This guy gets it. It's all just a racket. We obviously possess free will. It's one thing to playact for the sake of these effete debates, and be the devil's advocate, to assert that there's no free will and it's all an illusion. Which of course is the only minimally plausible explanation, if you can even call it that, to account for all the 'free will' that we obviously, undeniably possess all the time every moment of our lives, even if consciousness itself is really not technically understood at all, and may never be. An illusion.... But some of these hacks, like Robert Sapolsky in particular, really want to milk it for all it's worth, and thus affect a brazenly defiant pose. Even when they're immediately reduced to self-contradiction of the most ignominious sort, when they insist that nevertheless, though we possess absolutely dead zero individual agency or free will of any kind, we have to 'try' to do good in the world just the same. And be more kind to the less fortunate, I think, because they had no control over their misfortune, even though we have no ability whatsoever ourselves to help them, because, you know... And we're supposed to swallow that. But Sapolsky knows that people yearn to believe there's no free will, because it's very soothing. Just like regular religion can be. And maybe he does too. And that on account of his intellectual high status, no one will call him on it, and decorum and civility will be closely maintained, and so we get all these bizarro, 'respectful' debates about the mere existence of something as baseline as our own so-called free will. Intellectual grifter extraordinaire Sam Harris being the exemplar of this loathsome practice. And that's really all it boils down to. Magical thinking, as well as a good dose of willful intellectual hustling, with an overlay of the barest, most minimal scientific authority/legitimacy backing it up, to make it all respectable, and keep the lonely, sycophantic general public in their place.....
@@Fnoalle I don't know how I do it, I just do. You should try it some time. Put the poser philosophy books down, and just embrace your obvious possession of free will, even though you want to be in the cool intellectual crowd so desperately. You're just being taken for a ride, or really you're taking yourself for one. Unless the whole thing is a big joke to you, but like I said you're so desperate to fit in, there's no absurdity you won't reject as long the intelligentsia is okay with it, and that's what it's really all about for you.
This was right on the money. Thank you for this well thought out commentary. I've always felt that the conclusions people draw from the assumption that we do or do not have free will aren't very accurate anyway. Choice doesn't have to be tied to responsibility, you can have one without the other.
@FOREVER TRAPPED I'm not so sure. In some places, like where I live.. what your child does is legally your responsibility. What your pet does is your responsibility. even though the choices they made were objectively theirs. And sometimes you are legally responsible in situations where there was no agency at all, like if a tree in your yard is hit by lightning and crashes into your neighbors fence. Responsibility isn't necessarily tied to choice. What you choose to do matters, and its a very convenient way to assign responsibility, which is something a society must do to function, but it isn't a 1 to 1 connection.
@FOREVER TRAPPED I'm not sure how you come to that conclusion? Slaves to what, the law? you can always buy a boat and live on the ocean. It's not law free, but it's pretty close.
@FOREVER TRAPPED I don't think that's true. I think it can feel that way, but depending on where you live there's still plenty of freedom. Responsibility isn't a punishment, its a gift. There is no freedom without responsibility. Choice , by its very nature, comes with consequences. That's a good thing, consequences are the things that cause change.
@FOREVER TRAPPED why do you feel the way you do? You're on the internet right now, expression your opinions freely. No one is stopping you. As as consequence of your choice, I've had a nice conversation and gotten something to think about, and that will change the way I see things. That's freedom, choice and consequence. There's plenty of good things in life to enjoy. When you look at the night sky do you look at the stars, or the black empty space between them? perspective can make a big difference.
I half-agree, I think the question of whether or not we have a truly free will is an interesting ontological question, but as social beings, the question always devolves into a semantic game about individual and social narratives.
Determinism is not about being able to tell the future, but about causality being fundamental in nature. So, why would determinism, or even superdeterminism for that matter, contradict the concept of free will? Hidden variables may be "known" in theory, but not in reality. It's true though that such philosophical fundamental issues should not prevent us from doing the right thing in life, whether free will is an illusion or not. Free will may in theory be untenable, but for human interaction, it does not matter. We always have a choice to act responsibly and caring for one another.
