that, and it's not illegal. Like "nutritionist". I haven't looked into BetterHelp at all, but if they are saying they will put you in touch with a "therapist" and they put you in touch with someone calling themselves a "therapist" they haven't done anything illegal, they've just preyed on your ignorance.
Seriously. They need to stop accepting better help sponsorships!!
So, it wasn't up to me that I upvoted?
No, we are programmed to appreciate hard work and quality.
Watch the video mate.
It was inevitable.
It was up to your cat, who is both dead and alive at the same time.
The cat example is the most lamest thing i ever heard, we all know its either dead or alive. Don't get fooled by a bunch of nerds that think they know better.
I thought the title of the video read , _"Does The Universe Allow Free Wi-Fi?"_ , lol
If you think about what is to come in our society this isn't even far off. Scary thought tho
LOL same. On the other hand having free wi-fi everywhere would be nice
Is there anything truly "free of charge" in the universe, without someone paying the bills?
Hey, that's a great idea for the next video!!!! @HistoryoftheUniverse 😂
That's a very important question! Let's hope they make a video answering it next! 😂
@@johnb1145 The neutron and the neutrino are free of charge, as is the Higgs Boson.
First thing better help can help you with is sharing your most personal secrets with anyone that'll pay.
They're better at it than anybody else even
I don't trust them one bit, so BetterHelp can go off themselves.
Any system complex enough to perfectly compute the future of the evolution of the universe would basically just be the universe.
Question: Would that be a free wheeling universe or a deterministic universe?
It has been mathematically prove that it is possible to simulate the universe on the surface of a black hole much smaller than the size of the universe.
@@PersimmonHurmo The holographic hypothesis suggests that given a space of some dimensionality you can encode everything in it on a boundary one dimension lower. But critically for an infinite space that boundary is infinitely large and infinitely far away. And encoding is not simulating.
To be fair though the whole "you have to observe it" for physical interactions to be decided (quantum physics), makes for a really neat way so not everything has to calculated all the time. It's like when your video game doesn't process the whole world or how other games simply calculate the important parts (like how much money was generated), when you come back to something instead of continuously processing.
And in general predicting the future in a very limited manner, like a localized area where causes might have an effect might be easier. Yet another really convenient property of the universe. The speed of light which is also the speed limit of information flow. So you only need to calculate the observable part.
@@fifothebot Great insight! Thanks!
mama always said:
the purpose of your mind is to perceive reality, do try to get it right.
As ever, one big problem is "actions based on misinformation". History is filled with examples of both personal and international tragedies which arose from hasty decisions based on misinformation which was sometimes intentional and other times not. "Getting it right" is no easy task in the face of deliberate lies, slander, manipulative shady people on top of all the incidental misconstructions that abound.
@@electronphoton She did say there'd be days like this....
@@ExtantFrodo2 You can apply that logic to religion. The ultimate deception. Ironically it is religion that preaches free will, while it simultaneously takes it away by applying man made laws that dehumanize, oppress, and vilify those who don't follow the same beliefs. And to ensure they remain obedient, they use fear.
Just a thought
@@ExtantFrodo2The problem is, what is True? Any question has to reduced to an infinite degree. We don't really have the time.
We can't even trust our brains. Just look at optical illusions to see how bad they are at displaying to us objective reality, if there even is such a thing.
I have watched the entire series several times. As it progressed things referenced early on and in other videos come into focus. This is a master class in communication. Thank you
In case you've missed it, they've made history of the earth and history of humankind too
@@colbyr7811 History of the future - coming up.
As long as one - learns truthfully - then all - benefit.
The heart - responds beautifully - to clear ideas - it feels ennobled and the message - lasts.
Fare thee well - in life's journey.
Determinism was conquered by the fact that we can’t predict quantum mechanics. Insofar, our own brain mechanisms are so small we can’t predict our will past what we know we’ll decide based on many factors such as conditioning.
But the irony is, our brains work in this undetermined, quantum mode naturally, it is us to see all the possibilities before making a final decision.
Look inwards, experience the quantum particle as it splits into millions of options before it collapses into one.
stop promoting betterhelp
Cry about it
@@MationGaming im trying, thanks for the advice
@@MationGaming imma jump off something about it.
Why? I have seen lots of negative comments about them. Why are they not thought of very well?
@@ntmtatpeople are just parroting what they’ve heard. People who go to these channels to whine about betterhelp are NPCs.
So many reputable channels are sponsored by them(including Vsauce and Kyle Hill), yet these commenters think they know better.
The experience of free will is what the universe gives. Genuine free will is most likely an illusion, but such a statement does not free one from that illusion
I agree the statement alone does not immediately free you from the illusion, it is the first step towards it though
@@LukeGeaneythink he’s saying it’ll never be something we could be free of.
Whether it truly exists or not, I agree that we have no choice but to act like it does, even if we consciously tell ourselves that it doesn’t.
I mean, what would it even be like to act like you don’t have free will? The question itself is absurd. So it could be an illusion, but we’d never know because the world would appear exactly the same to us whether it exists or not.
@@wmpx34 I am curious: why do we have no choice? Why is the question absurd?
@@LukeGeaney its like how can u have free will when everything and i mean some of the most innocuous things imaginable go into each and every choice u make influencing your decisions. Things u have no control over
I love this channel, and watch every single video like a little child stick to the Tv screen!
You and me both. Plus all them other people that appreciate that there are seriously talented people creating such incredible informative, educational and insightful material. We're very lucky in that respect!
