1141
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world 47 points 1 year ago

I was into a choose your own adventure books when I was a kid, there was one in particular that you are told in the beginning that there is a perfect ending but you can't get there by choice. There was no path in the book that got you to that page. You had to just decide to not follow the rules and turn to that page.

[-] Stamau123@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago

I think I remember that one, unless it's a reoccurring element in choose your own adventures. It was about ice cream and parallel universes or time travel or something right?

[-] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago

Had aliens in it. They were abducting sentients from all over to try to see if anyone knew how to get to space-paradise.

[-] WhiskyTangoFoxtrot@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

You need a starship to penetrate the barrier at the centre of the galaxy.

[-] moosetwin@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

It's not the book that OOP was thinking of, but you're probably thinking of Meanwhile by Jason Shiga.

[-] Stamau123@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

Yep, that's the one. Remember I picked it up in the library years ago because of the cover saying any path is correct. I remember If you open to the page not connected to anything it shows the main character riding a colossal squid with no context.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] betterdeadthanreddit@lemmy.world 41 points 1 year ago

A moment of silence please for all the text in this image that's been mangled by JPEG compression.



Thank you.

[-] lung@lemmy.world 40 points 1 year ago

To be unfunny:

The whole idea of a balls hitting each other universe went out the window when we hit the quantum era. We have had to adapt to a reality where matter is somehow a statistical phenomena, and the details are always hidden from us in one way or another. Entanglement is another confusing thing, and its super common - not just some rare phenomena in a lab, it's more of a fact of particle interaction

So our brains are somehow statisical-chemical-electric sugar powered supercomputers that have entangled state. And the brain actually stretches across the body, with various chemistry being produced throughout

In short, nobody has any idea how brains really work, it's way more elaborate than current AI. It's also likely impossible to fully simulate a brain - it would have to BE a brain

There's a separate question about the nature of randomness in the universe, but all we can know is that follows a normal distribution over time. It seems truly random from our point of view. Of course, who's to say if God likes to fudge the numbers a little

[-] soniquest@lemmy.studio 32 points 1 year ago

Yes, but none of that refutes the argument that we lack free will. The trillions of interactions leading up to an 'action' on our part can be random, determined, or some mixture - but they still 'cause' our next action, rather than our 'free will ' causing the action. If you believe in free will, you believe in a magical quality we possess which is somehow neither random (else it wouldnt be 'will') nor determined (else it wouldn't be 'free')

[-] damnson@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago

I personally find all discussion around free will annoying. Whether or not I have free will I still have to decide to do shit. I can’t just go on autopilot.

[-] soniquest@lemmy.studio 6 points 1 year ago

It only feels that way 😃 But yes, there's no escaping the feeling

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[-] corm@sopuli.xyz 19 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Ridiculous, this is like some facebook post from my religious uncle. Brains are quantum entangled with the body? Bro you don't even know what that means or that information is not preserved in entanglement

I almost want to ask for a source but I shutter to think what might be dredged up

[-] MossyFeathers@pawb.social 13 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

What? Every chemical reaction within every neuron is still governed by physics. Just because we don't understand how the physics works doesn't mean we get to throw physics out the window. Even then, even if we ignore the physical aspect of it, from a philosophical standpoint, you can easily argue that free will doesn't exist.

Let's say for a moment that I'm wanting to go get dinner somewhere, and as I'm walking there, I start to cross a street and get hit by a bus. I wake up and Death is laughing. Wiping tears from his eyes he says, "man, that'll never get old. Listen, I'll give you a second chance. I'll rewind time to the moment before you decided to cross the street without looking, and if you make it across, I'll leave you alone." I take the offer (who wouldn't), and time gets rewound. I'm now standing at the curb, getting ready to cross the street, with no memory of the events that transpired after I stepped off the curb. Will I try to cross the street again, or will I decide not to?

spoilerThe answer is that I'll cross the street again. Why? Time got rewound. I don't remember getting hit by the bus, nor do I remember talking to death. There's no reason for me to avoid the street because I have the exact same information I had the last time, so there's no way for me to come to a different conclusion about which path I should take. I wake up and Death is laughing.

Edit: how the fuck do spoilers work? They don't show up on liftoff

load more comments (8 replies)
[-] Zalack@startrek.website 10 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Looking past the technobabble...

The implications of quantum mechanics just reframes what it means to not have free will.

In classical physics, given the exact same setup you make the exact same choice every time.

In Quantum mechanics, given the same exact setup, you make the same choice some percentage of the time.

One is you being an automaton while the other is you being a flipped coin. Neither of those really feel like free will.

Except.

We are looking at this through a kind of implied metaphor that the brain is some mechanism, separate from "us" that we are forced to think "through'. That the mechanisms of the brain are somehow distorting or restricting what the underlying self can do.

But there is no deeper "self". We are the brain. We are the chemical cascade bouncing around through the neurons. We are the kinetic billiard balls of classical physics and the probability curves of quantum mechanics. It doesn't matter if the universe is deterministic and we would always have the same response to the same input or if it's statistical and we just have a baked "likelihood" of that response.

The way we respond or the biases that inform that likelihood is still us making a choice, because we are that underlying mechanism. Whether it's deterministic or not it's just an implementation detail of free will, not a counterargument.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] SolarNialamide@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

Cool so you have awareness of and/or control over the quantum particles that make up the baryons that make up the matter of your brain? No? Then you don't have free will.

