Willpower depletion debunked

Stick to training related posts.

Moderators: Dux, seeahill

Post Reply
Yes, I'm drunk
Top
Posts: 2194
Joined: Tue Sep 07, 2010 8:57 am

Re: Willpower depletion debunked

Post by Yes, I'm drunk » Wed Sep 28, 2016 10:51 pm

buckethead wrote:If you don't think a squirrel has free will then stop with your "common sense" arguments and toss in some science. That is the worst null hypothesis I've seen. A Commodore 64 would pass that test if I put a chron job in
Not really. The computer is simply a conduit for something you've set in motion of your own free-will.

But I think the point I make about entropy is important, and relates to Libet's own criticism of his experiment: that being that his conclusions were only relevant to rapid, spontaneous movements, not decisions predicted to be performed days, weeks or months later.

Any argument as to free-will based on how the brain works is moot at the moment given our present inadequate understanding of the brain. If it's not a black box, then it's a very, very dark shade of grey.....

User avatar
Sangoma
Sergeant Commanding
Posts: 6470
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:16 pm
Contact:

Re: Willpower depletion debunked

Post by Sangoma » Wed Sep 28, 2016 10:52 pm

buckethead wrote: I have Penroses book in the mail.
Which one?
Image

User avatar
Sangoma
Sergeant Commanding
Posts: 6470
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:16 pm
Contact:

Re: Willpower depletion debunked

Post by Sangoma » Wed Sep 28, 2016 11:04 pm

Yes, I'm drunk wrote:From an entropic perspective, if I ran an experiment where I predict that I will do something very specific at a certain point in the future, and I do it, the chances of that thing happening randomly, and not because I choose to do it, is very small.

So, the null hypothesis here is: I have free-will, and because of that I am able to perform X event on Y date.

I don't see how that hypothesis could ever fail to be vindicated.
So, why would you do X on Y date? To prove a point of your experiment? The why did you run the experiment in the first place? How did you get into this topic at all? Why are you interested in this? There are myriads of interrelated causes that lead you to do X on Y date: from being born in a certain environment, to reading certain books, talking to certain people, etc., etc.,etc.... Unpredictable and untraceable chain of causes and effects ultimately leading to your X on Y.

Slightly tangential note: a lot of human behaviour is automated. Adolescence is a good example to illustrate this point. Automatic behaviour is the cornerstone of the Fourth Way movement organised by Gurdjieff about 100 years ago. He said couple of things that stuck with me. One - why is everyone so enamoured with predicting the future? It is easy to predict your future: in five years your life is going exactly like it is now. Unless you radically change something, which is unlikely without a teacher.
Image

Yes, I'm drunk
Top
Posts: 2194
Joined: Tue Sep 07, 2010 8:57 am

Re: Willpower depletion debunked

Post by Yes, I'm drunk » Wed Sep 28, 2016 11:41 pm

Sangoma wrote:...Unpredictable and untraceable chain of causes and effects ultimately leading to your X on Y.
They're neither "unpredictable and untraceable" when you've stated them in a prior hypothesis; whether they're down to chance or not is precisely why you assign a p-value and run your experiments.

Yes, I'm drunk
Top
Posts: 2194
Joined: Tue Sep 07, 2010 8:57 am

Re: Willpower depletion debunked

Post by Yes, I'm drunk » Thu Sep 29, 2016 12:08 am

Here's a paper that claims Libet failed to prove (or that he even disproved) his own hypothesis:

http://www.ucl.ac.uk/~uctytho/libet2.htm

If nothing else it goes to show how difficult it is to formulate good experiments on this subject.

User avatar
buckethead
Sergeant Commanding
Posts: 6631
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2005 6:25 pm
Location: The Rockies

Re: Willpower depletion debunked

Post by buckethead » Thu Sep 29, 2016 12:24 am

YID, again what cause does one base free will choices on? If none, then you have something no one has ever seen in the history of science. But please stop acting like this is non-issue

User avatar
Turdacious
Lifetime IGer
Posts: 20438
Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2005 6:54 am
Location: Upon the eternal throne of the great Republic of Turdistan

Re: Willpower depletion debunked

Post by Turdacious » Thu Sep 29, 2016 12:45 am

I answer that, Man has free-will: otherwise counsels, exhortations, commands, prohibitions, rewards, and punishments would be in vain. In order to make this evident, we must observe that some things act without judgment; as a stone moves downwards; and in like manner all things which lack knowledge. And some act from judgment, but not a free judgment; as brute animals. For the sheep, seeing the wolf, judges it a thing to be shunned, from a natural and not a free judgment, because it judges, not from reason, but from natural instinct. And the same thing is to be said of any judgment of brute animals. But man acts from judgment, because by his apprehensive power he judges that something should be avoided or sought. But because this judgment, in the case of some particular act, is not from a natural instinct, but from some act of comparison in the reason, therefore he acts from free judgment and retains the power of being inclined to various things. For reason in contingent matters may follow opposite courses, as we see in dialectic syllogisms and rhetorical arguments. Now particular operations are contingent, and therefore in such matters the judgment of reason may follow opposite courses, and is not determinate to one. And forasmuch as man is rational is it necessary that man have a free-will.
Aquinas gets to the heart of the matter-- free will is necessary for a just society.
"Liberalism is arbitrarily selective in its choice of whose dignity to champion." Adrian Vermeule

Blaidd Drwg
Lifetime IGer
Posts: 19077
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 5:39 pm

Re: Willpower depletion debunked

Post by Blaidd Drwg » Thu Sep 29, 2016 12:56 am

Turdacious wrote:
I answer that, Man has free-will: otherwise counsels, exhortations, commands, prohibitions, rewards, and punishments would be in vain. In order to make this evident, we must observe that some things act without judgment; as a stone moves downwards; and in like manner all things which lack knowledge. And some act from judgment, but not a free judgment; as brute animals. For the sheep, seeing the wolf, judges it a thing to be shunned, from a natural and not a free judgment, because it judges, not from reason, but from natural instinct. And the same thing is to be said of any judgment of brute animals. But man acts from judgment, because by his apprehensive power he judges that something should be avoided or sought. But because this judgment, in the case of some particular act, is not from a natural instinct, but from some act of comparison in the reason, therefore he acts from free judgment and retains the power of being inclined to various things. For reason in contingent matters may follow opposite courses, as we see in dialectic syllogisms and rhetorical arguments. Now particular operations are contingent, and therefore in such matters the judgment of reason may follow opposite courses, and is not determinate to one. And forasmuch as man is rational is it necessary that man have a free-will.
Aquinas gets to the heart of the matter-- free will is necessary for a just society.
Beer Jew's argument. Just because one thinks a thing (a bit of neuro-chemistry ) is prerequisite for another hoped for thing (a "just" society) does not imply anything useful as to the existence of either thing.
"He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that." JS Mill

User avatar
buckethead
Sergeant Commanding
Posts: 6631
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2005 6:25 pm
Location: The Rockies

Re: Willpower depletion debunked

Post by buckethead » Thu Sep 29, 2016 1:04 am

Yes, I'm drunk wrote:
buckethead wrote:If you don't think a squirrel has free will then stop with your "common sense" arguments and toss in some science. That is the worst null hypothesis I've seen. A Commodore 64 would pass that test if I put a chron job in
Not really. The computer is simply a conduit for something you've set in motion of your own free-will.

But I think the point I make about entropy is important, and relates to Libet's own criticism of his experiment: that being that his conclusions were only relevant to rapid, spontaneous movements, not decisions predicted to be performed days, weeks or months later.

Any argument as to free-will based on how the brain works is moot at the moment given our present inadequate understanding of the brain. If it's not a black box, then it's a very, very dark shade of grey.....
Your first point is again recursive and as for the lady point, you don't need any neuroscience for determinist arguments. Only cause and effect

User avatar
Turdacious
Lifetime IGer
Posts: 20438
Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2005 6:54 am
Location: Upon the eternal throne of the great Republic of Turdistan

Re: Willpower depletion debunked

Post by Turdacious » Thu Sep 29, 2016 1:27 am

Blaidd Drwg wrote:
Turdacious wrote:
I answer that, Man has free-will: otherwise counsels, exhortations, commands, prohibitions, rewards, and punishments would be in vain. In order to make this evident, we must observe that some things act without judgment; as a stone moves downwards; and in like manner all things which lack knowledge. And some act from judgment, but not a free judgment; as brute animals. For the sheep, seeing the wolf, judges it a thing to be shunned, from a natural and not a free judgment, because it judges, not from reason, but from natural instinct. And the same thing is to be said of any judgment of brute animals. But man acts from judgment, because by his apprehensive power he judges that something should be avoided or sought. But because this judgment, in the case of some particular act, is not from a natural instinct, but from some act of comparison in the reason, therefore he acts from free judgment and retains the power of being inclined to various things. For reason in contingent matters may follow opposite courses, as we see in dialectic syllogisms and rhetorical arguments. Now particular operations are contingent, and therefore in such matters the judgment of reason may follow opposite courses, and is not determinate to one. And forasmuch as man is rational is it necessary that man have a free-will.
Aquinas gets to the heart of the matter-- free will is necessary for a just society.
Beer Jew's argument. Just because one thinks a thing (a bit of neuro-chemistry ) is prerequisite for another hoped for thing (a "just" society) does not imply anything useful as to the existence of either thing.
Then I'll include your most relevant response to him:
Blaidd Drwg wrote:The fact our justice system works a certain way lends absolutely zero weight to whether or not Free Will as we conceptualize it does or does not exist.
The way you judge our justice system (as unfair in practice and inconsistent with it's stated principles) is by comparing it to it's stated principles. For the system to be unfair, free will is necessary-- otherwise it's just the natural order working the way it works and there's nothing wrong with it.
"Liberalism is arbitrarily selective in its choice of whose dignity to champion." Adrian Vermeule

Blaidd Drwg
Lifetime IGer
Posts: 19077
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 5:39 pm

Re: Willpower depletion debunked

Post by Blaidd Drwg » Thu Sep 29, 2016 2:00 am

Turdacious wrote:
Blaidd Drwg wrote:
Turdacious wrote:
I answer that, Man has free-will: otherwise counsels, exhortations, commands, prohibitions, rewards, and punishments would be in vain. In order to make this evident, we must observe that some things act without judgment; as a stone moves downwards; and in like manner all things which lack knowledge. And some act from judgment, but not a free judgment; as brute animals. For the sheep, seeing the wolf, judges it a thing to be shunned, from a natural and not a free judgment, because it judges, not from reason, but from natural instinct. And the same thing is to be said of any judgment of brute animals. But man acts from judgment, because by his apprehensive power he judges that something should be avoided or sought. But because this judgment, in the case of some particular act, is not from a natural instinct, but from some act of comparison in the reason, therefore he acts from free judgment and retains the power of being inclined to various things. For reason in contingent matters may follow opposite courses, as we see in dialectic syllogisms and rhetorical arguments. Now particular operations are contingent, and therefore in such matters the judgment of reason may follow opposite courses, and is not determinate to one. And forasmuch as man is rational is it necessary that man have a free-will.
Aquinas gets to the heart of the matter-- free will is necessary for a just society.
Beer Jew's argument. Just because one thinks a thing (a bit of neuro-chemistry ) is prerequisite for another hoped for thing (a "just" society) does not imply anything useful as to the existence of either thing.
Then I'll include your most relevant response to him:
Blaidd Drwg wrote:The fact our justice system works a certain way lends absolutely zero weight to whether or not Free Will as we conceptualize it does or does not exist.
The way you judge our justice system (as unfair in practice and inconsistent with it's stated principles) is by comparing it to it's stated principles. For the system to be unfair, free will is necessary-- otherwise it's just the natural order working the way it works and there's nothing wrong with it.
Are you talkin about the justice system or the existence of free will? Whatever my opinions on the former (you very obviously have no idea what they are) It says absolutely zero about the latter.