Without freewill, everyone is off the hook for the things they do. It's not even worth having the discussion because the implication is nobody is responsible for anything. If that's the case, it's not my fault for being upset that my life is so awful because the universe decided that I should have an awful existence while someone else gets the lottery and gets to have a wonderful existence. It makes you wonder, if that's the case, then why? Why the spite? If there is no consciousness making decisions and it's all random and we're all doing what nature is gonna do anyway since the very beginning of time, then why does it feel like this isn't the case? The simplest answer and the only answer is of course we have free will (even if it's not true). If it was determined tomorrow that we can confirm without a doubt we don't have freewill, then it's not ethical to punish anyone. Murderers are doing exactly what they should be doing. It's like getting mad at a wild animal for doing what they do. I never understood why anybody actually cares about this question or takes it seriously. Yes, we have free will because it feels like we do. If we didn't feel like we did, then we wouldn't feel anything. We'd be observers locked in a cage, forced to experience things against our will. I would say "no, I don't want that" and my body still does it. There has to be a point in which I avoid pain because "I" don't want to experience a bad experience. Life can be boiled down to seeking pleasure and avoiding pain, while non living things like rocks don't care one way or the other. They don't seek anything, and they don't avoid anything. Things happen to them because they can't will, they have no choices to make. But it's a very scary thought, that consciousness could be trapped in a rock and being an observer without the ability to make things happen, so if fall into lava you are released into the lava, or you're sitting in some wasteland for a billion years, being moved around by the enviroment, weathering you down, smaller and smaller, or maybe you find yourself perfectly reserved just under the surface for billions of years in perfect darkness. It's best to be human, for sure.
I personally subscribe that existence itself is infinite, that it's not possible to have a finite of anything. It doesn't make sense to have an arbitary limit or border in which things stop existing. If I travel in a straight line, will i reach an edge? No, literally no because light travels slower than the expanse of the universe. So as I travel straight, the universe expands faster than my ability to keep up. I can travel for infinity in one direction, and all matter (even if finite) will find itself remixing an infinite amount of different ways. If the universe is something that breathes in and out, that it expands and contracts and this is the big bang happening over and over and over, it's happening an infinite amount of times. If we live in a universe where it was once so dense that light couldn't escape before the big bang, then how long was it sitting there waiting for something to happen to kick off time and the expansion of space? For infinity? If not then, then where did it come from? You reach a point, where you must surrender to infinity. It's not possible otherwise. Even if infinity is in the future and that's where we're heading, there is an argument to make I have to live this life exactly as it plays out because every possibility must be possible and must play out an infinite amount of times, and this can be scary because it sort of robs you of agency. But I'd make the argument, if you want to do something and you do it, that's free will even if it was gonna happen. What something feels like, is actually very individualistic and personal to the observer. Each one of us, is living in a different universe - our heads. How I experience the universe is literally different than how a totally blind person experience's the universe. I have access to experiences that a totally blind person cannot even imagine even if you explain in great detail what looking at a galaxy looks like. You can explain a star, but unless you experience brightness and light, being told about lumination is as meaningless as any fiction trying to describe an impossible thing like trying to describe an exotic color that rests directly in between the cool and warm colors, giving a true middle. I transitionary color, a color you cannot see with the human eye or even measure, could totally exist for another species.
I remember feeling bad for insects with very short lifespans, but then someone told me they probably experience time in a distorted way so it feels as long to them, as 90 years feels for us. This seems to be backed up by science, because perception of time seems to be directly linked the heart rate of an animal. If you have very fast heart rate, time appears to move slower but on average your heart will beat the same amount of times as a slower heart beats. A mouse that lives a year has a much faster heart than an elephant, but on average both of their hearts will be the same amount in their lifetimes. For an elephant, time moves fast. As we get older, humans heart rates beat slower so time feels to be moving faster as we get older.... I make this comment, because what I'm really trying to get at is experiences boils down to the individual having the experience and there's no "objective" reality. We are all experiencing a unique thing because only I know what it's like to be me and only YOU know what it's like to be you even if we have identical experiences, how we feel about them is different. We could experience the same thing and I could get great pleasure out of it and you could suffer a great deal of pain. So the argument about free will is as moot of a conversation as exotic colors. I guess it's fun to talk about, but unless we can FEEL it and EXPERIENCE it, it's not actually real. If FEELS like I have free will, so therefore it's real to me regardless if I'm wrong. I cannot be wrong, because how I feel is more real than anything. It's why education is so important and we try and help people escape ignorance. It's why religion fights so hard to invade your world view and change it. God isn't real unless you believe in God. God is super super super real to the a person with faith. It's super important to be mindful of competing ideas and which actually give people the best sense of happiness way more than actual stone cold hard facts. Facts don't make people happy, how people feel about those facts and how it informs them of themselves in relation to everything around them can bring them peace, and so facts can be harmful to one person and liberating to someone else and I think we sort of try and ignore the human element in math. How we feel about results in math is vastly more important than what it says.
🫡
Tldr
Interesting post. As for free will, I think people misunderstand what free will means in the context of men. I believe for us its an evolutionary and biological achievement. For other forces of nature it can be other things entirely and these can overlap. The universe ultimately appears to be infinitely granular (ie...random). Men are affected by this universal force but can also shape it fundamentally. I think this point is often missed or confused.