[-] DrMango@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

Even just from a biological perspective the idea of free will is iffy.

Any decision you make today is influenced by a chain of decisions going back to the beginning of all decision making. Everything from what you had for breakfast to what your great grandfather had for breakfast to what tiktaalik had for breakfast has affected your own individual biology and internal chemistry to lead you to any choice you're about to make. Even locally there's so much going on in our bodies that we're not aware of and don't have control over and which are influenced by things we don't have control over that directs our daily lives in profound and complex ways.

The eminent Robert Sapolsky is able to put this idea into better terms than I am if anyone wants to peek into this area further.

load more comments (7 replies)
[-] chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com 21 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

From all the discussions I've read about Free Will, I'm convinced the term actually doesn't mean anything at all. What would a world with free will look like? What would a world without free will look like? How would a person with/without it behave? Would there be any tangible difference between them?

As far as I can tell, free will is supposed to be a property of a person, which may or may not have something to do with physics, either everybody has it or nobody has it, and nobody has a definition that would let them measure it (without reducing the question to a disagreement over semantics). I think that whether someone believes in free will is a trick question; you can't believe or disbelieve in a something that isn't even a real concept to begin with.

[-] HiddenLayer5@lemmy.ml 7 points 1 year ago

It's like the "are we living in a simulation" question. It's impossible to prove or disprove and ultimately does not affect our lives in any way that we can control. Just a thought experiment.

[-] rikudou@lemmings.world 5 points 1 year ago

It may be possible to prove if one day we can prove whether universe is or isn't deterministic.

[-] rikudou@lemmings.world 5 points 1 year ago

It can in theory be disproved - if we ever manage to prove that universe is deterministic, free will by definition cannot exist.

load more comments (11 replies)
[-] squaresinger@feddit.de 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

There are so many cases like that. For example, define intelligence. If you try to, you'll run in loops of equally undefined abstract concepts.

And that's basically what philosophy is about.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] RQG@lemmy.world 15 points 1 year ago

What is this from?

Gave me a chuckle.

[-] kaklerbitmap@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago
[-] CertifiedBlackGuy@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

A team has been dispatched to your location.

[-] cloudy1999@sh.itjust.works 10 points 1 year ago

Slams book shut in disgust

[-] EmoDuck@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 year ago

When I first played Life Is Strange I already knew about the choice at the end, but without context it didn't really mean much to me. I thought that over the course of the game I'd come to prefer one option over the other.

By the time the final mission started I was still very much on the fence, so I went and choose the third option: Closing the game and leaving it's characters in a limbo of uncertainty

[-] SasquatchBanana@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

Due to quantum mechanics, we know this is not true. There is a level of uncertainty and probability and the smallest level of our universe. The deterministic model of the universe has been put to rest a century ago.

[-] masterspace@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

There is a level of uncertainty and probability and the smallest level of our universe. The deterministic model of the universe has been put to rest a century ago.

This is true, what we instead have is a probabilistic model of the universe, which still obeys very clear statistical rules and probabilities, also seemingly leaving no room for free will.

A dice roll doesn't have more free will just because it's random.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

No. On average things are average. So while not everything can be fully predicted you don't usually need to. A laser, a transistor, a diode are all devices that depend on QM theories being true. We have lasers, we have screens, we have neat flashlights, we have computers. Just because we can't say everything doesn't mean we can say nothing. Every time your lungs fill it is only because vacuums are unlikely, not impossible just unlikely.

Uncertainty doesn't save free will, at most it sets limits to it.

[-] Bondrewd@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I think you are not getting it quite right. Those "low level" things are predetermined. Where you get the uncertainty is that there is always a bigger or smaller picture.

Determinism and uncertainty are both perfectly compatible with each other.

[-] jarfil@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)
  • if you agree to this hypothesis, turn to page 72 70% of the times
  • if you disagree, turn to page 72 40% of the times
  • if you're viewing this through polarized glasses, turn to page 72 80% of the times
  • if you're an electron, rotate 360° to page 72
[-] sneezycat@sopuli.xyz 4 points 1 year ago

Unless superdeterminism is true. But does it make a difference anyway? "Free will" is overrated.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] darkentries@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Oooooo You cannot go against nature Because when you do (Go against nature) It’s part of nature too

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] ICastFist@programming.dev 7 points 1 year ago

Pretty sure that "free will" is just our monkey brains attempting to rationalize what we mostly do based on instincts.

[-] KAMI_SM@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

For anyone who's skeptical about 'free will' being illusion, please read consider this book "Free Will" by Sam Harris, it will change allot.

Edit: there is another one, "Predictably Irrational". This does not deal with the matter directly but can help developing a opinion on the matter.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 05 Aug 2023
1141 points (100.0% liked)

internet funeral

6810 readers
147 users here now

ㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤart of the internet

What is this place?

!hmmm@lemmy.world with text and titles

• post obscure and surreal art with text

• nothing memetic, nothing boring

• unique textural art images

• Post only images or gifs (except for meta posts)

Guidlines

• no video posts are allowed

• No memes. Not even surreal ones. Post your memes on !surrealmemes@sh.itjust.works instead

• If your submission can be posted to !hmmm@lemmy.world (I.e. no text images), It should be posted there instead

This is a curated magazine. Post anything and everything. It will either stay up or be lost into the void.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS