human perspective: the only good in this world
Posts tagged free will
Human Existence and Free Will as Universal Wave Structure in Space
Jul 10th
As a freshman student of WSM I am focusing on the topic of the title the next week or so:
http://www.spaceandmotion.com/Philosophy-Free-Will-Determinism.htm
Wave Structure of Matter describes a finite universe in an infinite space, which is a medium for the transmission of energy by quantum wave-dynamic, as the fundamental structure of all matter. All matter everywhere in infinite space has a finite spherical universe around it, which determines it directly, with radius, R. All matter is always in the exact center of its own finite spherical universe. This is called the Hubble Universe. For every clump of matter less than R distant from each other, their Hubble universes overlap incompletely but when they are beyond R distant from each other, their Hubble universes do not overlap. The significance of this follows …
Within every Hubble universe matter reciprocally determines the nature of all other matter because they mutually reverberate (fundamentally as actual standing waves) in (infinite) space as 3-D matrices consisting of 3-D points (each analogized as a quantum particle) each point being where many quantum energy waves each originating in all other such points along the path of its transmission, all moving at the speed of light in all directions in infinite space, cross each other … in this way all matter sharing some of their Hubble universe can “sense” each other.
Questions here for me 1) about the most fundamental relationship between the standing waves and moving waves, or is it an abstraction only? 2) What are the energy quantum wave transmissions (if any) under the horizon of light?
Some of this energy transfer is direct. Some of it is indirect. Transmission of energy through the wave structure of infinite space is minutely incomplete, as if there is a very slight spatial haze, which is the reason for the finiteness of Hubble universes. Clumps of matter in the infinite space are less visible to each other the closer the distance between them gets to a distance of R. They are blind to each other if they are further away from each other than R. However, a very small amount of directly invisible information does get through indirectly, both from beyond R and the shielded information closer than R.
… so I will more widely consider the historical philosophical questions of Free Will, Choice, Purpose, Morality and Human Existence and reconsider that mindstorm against the new question for me of finite information of the finite Hubble universe in the establishment of all existential energy (matter), being incomplete relative to the infinite information of WSM theory’s infinite space. The main question is whether this constitutes a non-deterministic window in general determinism.
I also want to hear Geoffrey Haselhurst’s position on the question of why the universe is mildly teleological (has purpose) against my view that it is only teleonomical (has only the appearance of purpose to us). I want to know if and how Geoff translates this appearance of human purpose into a characteristic of the fundamental structure of the universe. What is the relationship between free will, choice, and purpose, etc? How does Geoff differentiate between direct and indirect transmission of existential information? What is his view of the mind-world dichotomy?
Human Guilt
Sep 10th
On responsibility, free will, determinism, probability, technological singularity, artificial intelligence (and fit). … and in absence, meaning making, deconstructionism, noumenon, qualia, etc.
Have we overstayed our welcome on earth? Why do feel so guilty? Do you realize how popular a notion it is to say that what has gone wrong is humans’ fault because of our irresponsibility as shepherds of the earth? This sense of guilt is so unnecessary! It is simply mistaken, because it is very far from as simple as human guilt or incompetence. Can we really decide what we ought to do? Do we have free will?
Free will would be a myth based on such an incredible profusion of variables as soon as we try to use variables to analyze what is going to happen, and how to modulate our behavior, that it appears to us as if we can be a first cause of action. (primum movens – to move without having been moved by antecedents). Humans are not responsible for their actions because their behavior is for practical purposes fully deterministic, even if there may be a very small element of non-determinism at the quantum level. In other words, every individual has been conditioned to think and act the way it does.
It is the story that we have free will that makes it appear to us that we can freely make decisions. If we would concentrate our focus on the profusion of determinism on why we think and act the way we do, the free will story evaporates. It then becomes a matter of fit. We increasingly do not fit on the earth. We are deep into technological singularity.
TECHNOLOGICAL SINGULARITY: The technological singularity is the condition of technological complexification so fast and unpredictable, and artificial intelligence so much more intelligent than human minds, that humans cannot understand whatsoever what is happening.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technological_singularity
DETERMINISM: The philosophical doctrine that every state of affairs, including every human event, act, and decision is the inevitable consequence of antecedent states of affairs. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Determinism
INDETERMINISM: Indeterminism is a philosophical position that maintains that some form of determinism is incorrect: that there are events which do not correspond with determinism (and therefore are either uncaused, or caused in a manner that the corresponding form of determinism does not allow)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indeterminism
… MY NOTE: if there is indeterminism, this is probably small, and happens at the quantum level. If it is larger, as if in a leveraged dynamic in brain activity, then still: our image of existence in our mind and what is actually happening, are largely incompatible. We could not understand anyway, even in the slow primitive conditions before technology. That we can understand has from the very start been a shamanic story. Here especially the indeterminism and extreme insubstantiality of qualia vis a vis what is actually happening.
