Free will - have we polled this?

[Skidoo]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Has an illusion of free will ever been observed?

[/ QUOTE ]
Yes. In a number of experiments.

Edit: For those of you not familiar with them, I'll summarize two...does this sort of thing make any of the 'no' responders feel any more ambivalent about their response?

1) When asked to sit in a chair and move one hand (either hand), right-handed individuals will choose to move their right hand 60% of the time. Transcranial stimulation (using a magnetic field on the exterior of the head) can induce these same people to 'choose' to move their left hand 80% of the time. In all cases, all subjects report that they were fully in control of their choice.

2) (less convincing, maybe). Subjects are instructed to look at a 'clock', and a point of their choosing, to move their hand. The time of movement is recorded, and the subject is then asked WHEN he made the decision to move his hand. The reported decision time always precedes the time of movement. HOWEVER...voluntary movements are always preceded by a preparatory electric potential in the nervous system...this potential is detected well BEFORE the subject reports that they decided to move. Hence, the conscious decision to move is, at a minimum, EXPERIENCED after the process has been set in motion.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not applicable.

Free will is not about being without material factors contributing to or influencing behavior, even unconsciously. Free will is the capacity to consciously determine to act a certain way in spite of such influences.

[keith123]

[ QUOTE ]
Free will is not about being without material factors contributing to or influencing behavior, even unconsciously. Free will is the capacity to consciously determine to act a certain way in spite of such influences.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why would a person act in spite of such influences if he had no desire to?

[arahant]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Has an illusion of free will ever been observed?

[/ QUOTE ]
Yes. In a number of experiments.

Edit: For those of you not familiar with them, I'll summarize two...does this sort of thing make any of the 'no' responders feel any more ambivalent about their response?

1) When asked to sit in a chair and move one hand (either hand), right-handed individuals will choose to move their right hand 60% of the time. Transcranial stimulation (using a magnetic field on the exterior of the head) can induce these same people to 'choose' to move their left hand 80% of the time. In all cases, all subjects report that they were fully in control of their choice.

2) (less convincing, maybe). Subjects are instructed to look at a 'clock', and a point of their choosing, to move their hand. The time of movement is recorded, and the subject is then asked WHEN he made the decision to move his hand. The reported decision time always precedes the time of movement. HOWEVER...voluntary movements are always preceded by a preparatory electric potential in the nervous system...this potential is detected well BEFORE the subject reports that they decided to move. Hence, the conscious decision to move is, at a minimum, EXPERIENCED after the process has been set in motion.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not applicable.

Free will is not about being without material factors contributing to or influencing behavior, even unconsciously. Free will is the capacity to consciously determine to act a certain way in spite of such influences.

[/ QUOTE ]

What are you talking about? You asked if the "illusion of free will" had been observed. Are you trying to say that people believing they freely chose to move their left hand when they were clearly forced to do so by an external factor isn't the 'illusion of free will'? What is your defintion of 'illusion of free will' here?

[Skidoo]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Free will is not about being without material factors contributing to or influencing behavior, even unconsciously. Free will is the capacity to consciously determine to act a certain way in spite of such influences.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why would a person act in spite of such influences if he had no desire to?

[/ QUOTE ]

Do people do that often? I'm not sure what you're getting at.

[Skidoo]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Has an illusion of free will ever been observed?

[/ QUOTE ]
Yes. In a number of experiments.

Edit: For those of you not familiar with them, I'll summarize two...does this sort of thing make any of the 'no' responders feel any more ambivalent about their response?

1) When asked to sit in a chair and move one hand (either hand), right-handed individuals will choose to move their right hand 60% of the time. Transcranial stimulation (using a magnetic field on the exterior of the head) can induce these same people to 'choose' to move their left hand 80% of the time. In all cases, all subjects report that they were fully in control of their choice.

2) (less convincing, maybe). Subjects are instructed to look at a 'clock', and a point of their choosing, to move their hand. The time of movement is recorded, and the subject is then asked WHEN he made the decision to move his hand. The reported decision time always precedes the time of movement. HOWEVER...voluntary movements are always preceded by a preparatory electric potential in the nervous system...this potential is detected well BEFORE the subject reports that they decided to move. Hence, the conscious decision to move is, at a minimum, EXPERIENCED after the process has been set in motion.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not applicable.

Free will is not about being without material factors contributing to or influencing behavior, even unconsciously. Free will is the capacity to consciously determine to act a certain way in spite of such influences.

[/ QUOTE ]

What are you talking about? You asked if the "illusion of free will" had been observed. Are you trying to say that people believing they freely chose to move their left hand when they were clearly forced to do so by an external factor isn't the 'illusion of free will'? What is your defintion of 'illusion of free will' here?

[/ QUOTE ]

The experiment does not show they were "forced" to do anything they were unable to choose to not do. Free will remained.

[keith123]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Free will is not about being without material factors contributing to or influencing behavior, even unconsciously. Free will is the capacity to consciously determine to act a certain way in spite of such influences.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why would a person act in spite of such influences if he had no desire to?

[/ QUOTE ]

Do people do that often? I'm not sure what you're getting at.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, never. People never act in a certain way despite their influences. Why would they?

[Skidoo]

[ QUOTE ]
People never act in a certain way despite their influences.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's a big negative to prove.

[keith123]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
People never act in a certain way despite their influences.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's a big negative to prove.

[/ QUOTE ]

well come up with one example where someone would. i would ask you why someone would do so, but the why is a determinant factor so i guess i can't ask that. you are saying there are at least some instances when our free will has an effect on our actions (most people believing in free will would claim that it has an effect on a great deal of our actions, and probably all of our important ones), that is that we act in a certain way when there is absolutely no reason to.

[Skidoo]

[ QUOTE ]
well come up with one example where someone would.

[/ QUOTE ]

Running a mile rather than having a quick couple of drinks in front of the TV is an example of someone acting despite their influences.

[keith123]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
well come up with one example where someone would.

[/ QUOTE ]

Running a mile rather than having a quick couple of drinks in front of the TV is an example of someone acting despite their influences.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ha. Of course not! You are influenced by your desire to stay in shape, look good, feel healthy, become speedier. The runner may have desired to sit and watch TV, but the desire to run was stronger.