Ironically for men, true free will only becomes possible when he realizes that everything is possible. The purist form of free will is when an individual comes to the deep fundamental realization that everything is possible. When this realization is achieved, the free will of choice becomes the new foundation of our understanding of nature. Every choice then becomes an option with no boundaries or limitations. We become solely responsible for every choice we make from that moment forward. In the context of men, free will is actually just a realization, thats it, nothing more, nothing less. From this realization springs choice and interestingly, defines the force of infinity for what it truly is. Infinity is not a thing. Infinity is actually the open-endedness of all possible outcomes. Its not all possible outcomes. There is a difference.
The universe enables those who need enabling, and rewards those who do not need enabling. Pretty intelligent cookie of a universe. Satisfies both sides of the fence without pandering to one side or the other.
Glad to hear that! Your salary will be reduced by 99%. Thanks for understanding.
Neither strict determinism nor randomness can provide us with free will: If one thing is like going somewhere by train, the other is sitting within a boat which readomly moves here and there.
If free will exists, it - or some kind of "precursor" of it, maybe disguising itself as randomness - must be inherent.
Free will itself needs to be reconnected by the I fluences of the universe. Because if there is influence, the will wouldn't be free. But if that's the case the will doesn't exist in this universe, which cannot be the cases because the will need to interact with this universe. So far everything seems to be connected (like just usual standard model and so on)
That probably means I'm ultimately making my own decisions and choices that have some effect on my life both good and bad.
That being said, it's highly unrealistic to assume strict determinism as well, but I digress in the meantime.
Jury: "while it's impossible to know if he's guilty or not, based on your argument, we better throw him in a box and check in 5 years"
With Schrödinger's cat?
I guess
You are right. If prisons worked, the system would be demolishing them, not expanding them.
Predeterminism, the idea that all events are determined by preceding causes and that the future is fixed, faces significant challenges from modern scientific theories. Quantum mechanics introduces inherent indeterminacy at the subatomic level, where particles exist in states of probability until observed. This probabilistic nature contradicts the notion of a predetermined universe. Chaos theory further complicates the picture by showing that even small changes in initial conditions can lead to vastly different outcomes, a phenomenon known as the "butterfly effect," which implies that precise prediction is impossible.
Moreover, sensitivity to initial conditions in chaotic systems suggests that tiny variations can cause dramatic and unpredictable changes, undermining the idea of a fixed future. Additionally, the concept of retrocausality in some interpretations of quantum mechanics and the temporal symmetry in physical laws suggest that future events could influence the past, allowing for actions that effectively cancel out their own logical course
"if you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice"
Freewill by Rush c:1979
If we choose not to choose, we've made our choice. That's free will indeed
🐕💚🍕 I've made my choice now where's my beer 🍻😁🍻
@@TheSilverShadow17"If we choose not to decide, we still have made a choice." And your choice brothers and sisters should be to listen to Rush for all your therapy needs (and avoid those scam companies!).
@@MatthewStaton-z4s It was my first time hearing about Rush and yet I could relate to a greater extent than what those online therapy companies say.
@@jefferyharris4066 Go out and get some from a bar or store, they sell that stuff lol
I love how the theoretical framework for philosophical questions can be approached from the perspective of fundamental physics. Who knows what or when we will find the the final pieces of the puzzle, but for now, this kind of analysis is certainly one of the great tasks of humanity.
If the universe don't fit you must acquit!
You always have the choice to listen and be guided or not listen and be a lost soul in this world but as God's children we all have free will it's our birth Wright as his children to have and be born with free will period. ❤
Even if we do live in an eternal block universe, wouldn't there have been a first time for everything to happen, before everything was frozen. If so, wouldn’t we have free choice, then.
And, now, we are just watching it play out over and over...
The lesson from accepting determinism isn't to not punish crime, it's that sometimes restorative justice might be wholly more constructive to addressing it than punitive justice, because more than just people's personal character is involved in decision making. Or that things like reducing lead levels in the water supply might be better policy than trying to regulate religion or speech or whatever.
No, the lesson from accepting determinism (without going the compatiblism route) is that systems of justice are fairly meaningless. They exist for the same reason that the crime does: because that's how the physics says it has to happen. None of it matters. It isn't an excuse to not punish crime, because the punishment is just as deterministic as the crime is. All it's telling you is that it doesn't matter what you choose, because you will only ever choose one thing. There was never a reality where anything else happened.
But why should we accept determinism?
@@jordanledoux197and yet different systems of justice have vast different outcomes. That's something that's been measured over and over again.
@@AstralTraveler free will is incoherent, it's just pulling information out of nowhere. Even when QM seems to do it, it sums to 0.
You got my vote.
I hate better help, and I'm sure I'm not the only one. They are so scummy, i dislike the fact that this channel is sponsored by them.
30:21
_Quantum mechanics ... might just hold the keys of unlocking free will._
As far as we know, no. It unlocks true randomness. If a particle is in a status of having, say, spin +½ in x direction, there is no way to predict the outcome of spin measurement in z direction since spin +½ in x direction is a superposition of spin +½ and spin -½ in z direction.
However, the outcome is real random, snd randomness is not free will choice.
We have some kind of free will and control with some randomness mixed in..but probelm happens when we mistake with free will with a free choice. We have free will buy we doesn't have free choice we are like bloggers who can't be choosers.
And our attraction and aversion are totally based on our genetical programing and some nurture and environmental programing. So complete free will is lie. Like how you forced me to comment on your video it's not my free will.
I’m glad it was predetermined that I’d enjoy this video.
Good point 👉😂
i've had this personal joke recently where anytime someone asks why: "anything" happened or why did i do something, i just say because entropy. 😂
The day made ❤
Heyyy 53:36 you finally get around to addressing something you've been recklessly ignoring for almost an hour, the dominant position on free will across all of philosophical history... oh, but only one second further in and you've already fucked it up: compatibilism was neither invented by Hume and Hobbes (plenty of Medieval and even Classical philosophers have supported some variety of it), nor is their variety of it at all representative of the contemporary thinking on the topic, which is wholly unlike theirs.
Time is illusory, just like space, solidity and everything else besides Pure Consciousness. What people call 'movement' is an illusion. Nothing ever truly moves, every moment is like a frame in a television show. When you watch a television show, it looks like you're seeing moving images, but the images you are seeing are not moving at all. You are seeing one frozen image after another in rapid succession, so it looks as though you are seeing moving images (even though you're not). Time is like that. Every moment in our lives is like a frozen image, an eternity of its own. And it is possible to both 'rewind' and 'fast-forward' these frozen images - this is known as 'time travel'.
Everyone is Pure Consciousness, which is infinite and eternal, experiencing life in a temporary human form. You can call Pure Consciousness 'God' if you want, but I don't, because the word 'God' has limiting religious connotations that I would rather avoid. Pure Consciousness has free will, but when it assumes temporary human forms (which are us), it experiences predetermined lives. Everything you experience in your life (right down to the most trivial details) was chosen by your true self, Pure Consciousness. Even when some guy on the street punches you in the face. You chose to be punched in the face for whatever reason. I know this is hard to accept. I genuinely do. But it's true all the same. So at the physical level of 'reality', there is no free will. But at the most fundamental level of 'reality', there IS free will.
Great video. I've always suspected that free will doesn't exist, but that the illusion of free will does exist. And maybe that's fine.
Why would it exist to us? That's the question you need to ask
Philosophy shouldn't be used with physics in this sense, but I get you
Hm
I think the bigger question is: what even IS free will?
like... think about it... is there a concrete definition of it... one that doesn't demand further questions...
it's one of those questions that fries your brain if you think about it too long
Call when you break down the individual Words Free and will and get the individual definitions then it's obvious to see that it doesn't exist because you have limited Universal potentiality that you can choose from and it matters not your choices because all of the choices are pre-programmed to send you in the same direction regardless of your choice so it doesn't really matter about the end outcome... just as objective reality doesn't exist everything we have here is a shared subjective reality and that is the best we have for in order to have objective reality you need to have an observer that exists from the beginning of time all the way to the end of time and even if such hypothetical Observer exists the End of Time hasn't came yet so therefore everything is strictly subjective here and objective reality fundamentally cannot exist...
Yes, this is the first question that needs to be answered, and most philosophers for most of history have answered that free will, properly analyzed, has nothing to do with whether or not determinism is true. Or rather, if anything, it *depends* on determinism being adequately close to true, because the randomness of indeterminism is a much greater threat to freedom.
free will has no area of dispute with determinism. free will is merely the observation that whatever you consider your "self" to be is the thing in control of your behavior. if that self is the sum of all variables that preceded it, or if it somehow wills itself into existence, it makes no difference. this is not a debate between free will and determinism. it's a debate between fatalism and non-fatalism, or alternatively a very low-level application of determinism vs a version of determinism that wasn't conceived of by a child with only enough scientific knowledge to know that science is most often composed of statements that are true, and nothing else. they think that because the universe operates as if it were running on a program, that everything must be hardcoded from the start, when the truth is that dynamic code is far more common within the universe than they give it credit.
True free will doesn't exist, it literally can't. To decide what to think of next, you'd have to know all of the possible things to think of, be able to make a choice, and THEN think it. It's a paradox, and true free will CAN'T exist.
@@pnut3844able if this is satire, it's hilarious.
This was so well done, I've watched everything you guys have produced, some videos more than once, and I have enjoyed and learned so much. I don't know why you don't have millions of subscribers, but I for one really appreciate the hard work and consistent excellence. I love the choice of content, the imagery, the long form presentation, and even the narrator's voice! I hope all is well with you and yours, I look forward to more of your work, take care
Such a exciting videos of this Chanel. But voice and music in background always make you yaun and put you in sleep. I want this video stimulate me insted of puting us in sleep. I need strong dose of caffeine and red bull if I want to finish this videos watching fully without yauning and feeling sleepy.
To believe in free will is to assume such powers of agency as to constitute a true _first cause,_ in defiance of causality itself. Obviously we're nothing so unnatural as walking causality violations. Also remember Godel's incompleteness theorem, and that there's a key distinction between information that is indeterminable insofar as being unavailable, in contrast to being truly indeterminate - acausal determinants being a contradiction in terms.
A favourite example here is that of a split-brain patient, after severance of the corpus callosum as drastic but effective therapy for life-threatening seizures; in examination following recovery, the patient, via stereo headphones, was asked into one ear to take a sip from the glass of water on the desk before her. Having complied, the question was then put to the opposite ear of why she'd performed this action, replying "because i was thirsty".. a perfectly plausible posteriori rationalisation.. and all that free will can be.
Popper would remind us that an intrinsically unfalsifiable hypothesis isn't even strictly scientific. But as far as illusions go it's a perfectly agreeable one, and more importantly we still need to be held accountable for our actions, and protect society from those who do not, hence this realisation of what free will is and isn't has little more than philosophical bearing - there's nothing else to do but continue going along with it regardless, *the social imperative* certainly being no farce.