Hey. Interesting video. I have a question that you can answer with a new video:) If I am traveling with 0.8c to some place 1 light day away. My time went faster than those on earth. When I come back to earth. What will be the speed people from earth tell I me I went and what was the speed measured by me? How come distance and time contract/dilate, but we all agree that it took me X hours, while people on earth aged y days?... After half the time what is that we both agree on? People from earth will see me at the destination 1 day after i was there (this part I get), but the rest, I have no clue...
I wonder if there’s an equation to relate traveling near the speed of light compared to traveling at slow speeds. I don’t think everyone would say the same amount of time passed. There would be one time for you and one time for people on earth.
Your speed measured from your reference frame would be zero. The piece you are missing is the “come back to earth” part, that involves accelerating, and you changing your reference frame.
There really is no debate . Any decision you make is the only possible decision you could make, given everything that you are at that moment. All things being equal, that same decision would be made 100% of the time. Therefore free will is just not possible logically.
I feel it better reflects the direction I want to go artistically. I'm not just interested in what the science of sci-fi is, but why we find it interesting and what it can teach us about ourselves. Stories are how we make sense of the world and choose how to live our lives, and I want to use my channel to help people find better lives for themselves, not just be more distracting entertainment.
![VENEZUELA vs. ARGENTINA [1-1] | RESUMEN | ELIMINATORIAS SUDAMERICANAS | FECHA 9](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/SJfoPdeOPCQ/mqdefault.jpg)
This guy gets it. It's all just a racket. We obviously possess free will. It's one thing to playact for the sake of these effete debates, and be the devil's advocate, to assert that there's no free will and it's all an illusion. Which of course is the only minimally plausible explanation, if you can even call it that, to account for all the 'free will' that we obviously, undeniably possess all the time every moment of our lives, even if consciousness itself is really not technically understood at all, and may never be. An illusion.... But some of these hacks, like Robert Sapolsky in particular, really want to milk it for all it's worth, and thus affect a brazenly defiant pose. Even when they're immediately reduced to self-contradiction of the most ignominious sort, when they insist that nevertheless, though we possess absolutely dead zero individual agency or free will of any kind, we have to 'try' to do good in the world just the same. And be more kind to the less fortunate, I think, because they had no control over their misfortune, even though we have no ability whatsoever ourselves to help them, because, you know... And we're supposed to swallow that. But Sapolsky knows that people yearn to believe there's no free will, because it's very soothing. Just like regular religion can be. And maybe he does too. And that on account of his intellectual high status, no one will call him on it, and decorum and civility will be closely maintained, and so we get all these bizarro, 'respectful' debates about the mere existence of something as baseline as our own so-called free will. Intellectual grifter extraordinaire Sam Harris being the exemplar of this loathsome practice.
And that's really all it boils down to. Magical thinking, as well as a good dose of willful intellectual hustling, with an overlay of the barest, most minimal scientific authority/legitimacy backing it up, to make it all respectable, and keep the lonely, sycophantic general public in their place.....
How on Earth can you be at least somewhat familiar with philosophy and still say that "we obviously possess free will"?
@@Fnoalle I don't know how I do it, I just do. You should try it some time. Put the poser philosophy books down, and just embrace your obvious possession of free will, even though you want to be in the cool intellectual crowd so desperately. You're just being taken for a ride, or really you're taking yourself for one. Unless the whole thing is a big joke to you, but like I said you're so desperate to fit in, there's no absurdity you won't reject as long the intelligentsia is okay with it, and that's what it's really all about for you.
This was right on the money. Thank you for this well thought out commentary. I've always felt that the conclusions people draw from the assumption that we do or do not have free will aren't very accurate anyway. Choice doesn't have to be tied to responsibility, you can have one without the other.