Not sure how much more dead nuts logical I can draw this for you. Wishing a thing to be a fact bears no weight in the argument. As SS and bux have amply stated, we'd all prefer that the classic conception of free will were true....so what?
"He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that." JS Mill

User avatar
Turdacious
Lifetime IGer
Posts: 20438
Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2005 6:54 am
Location: Upon the eternal throne of the great Republic of Turdistan

Re: Willpower depletion debunked

Post by Turdacious » Thu Sep 29, 2016 2:35 am

Blaidd Drwg wrote:
Turdacious wrote:
Blaidd Drwg wrote:
Turdacious wrote:
I answer that, Man has free-will: otherwise counsels, exhortations, commands, prohibitions, rewards, and punishments would be in vain. In order to make this evident, we must observe that some things act without judgment; as a stone moves downwards; and in like manner all things which lack knowledge. And some act from judgment, but not a free judgment; as brute animals. For the sheep, seeing the wolf, judges it a thing to be shunned, from a natural and not a free judgment, because it judges, not from reason, but from natural instinct. And the same thing is to be said of any judgment of brute animals. But man acts from judgment, because by his apprehensive power he judges that something should be avoided or sought. But because this judgment, in the case of some particular act, is not from a natural instinct, but from some act of comparison in the reason, therefore he acts from free judgment and retains the power of being inclined to various things. For reason in contingent matters may follow opposite courses, as we see in dialectic syllogisms and rhetorical arguments. Now particular operations are contingent, and therefore in such matters the judgment of reason may follow opposite courses, and is not determinate to one. And forasmuch as man is rational is it necessary that man have a free-will.
Aquinas gets to the heart of the matter-- free will is necessary for a just society.
Beer Jew's argument. Just because one thinks a thing (a bit of neuro-chemistry ) is prerequisite for another hoped for thing (a "just" society) does not imply anything useful as to the existence of either thing.
Then I'll include your most relevant response to him:
Blaidd Drwg wrote:The fact our justice system works a certain way lends absolutely zero weight to whether or not Free Will as we conceptualize it does or does not exist.
The way you judge our justice system (as unfair in practice and inconsistent with it's stated principles) is by comparing it to it's stated principles. For the system to be unfair, free will is necessary-- otherwise it's just the natural order working the way it works and there's nothing wrong with it.
Are you talkin about the justice system or the existence of free will? Whatever my opinions on the former (you very obviously have no idea what they are) It says absolutely zero about the latter.

Not sure how much more dead nuts logical I can draw this for you. Wishing a thing to be a fact bears no weight in the argument. As SS and bux have amply stated, we'd all prefer that the classic conception of free will were true....so what?
That's the point-- nobody proved the classic conception of free will, it's based on deductive logic. Free will is absolutely connected with justice because for an act to be wrong, a person has to know an act is wrong and choose to do it anyway. Props to all these scientists for discovering Averroes; no props to them for refusing to read the scientists who argued against him.
"Liberalism is arbitrarily selective in its choice of whose dignity to champion." Adrian Vermeule

Blaidd Drwg
Lifetime IGer
Posts: 19077
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 5:39 pm

Re: Willpower depletion debunked

Post by Blaidd Drwg » Thu Sep 29, 2016 2:55 am

You're so ridiculous.

Let's unpack this as the kids say.

No one ever proved the classic conception of free will. True. It's based on deductive but ultimately not fully informed logic. I'll grant you the first part.

The rest is utterly irrelevant

When looked for in actual scientific inquiry (not navel gazing with the ancients as is your wont) we cannot find evidence it exists and further, its very existence would tend to contravene many other well understood principles. So, we continue to look for it but the burden of proof has shifted more to the camp that argues in favor than the camp that argues against.

That's the end of the discussion. Mushy thought problems like justice and fairness and the role of individual responsibility is not part of the equation. Certainly as the picture fills out, there are implications for how we behave but those are neither necessary to the inquiry itself.