The best comment I have ever read
if free will is not being affected by anything other than yourself, couldnt reality in and of itself be considered free because nothing outside of reality even exists so reality is only affecting itself, i.e. free from outside influence because there is nothing outside of reality. following this line of thinking, couldn't this recursive, reflexive property of reality distribute or cascade down to observers like ourselves
Every moment is an opportunity to exert free will.
Hard disagree to it being little more than philosophy.
Accepting the absence of free will is the antidote to hate. It makes negligence obsolete. It makes punitive intent anathema. There is so much hatred in the world because we believe people are bad because they should have acted differently than they did and because we believe that they could have in that moment - not any other moment, but the one in which acted that way.
@@EndoExcision Yes, there's no loss from the realisation, and arguably higher ground in the spiritual submission to providence and destiny!
The belief in free will is actually a strong argument for its existence in some measure (in my opinion). A version of yourself that doesn't believe in free will will think and act differently than a version of yourself that does believe. The possible thoughts and actions of a mind that believes in free will is much more varied and unpredictable than a mind that doesn't. The laws of nature can't direct or predict how you create an abstract painting, what philosophies you will hold, what music you listen to, how you dream at night (if you dream), which groceries you buy at the store or even how you die. Of course the unpredictability varies from person to person based on their measure of awareness and mental structure--some people may be more deterministic than others. When we weigh decisions on our minds and hold to them, especially despite any struggles or obstacles we encounter because of them, our decisions go on to influence the quasi-deterministic aspects of our subconscious, giving us control of our tendencies. Many of our decisions have no rational or evolutionary reasoning to them, especially if we choose to believe in free will.
Edit: when we choose to believe or disbelieve in free will, we may be proclaiming our own capacity for experiencing free will.
No.
@@chudleyflusher7132 care to elaborate?
Babe! Wake up! Another History of The Universe vid just dropped!
Think everyone misses the true flaw with the cat experiment. .. it's, is the cat an observer? I would think it is. So, us opening a box is irrelevant. The outcome was already observed by the cat. We could try without a living object. But then is life the only observer able to produce an outcome.. if so then the universe was and wasnt until life was developed... which was and wasnt. Because how was the process of creation to life processed. Without an observer. So either the universe doesnt need observation to force an outcome or there is a godlike figure observing the universe. I think its more with light and time. If it can be observed then it has its state chosen. Not that it is observed. So the state of the cat is choosen the moment the bomb does or doesn't go off. Opening the box doesnt matter at all.
You've arrived at the proper conclusion but let me clarify a few points. The things that everyone misses about Schrödinger's thought experiment are that:
a) it was meant to show how absurd quantum physics is when combined with classical physics,
b) the universe doesn't "know" it is or isn't being observed. Observation simply means measurement - and we can only measure something by applying some force to it (even looking at a thing requires a photon to interact with that thing first). It's this application of force - an interaction between particles - that causes the wave function to collapse.
Amazing! Imagine Kurzgesagt (didn't check the spelling) made a video inspired by this in just two weeks!
:Edit for people interested - the video is called "Are you an NPC?" and was uploaded June 11th
And *they* fucking butchered the treatment of it too, just like this.
What all can't be said, must be passed over in silence.
🐕💚🍕it will all be said and done eventually 😎🤔🤠
Whoever wrote it is master of storytelling
Mr. David Kelley created the series and narrates. The scripts are written by some of the finest astrophysicists in the field.
Each episode is a _thrill!_
About us: The Entire History of the Universe (or History of the Universe) is a youtube channel with a simple, if ambitious aim: to tell the story of how our universe began, grew, and will grow for trillions of years to come.
Started by David Kelly, the joint creator behind History of the Earth and Voices of the Past (with his brother Pete Kelly, creator of History Time and the other “History Brother”), History of the Universe is based out of Spain. But David is English. Inspired by Cosmos and BBC´s long running Horizon series, our aim is to convey how wild our universe is on the largest and smallest scales, in a way that is understandable to anyone.
@@JohnnyNiteTrain seems about right! 👍
3 minutes. Blessed.
This was the most profound RUclips video of all time.
37:45
_... and you can follow classical physics to track its progress and predict its future behaviour._
No, not even close! You just located the particle in the place of one detector cell, having its momentary position for a point in time. At this point, the particle is in a superposition of _many different momenta_ which takes away the predictability. You didn't turn it into a classical particle since no such thing exists.
You literally say it yourself by mentioning Heisenbergs relation of uncertainty (a more precise translation of 'Unschärferelation').
the flaw in schroedingers cat is the assumption that you have to "open" the box.. .
"hey , you alive in there?"
"meow"
*quantum collapse*
also wrong that cat itself is not an "observer"
that would just be another way to observe the state of the cat
@@b.gizzlles”half the time” it isn’t there so it’s not a reliable observer. To be an observer means being able to observe all possible configurations without annihilation. I can’t observe my own death any more than the cat can.
It is meant as a thought experiment illustrating the concept of superposition, not as some foolproof measurement setup.
The flaw in Schrödinger's cat is thinking we have the ability to open the box and find out the "absolute truth"
Your channel never ceases to deliver excellence. I've been with you since the beginning and you never disappoint.
Same here.
Really makes your mind think
I love it, they really make you think
Control is an illusion. You will try anything to stay safe but shit just happens.
I mean hey, if I do something bad I only have myself to blame.
What does that have to do with free will or causal determinism?