@THE STRONG SURVIVES not sure what you're on about but it seems like you're having a good time.
@FOREVER TRAPPED I'm not so sure. In some places, like where I live.. what your child does is legally your responsibility.
What your pet does is your responsibility. even though the choices they made were objectively theirs. And sometimes you are legally responsible in situations where there was no agency at all, like if a tree in your yard is hit by lightning and crashes into your neighbors fence. Responsibility isn't necessarily tied to choice. What you choose to do matters, and its a very convenient way to assign responsibility, which is something a society must do to function, but it isn't a 1 to 1 connection.
@FOREVER TRAPPED I'm not sure how you come to that conclusion? Slaves to what, the law? you can always buy a boat and live on the ocean. It's not law free, but it's pretty close.
@FOREVER TRAPPED I don't think that's true. I think it can feel that way, but depending on where you live there's still plenty of freedom. Responsibility isn't a punishment, its a gift. There is no freedom without responsibility. Choice , by its very nature, comes with consequences. That's a good thing, consequences are the things that cause change.
@FOREVER TRAPPED why do you feel the way you do? You're on the internet right now, expression your opinions freely. No one is stopping you. As as consequence of your choice, I've had a nice conversation and gotten something to think about, and that will change the way I see things. That's freedom, choice and consequence. There's plenty of good things in life to enjoy. When you look at the night sky do you look at the stars, or the black empty space between them? perspective can make a big difference.
I half-agree, I think the question of whether or not we have a truly free will is an interesting ontological question, but as social beings, the question always devolves into a semantic game about individual and social narratives.
I'm quite fond of the idea that human consciousness neither is matter or energy thus it isn't bound to deterministic law of physics.
Everything is matter and energy.
Consciousness is probably a result of the patterns followed by matter and energy in our brains, so it would still be controlled by physics.
So you’re saying that nobody tries to prove free well. Could you imagine if someone proved or disproved it. Would it change anything? Lol.
Determinism is not about being able to tell the future, but about causality being fundamental in nature. So, why would determinism, or even superdeterminism for that matter, contradict the concept of free will? Hidden variables may be "known" in theory, but not in reality.
It's true though that such philosophical fundamental issues should not prevent us from doing the right thing in life, whether free will is an illusion or not. Free will may in theory be untenable, but for human interaction, it does not matter. We always have a choice to act responsibly and caring for one another.
Hey. Interesting video. I have a question that you can answer with a new video:) If I am traveling with 0.8c to some place 1 light day away. My time went faster than those on earth. When I come back to earth. What will be the speed people from earth tell I me I went and what was the speed measured by me? How come distance and time contract/dilate, but we all agree that it took me X hours, while people on earth aged y days?... After half the time what is that we both agree on? People from earth will see me at the destination 1 day after i was there (this part I get), but the rest, I have no clue...
I wonder if there’s an equation to relate traveling near the speed of light compared to traveling at slow speeds. I don’t think everyone would say the same amount of time passed. There would be one time for you and one time for people on earth.
Your speed measured from your reference frame would be zero. The piece you are missing is the “come back to earth” part, that involves accelerating, and you changing your reference frame.
Law of physics are not laws. They have only 7 digits precision. It’s statistics. Like normal distribution for example.
There really is no debate . Any decision you make is the only possible decision you could make, given everything that you are at that moment. All things being equal, that same decision would be made 100% of the time. Therefore free will is just not possible logically.
All you've proven here is that you haven't listened to the arguments of compatibilism.
Why did you change your channel name ?
I feel it better reflects the direction I want to go artistically. I'm not just interested in what the science of sci-fi is, but why we find it interesting and what it can teach us about ourselves. Stories are how we make sense of the world and choose how to live our lives, and I want to use my channel to help people find better lives for themselves, not just be more distracting entertainment.
@@chrishorst2124 Thank you for explaining. I'll support you to the end. I look forward to your channel's growth.