“Qualia” (pronounced /ˈkwɑːliə/), singular “quale” (pronounced /ˈkwɑːleɪ/, roughly KWAH-leh), from the Latin for “what sort” or “what kind,” is a term used in philosophy to describe the subjective quality of conscious experience. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qualia
PROBABILISM: the doctrine, introduced by the Skeptics, that certainty is impossible and that probability (complex statistical analysis) suffices to govern faith and practice. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Probabilism
We use probability to judge as closely as possible what is going to happen in the future. As you know the future remains unpredictable. Even if the world is fully deterministic, in the consideration of variables as in multivariate causality analysis, it is impossible to consider enough variables to predict the future. In other words the idea of considering the causal flow in terms of variables is moot anyway, because the variables we are capable of using are not representative. Furthermore, words cannot be representative.
FREE WILL raises the question whether, and in what sense, rational agents exercise control over their actions, decisions, choices. Addressing this question requires understanding the relationship between freedom and cause, and determining whether the laws of nature are causally deterministic. The various philosophical positions taken differ on whether all events are determined or not — determinism versus indeterminism — and also on whether freedom can coexist with determinism or not — compatibilism versus incompatibilism. So, for instance, ‘hard determinists’ argue that the universe is deterministic, and that this makes free will impossible.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_will
CONCLUSION
I have only barely touched these subjects here. But my conclusion after a lifetime of worrying over these issues, has been that to even start thinking conclusively as part as a complex organization is delusional. Logical thinking is always terribly incomplete. Civilized language is intrinsically delusional. It is a machine. It is an alien life form much more powerful than we are. We must slow it down, scale it down and shut it down.
To maintain that “man” is responsible for everything that is going wrong with the earth, is insane.
How Science Is Always Wrong
Mar 24th
Science, as it is now practiced, is intrinsically wrong for human life.
For those of you kneejerking that I am a thankless idiot for medical science having saved my life, let me say that it is very likely that science was instrumental in my cancer in the first place.
Scientific measurement is always wrong because we cannot measure the terrain and we cannot produce maps representative of the terrain – where the terrain is not some hypothetical ideal, but is always and everywhere chaotic (or random) * because it is always open. [This relates to both Gödel's incompleteness theorems and chaos theory.] Yet we are extremely compelled to measure everything because a mechanical evolutionary process chronically seduces each of us from birth to constantly go on measuring like crazy. We know this process euphemistically through nice catch phrases like economic growth, (technological) progress and personal development.
When we are compelled to measure we make maps of the terrain to measure, because we cannot measure the terrain. Making maps has evolved as constantly working at trying to find better ways to collectively measure experimentally in closed system. The story of science is that scientists reproduce certain measurements all over the world to collectively draw approximate maps of the terrain, which engineers and other relevant professionals can then take out of their bags at the right times, as they negotiate the terrain. I am indeed saying that this scientific method would, if humans would adopt a human-centered rational perspective, reveal itself to be blatantly delusional. I am saying further that the scientific method is perfectly rational from the perspective of the evolution of technology; that is as a prolific mechanism of technological evolution. What happens as we repeatedly apply the theory is that we chronically run into problems, because of the gross incompleteness of the variables to account for open currents of determination. Instead of questioning the intrinsic myopia of the scientific method, engineers now run back to the computer and plug in the new data to try and find more finely tuned theory more appropriate for the local conditions. But again, from other perspectives, “local conditions” also apply as myopic “closed system,” the engineers ignore the destructive consequences of the running of their machines.
It is twisted to ascribe progress to human “creativity” as some kind of first cause. It is just as delusional as to say gods created the universe. It is the robotic systematic correction in application of mathematical incompleteness and scientific error, that is the engine of the exponential acceleration of the change/evolution of technology, and certainly not human “ingenuity.” Humans are seduced to thinking from a machine perspective, a perspective conducive to the relentless evolution of the machine, with ultimately zero interest in human survival. Civilized humans ultimately don’t care about human survival. This is the amazing paradox. While bullshit stories about human creativity seduce human minds into “productivity” for the sake of human well-being on the one hand, at the same time bullshit stories about human guilt for all kinds of things gone wrong, as if humans have original free will, cause humans to regurgitate the phrase that humans don’t deserve to survive! Amazing!
*The established popular scientific wisdom is that there is order in the universe and it being orderly, with some kind of predictably pattern, it can be measured, and if we measure it, we can expand the order into the surrounding chaos. Rarely included in the mainstream currents of popular scientific wisdom is the notion that order can be measured only locally in space and time, in other words in closed system. To conduct its destructive business, science rejects the valid perspective that because of the open chronological connectedness of the universe, beyond the immediate short run/term, there is no order anywhere and that order is an illusion of the closed focus (closed in terms of variables, space and/or time) of our analysis and measurement.
Instead of actually being constructive on the whole, science merely stimulates change. Science certainly produces local order, but on the whole, in human existential terms, in a kind of delayed action, or potential energy (pressure) build-up it inevitably produces more extreme disorder.