Like I said. Control/ Free will is an illusion. Idas will come to your mind and you will do stuff. You can't control what comes into your mind. Think about it. It's all programed.
@@TheSilverShadow17 you blame whatever put the idea to do something bad into your mind. It sure wasn't you.
@@TheSilverShadow17 like I said. Control /Free will is an illusion. Ideas will come in your mind and you will do stuff. You can't control the way you think. it's all programed for you. If You can't control if you going to wake up tomorrow. What makes you think you can control the decisions you make. You just going to make a decision because you was programed to make that decision. Free will is not a thing.
Na, ppl are surprisingly predictable. This has never been more evident than now with so many ppl connected by the internet. Ppl behave like a wave, one that can be predicted. Content creators take advantage of this fact by causing millions of ppl to watch their videos. They pretty much have it down to a science. Some creators are just better at it than others. Same thing with trends. More trends than you think are purposely triggered and that’s with our rudimentary understanding of human behavior. Ppl that understand how this works continues to get better and better at it. Same principle applies to advertisement, elections, popular music, you name it. I swear it’s like ppl genuinely don’t think for themselves anymore, or maybe they never did. As different as we all may seem, we’re pretty much identical.
People are easy to predict, but you can't predict what all the people will do every time. Group averages are easy, but individuals are a bit harder to predict but not impossible.
People are predictable at times and with certain things, but we're FAR too complex to say we're identical lmao
Have too warn you all about better help that sells your data including chats with your therapist to companies. No hate for the sponsor but I think people should know that.
I listen episodes from the is channel every night when I got to bed. Absolutely love the narrator.
💫🙏
Sorry. Misread the title. I thought it said free wifi.
*gives us an existential crisis*
"This video is sponsored by BetterHelp!"
The perfect marketing scheme
By a shady company
My favorite type of scenario right there. An existential crisis to make my day better.
These guys put out some kick ass episodes.
So much for many worlds interpretation of multi verse theory.
Butterfly effect, add one molecule at the formation and youll upset the entire timeline.
If all big bangs are the same , like type 1a , then every universe us completely identical in every way.
Lol.
Where was my free will before my birth
I like to imagine my ethereal self made a choice as well. When asked if it would like to play a round of the divine game of life, I responded “let’s do it!” Maybe it happened, maybe it didn’t, but believing the former took place gives me a better outlook. It gives me a sense of autonomy and confidence. Which is better than feeling like I had no choice and I’m stuck here.
@@ellemiles934 devine! Definitely not.
Life isn't rainbows and unicorns for every one
I actually think about stuff like this all the time, and it completely transformed how I see “bad” people. If you were born as them, you would have the exact same thoughts and do the same things by definition. They didn’t choose to be themself, therefore, it’s not their fault.
We should discourage harmful actions, but we should also understand that they didn’t choose to be this way. Therefore, it is completely unethical and unproductive to punish “bad” people for the sole sake of retribution.
We are really behind on how we handle people we don’t like. They need to suffer after all, because you suffered because of them, regardless of if it would make the world a better place or not. It just feels right.
We don’t like to think of these people as human, and we like to believe we have free will. It’s like we’re hardwired to think this way, since it makes us feel better about our existence. I just hope we will come around someday.
The problem is that if one is fated to commit a crime, one would also be fated to be imprisoned.
15:34 "If causal determinism is true, then free will is an illusion" -- this, this right here, this is where you fucked up, and I called it before even hitting play. You are just assuming an incoherent analysis of the very concept of free will, without even trying to give an argument for it.
What? His reasoning seems logical to me. Or do you think that free will and determinism can coexist? I think they cannot, because if your will is determined, it isn't free
To give my honest answer, I truly have zero clue if the universe is deterministic or non-deterministic because we have no hard evidence or proof thus far. As stupid as this comment is, I chose to write it down just because.
@@heinrich6294 It's called compatibilism, it's been the dominant position of professional philosophers on this topic for most of history, look it up.
Thank you for these videos.
30:18 of course, quantum woo to the rescue! /s Tell me, given an indeterministic interpretation of quantum theory, does every single electron have "free will"? No? But they're intedeterministic (we've stipulated)! So why not? What is missing? Maybe... just maybe... you have no fucking clue what free will even is, and that leads you to this absurd conclusion?
Having read 'Think' by Simon Blackburn recently, this video was treat for me. Wonderful presentation and story telling.
Every decision you make is reaction based on a past experience that happened to you. Plus to believe that your decisions has any sort of significant impact on the entire universe is very egocentric.
I agree, but I don't think most people think their actions will have a significant impact on the universe lol
Then again, I've made mistakes and bad decisions but at least I know that I'm the one bearing the responsibility for them, as it was I who did that. No-one else.
I've watched every video this team has released (more than once), can anybody suggest more channels that have great storytelling like this? Thanks
The narrator also has a few other channels, such as Voices of the Past and History of Humankind, also History of the Earth
@@Lu-nj9ec yeah watched them all lol thanks though
@colbyr7811 haha, well then, I would recommend Cool Worlds (also calm narrator, long physics videos). For some more existential stuff, check out Aperture
@@colbyr7811***The Why Files***... or, if u like kinda paranormal stuff, ***The InBetween***...
VSauce is kinda similar, though you probably know it too :))
This makes me feel better about all the stupid decisions I made. It wasn't me.
That doesn't mean you didn't make those stupid decisions, or that you have no burden of self-evaluation and change. The key difference between us and other animals is that we are capable of such complex self-analysis, and our survival as a species is dependent on our using it.