TL/DR

IMPLICATIONS OF THE EXISTENCE OF X ARE NOT RELEVANT TO THE QUESTION OF WHAT IT MEANS TO LIVE IN A WORLD WITH OR WITHOUT X.
"He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that." JS Mill

User avatar
buckethead
Sergeant Commanding
Posts: 6631
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2005 6:25 pm
Location: The Rockies

Re: Willpower depletion debunked

Post by buckethead » Thu Sep 29, 2016 3:00 am

Turdacious 1000 years ago wrote:Geocentricity is absolutely connected with justice because for an act to be wrong, a person has to know an act is wrong by God and choose to go against Him anyway. If earth is not the center of the universe then God does not exist and there is no wrong

User avatar
Sangoma
Sergeant Commanding
Posts: 6470
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:16 pm
Contact:

Re: Willpower depletion debunked

Post by Sangoma » Thu Sep 29, 2016 3:03 am

Yes, I'm drunk wrote:
Sangoma wrote:...Unpredictable and untraceable chain of causes and effects ultimately leading to your X on Y.
They're neither "unpredictable and untraceable" when you've stated them in a prior hypothesis; whether they're down to chance or not is precisely why you assign a p-value and run your experiments.
Simple reduction does not work in this case, because it doesn't take into account numerous causes that precede the hypothesis. Simple illustration: you want to spite me and do your X on the date Y - I am the reason you are doing it, not your free will. P-values are irrelevant here because this is exactly my point, that your action X is not due to chance, but due to myriads of causes that determine your decision to do it.
Image

User avatar
Turdacious
Lifetime IGer
Posts: 20438
Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2005 6:54 am
Location: Upon the eternal throne of the great Republic of Turdistan

Re: Willpower depletion debunked

Post by Turdacious » Thu Sep 29, 2016 3:05 am

buckethead wrote:
Turdacious 1000 years ago wrote:Geocentricity is absolutely connected with justice because for an act to be wrong, a person has to know an act is wrong by God and choose to go against Him anyway. If earth is not the center of the universe then God does not exist and there is no wrong
That's cute. Who opposed heliocentricism again? Oh yeah...

Re geocentricity-- viewing man as the center of universe i fair regarding inquiries into understanding man's responsibilities.

Pretty sad that you have to misrepresent historical thought so badly to make your point.
Last edited by Turdacious on Thu Sep 29, 2016 3:19 am, edited 3 times in total.
"Liberalism is arbitrarily selective in its choice of whose dignity to champion." Adrian Vermeule

User avatar
buckethead
Sergeant Commanding
Posts: 6631
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2005 6:25 pm
Location: The Rockies

Re: Willpower depletion debunked

Post by buckethead » Thu Sep 29, 2016 3:07 am

Yes, I'm drunk 1000 years ago wrote:of course the Sun goes around the earth. Walk outside and look. Idiots.

Oh, and don't even start with this "we're spinning" shit

User avatar
Turdacious
Lifetime IGer
Posts: 20438
Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2005 6:54 am
Location: Upon the eternal throne of the great Republic of Turdistan

Re: Willpower depletion debunked

Post by Turdacious » Thu Sep 29, 2016 3:13 am

Blaidd Drwg wrote:Mushy thought problems like justice and fairness and the role of individual responsibility is not part of the equation. Certainly as the picture fills out, there are implications for how we behave but those are neither necessary to the inquiry itself.
Per usual, you're missing the point-- justice, fairness, and the role of individual responsibility are the point.
"Liberalism is arbitrarily selective in its choice of whose dignity to champion." Adrian Vermeule

User avatar
buckethead
Sergeant Commanding
Posts: 6631
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2005 6:25 pm
Location: The Rockies

Re: Willpower depletion debunked

Post by buckethead » Thu Sep 29, 2016 3:13 am

Andy 1000 years ago wrote:Mario, can you change my username to Andy3

User avatar
Sangoma
Sergeant Commanding
Posts: 6470
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:16 pm
Contact:

Re: Willpower depletion debunked

Post by Sangoma » Thu Sep 29, 2016 3:17 am

The Lucretian swerve: The biological basis of human behavior and the criminal justice system
Many believe that the consequences of a society lacking free will would be disastrous. In contrast, I argue that we do not necessarily need to be pessimistic about confronting a world lacking free will. Indeed, it is quite possible that progress in some of the more vexing sociological problems may be better achieved once we clarify our thinking concerning the concepts of free will and fault. Certainly, crime is a problem that society has much difficulty dealing with, and in the United States we have the highest rate of incarceration in the world (40). For these and other reasons, surely it is inexcusable that in addressing these problems we continue to entertain this fallacious assumption concerning the most basic feature of human behavior.
Image

User avatar
buckethead
Sergeant Commanding
Posts: 6631
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2005 6:25 pm
Location: The Rockies

Re: Willpower depletion debunked

Post by buckethead » Thu Sep 29, 2016 3:21 am

Turdacious wrote:
Blaidd Drwg wrote:Mushy thought problems like justice and fairness and the role of individual responsibility is not part of the equation. Certainly as the picture fills out, there are implications for how we behave but those are neither necessary to the inquiry itself.
Per usual, you're missing the point-- justice, fairness, and the role of individual responsibility are the point.
How is he missing the point. The thread is about nature and biology period

User avatar
Turdacious
Lifetime IGer
Posts: 20438
Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2005 6:54 am
Location: Upon the eternal throne of the great Republic of Turdistan

Re: Willpower depletion debunked

Post by Turdacious » Thu Sep 29, 2016 3:28 am

Sangoma wrote:The Lucretian swerve: The biological basis of human behavior and the criminal justice system
Many believe that the consequences of a society lacking free will would be disastrous. In contrast, I argue that we do not necessarily need to be pessimistic about confronting a world lacking free will. Indeed, it is quite possible that progress in some of the more vexing sociological problems may be better achieved once we clarify our thinking concerning the concepts of free will and fault. Certainly, crime is a problem that society has much difficulty dealing with, and in the United States we have the highest rate of incarceration in the world (40). For these and other reasons, surely it is inexcusable that in addressing these problems we continue to entertain this fallacious assumption concerning the most basic feature of human behavior.
Pro tip-- when the only medieval philosopher you discuss is Occam, the paper is generally shit.
"Liberalism is arbitrarily selective in its choice of whose dignity to champion." Adrian Vermeule

User avatar
Turdacious
Lifetime IGer
Posts: 20438
Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2005 6:54 am
Location: Upon the eternal throne of the great Republic of Turdistan

Re: Willpower depletion debunked

Post by Turdacious » Thu Sep 29, 2016 3:29 am

buckethead wrote:
Turdacious wrote:
Blaidd Drwg wrote:Mushy thought problems like justice and fairness and the role of individual responsibility is not part of the equation. Certainly as the picture fills out, there are implications for how we behave but those are neither necessary to the inquiry itself.
Per usual, you're missing the point-- justice, fairness, and the role of individual responsibility are the point.
How is he missing the point. The thread is about nature and biology period
Silly me, I thought it was about will.

EDIT-- then BD took the thread down the Sam Harris rabbit hole. I don't generally agree with Harris, but with Hitchens gone he's one of the few on the topic worth listening to.
"Liberalism is arbitrarily selective in its choice of whose dignity to champion." Adrian Vermeule

Blaidd Drwg
Lifetime IGer
Posts: 19077
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 5:39 pm

Re: Willpower depletion debunked

Post by Blaidd Drwg » Thu Sep 29, 2016 3:44 am

I used to go back and forth as to whether you're even self aware enough to be embarrassed.
"He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that." JS Mill

User avatar
Turdacious
Lifetime IGer
Posts: 20438
Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2005 6:54 am
Location: Upon the eternal throne of the great Republic of Turdistan

Re: Willpower depletion debunked

Post by Turdacious » Thu Sep 29, 2016 3:49 am

Blaidd Drwg wrote:I used to go back and forth as to whether you're even self aware enough to be embarrassed.
Get your meds right and you'll come to the right conclusion.

But (slightly) more seriously-- you're at least seriously looking for answers to hard questions and I respect that.
"Liberalism is arbitrarily selective in its choice of whose dignity to champion." Adrian Vermeule

Post Reply