@@robinpage2730first off, that's exactly what it means. Secondly, what you said about us and other animals is just something you pulled out of your ass.
I've made some pretty dumb decisions in my lifetime but I know that I ultimately made them myself, and many of which I regret. Everyone makes mistakes no matter how much of a goody 2 shoes one is. Mistakes are unavoidable period.
@@TheSilverShadow17 no, you didn't choose anything
@@pnut3844able Yes I did
Anyone else read the book DETERMINED by Robert M Sapolsky? Really great and compelling book on this topic.
My 1 year old child discovered that pushing a ball makes it roll. Now he thinks he controlls his universe.
"You can choose a ready guide in some celestial voice
If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice
You can choose from phantom fears and kindness that can kill
I will choose a path that's clear, I will choose freewill"
You won't choose anything
I'll admit that I made a lot of bad choices, but that's because I ultimately did all of that myself. I regret my mistakes, but can't avoid them either way. There's always another chance that another mistake will be made regardless.
The thing is, that I have chosen a lot of things and made decisions on my own behalf. There's nobody or nothing out there telling me I'm not.
Simple answer:
Yes. I chose to come and say this.
.... Or did you?
you chose to come and say this but you could not choose wanting to choose that. you are bound to doing only what you want, if you want to do another thing instead then you will have to want to do the other thing instead more and want to not do the other thing. all along the way your wants were what they were at each particular moment causing you to make a choice. say you would want to choose to want a different thing. then you will want to want to choose a different thing. there will always be one want that precedes which you will never have control over. thus freewill cannot exist
@@amir3515 I choose to nod in agreement.
😆
No you didn’t.
Prefacing this with "simple answer" is pretty funny.
Even though free will is a delusion, we can hold to account because we have no free will to not hold them to account.
Free Will must exist or nothing can exist. Thats not the delusion, its the thinking that Free Will is freely attainable without the conscious use of the Will.
@@JoshPhoenix11 Rocks exist without free will. What scientology spin-off are you a member of?
@@Johnny_Shields Free Will means having the ability to be in charge of your own consciousness. To direct attention, to choose thought. Thats what I meant by not freely attainable without conscious use of the Will.
Meaning you're free to think about what you want, but unless you consciously, or deliberately make those thoughts and direct them where you want you're not necessarily utilizing Free Will and are open to mind control.
@@JoshPhoenix11 you just said a whole lot of nothing lmao
@@Johnny_Shields A lot of things exist without free will, but I think that personally we have the ability to make decisions and choices.
Belief doesn’t equal truth 😂
We’re just a bunch of fish under the water that don’t have the ability to comprehend what’s actually happening
🐟🐠🐡🎣
Quantum mechanics doesn’t mean free will exists. Just because the wave function collapses doesn’t mean we have any control over how it collapses. The universe may not be deterministic, but that doesn’t mean that humans can affect the results of fundamentally unpredictable processes.
I particularly enjoyed this one, nicely done.
Imagine sitting there in the courtroom listening to the defendant lawyer yapping on about why the origins of the Milky Way and the sun's nuclear fusion reaction explains why his victim is not guilty for a murder. Talk about grasping for straws xD
Might just be true though
At one point, I was heavily disturbed by the likelihood that all human actions could be deterministic.
I learned about Spinoza's philosophy and much about his life, albeit from secondary sources, and how his deterministic view actually led him to peace with his religious prosecutors because it was simply fate that they would prosecute him. Upon learning this, I understood that a deterministic view of the world did not have to be pessimistic or something that detracts from human meaning, but something that points us to a direction of absolute acceptance of life and of others. There is peace in accepting fate.
Amor fati.
"There is peace in accepting fate."
Even in that sentence you seem to imply a bit that there is some choice and that you made it to accept something. When I hear people that deny free will talk, they sooner or later contradict themselves because living like everything is determined is absurd.
Peace in accepting fate??? If you mean by that the acceptance of anything and everything, without discrimination, then perhaps you're right. It also means that goals are unnecessary, and that solving problems has no purpose.. We should simply sit on our laurels and accept whatever happens! True inner peace (?).
@@mysticone1798well done👏
@@mysticone1798 "We should simply sit on our laurels and accept whatever happens!"
That implies choice also which doesn't exist under determinism.
@@cyberfunk3793 Whether choice or not, it's the end result of determinism.
Pretty sure quantum theory negates this by being probabilistic....
Great video from one of my favorite channels. But please stop sponsorship with Better Help. They are scummy.
I think we have plenty of avenues to excuse bad behavior without invoking physics.
It would all come from some sort of physics
I think most of the people who claim to believe that free will doesn't exist would also claim to believe that consciousness doesn't exist, if they believed it were incompatible with materialism. I don't think any sane person could believe either thing, even if they say they do, think they should, and want to.
There is no link between free will and determining guilt in a court. People are prosecuted for their act and the prejudice resulting of said act.
It would be like having a machinist refusing to replace a defective piece because "it cannot be responsible of creating a failure, it has no free will!"
No one ever said to not punish criminals. This viewpoint merely allows some to be more empathic with said criminals, realizing that it's not their fault.
Your comparison does not make any sense, your reasoning neither, and also you entirely missed the point of the video. Congrats.
@@snarckys3063 It is appropriate. The original argument is that guilt is made upon intension through free will, and, by extension, without free will, no one would be guilty of anything.
What I am saying, is that there is no relation between guilt of an action and free will. (I could provide a more concrete example, but RUclips won't let it out)
If you can find a piece of machinery (which has no free will since it is an object) to be faulty and discard it because it is not doing something it is supposed to do, then you can also find someone guilty of doing something regardless of them having free will or not strictly through what they actually did.
This is not complicated at all, really.
@@pnut3844able "No one ever said to not punish criminals." Wrong.
Many religious people criticise atheism precisely on the basis that it, and I quote, "denies the free bestowed upon us by God."
Even in this comment section you can see plenty of people bringing this up in a way or another.
Also, even if it may help being "more empathic" towards said criminal, your point is not addressing the point the video was making in its analogy (where the accused is smiling, thinking he'd get away by demonstrating he had no free will).
I can choose to become a hateful jackass but that'll send me down the wrong path and end up bringing up self hatred in the process. I have the option to decide to do myself a favor to become better or risk losing it all for hellbent hatred.
This sort of science always makes me suicidal...like what's the damn point knowing all of this?
I exercised free will by turning this tripe off.
😂
@@stormysyndrome7043 And because of that, you've made the decision to do it on your own and not because something else told you to.
Compatibilism Is the stupidest position ever IMO. Either you have free will or the universe is causally deterministic
Most philosophers across most of history disagree vehemently. Either the universe is causally deterministic or it's not, but neither has anything to do with whether or not anybody has free will, because free will isn't about whether or not choices/actions/etc are determined at all, but the specifics of *how* they are determined.
@@Pfhorrest uh what? The specifics don't matter bc none of them are in your control.
The only sense in which anything can possibly be in anything’s control, and so the only possible sense that can be made of the very concept of control, is when the thing that is controlled (call it B) is limited in its possibilities by the thing that is controlling (call it A), despite any other influences to the contrary. That requires that an adequate degree of determinism be true, otherwise attempts at such limitation will just randomly fail; but that it is A specifically that determines B, rather than something else, otherwise A cannot be said to control B.
When it comes to free will, as understood by contemporary compatibilists, what matters is a kind of *self-control* where what you do is controlled by what you think you should do, in contrast to situations where you think you should do one thing but find yourself doing another thing and wishing you wouldn’t but being unable to stop yourself and immediately regretting it. In that latter case, you lack free will; conversely, free will is the ability to prevent the latter kind of thing from happening.
It’s only when you have that ability that it does any good to tell you that you did right or wrong, or in other words, that you deserve to be praised or blamed, because if your thoughts about what you should do aren’t in control of what you do, changing your mind about what you should do is not only useless but possibly needless, because maybe you already agree but couldn’t control yourself! Deserving blame or praise is just what moral responsibility is, so this is precisely the sense of free will that moral responsibility hinges on.
And not only is determinism not a threat to it, but the right kind of determination is *necessary* for it.
Depends what free will is actually.
Depends. However I'm in control of my decisions and choices, to put it lightly.
The problem is that free will and responsibility are not the same thing. If you accept that we don’t have free will in this context, that normally means that you are essentially a meat robot, responding to a combination of internal and external stimulus, correct? If so, then a negative consequence can be a strong external stimulus to discourage the unwanted behaviour in the future, so punishment is still effective.
Accepting responsibility, and expressing and feeling genuine remorse can indicate a change in internal state that would result in different behaviour should the external stimulus occur again, with or without free will.
No one ever said not to punish criminals.
@@pnut3844able did you watch the video? The introduction’s premise was a court case where the defence lawyer said their client wasn’t responsible (which means they would not be punished).
@@thedave1771 yes, but that's just an example. The creator isn't saying not to punish anyone lmao.
You don't make any sense, and you are completely missing the point by trying to make a moral argument about the subject. That's not the point, quit being off topic.
I chose to leave a completely random comment here, and nobody asked me to. So here it is regardless. That's all from me.
Yes. but time does not exist beyond our understanding of it as a way to transverse this existence,
The past, present and future all exist, so it makes it predetermined, but at the same time, we made all of our choices at the instance of existence.
free wills true however the universe does push you in certain ways sometimes more than others when you go against it stuff never goes right. karma wouldnt have a job without free will lol universe will put u were ur meant to be tho
PSA DONT USE BETTER HELP unless you like scams
We are but biological machines doing what our atoms and molecule do under the laws of physics
Another fabulous episode by the brilliant Paul Sutter. Thank you.
Universe will allow free will until such time you piss the universe off. Then prepare for retribution.
" We record that which they send before (them), and that which they leave behind], and all things We have recorded with numbers (as a record) in a Clear Book (universal record)" (Quran: Yasin 12)
well after spending an hour writing an explanation, only to loose it all with a computer crash... all i will say is this.. the fact that consciousness evolved as a mechanism to affect probable outcomes in favour of the organism proves free will and disproves super determinism and pure causal determinism... just think it though...
Thanks
The planets go around the sun counterclockwise - you keep showing video of them going clockwise!
Depends on your point of view. All maps of the earth suffer from the same problem... They could have started with the first maps being inverted from what we have now.
@@veritas41photoour point of view , humans on earth
There isn't free will. Most of your life is determined by genetics. If you're a tall guy or pretty girl congratulations you won. If ur a sub5 guy sorry you lost.
Fair point about not controlling when we're born and all, but let's say by existing we pretty much control ourselves and think for ourselves.
Of course I have free will. I have no choice 😉
Given a choice between steak and chicken, surely it has been predetermined that I will have lasagna.
I can choose to care or not care, but since lasagna sounds like a decent choice I can pick steak.
DNA + Randomness != free will