Oct 162014
 

Kaku free will

As a philosopher who has educated himself on physics, I’d never try to argue physics with a physicist. That is, until such physicist moves from the realm of physics into the realm of philosophy! ūüėČ

Then it’s simply time to correct some huge mistakes, even if that means delving into the philosophy of physics itself¬†. The philosophy of physics¬†is different than the mathematics which, as a philosopher and not a physicist, I don’t¬†make¬†arguments against (e.g. I’ll assume accepted mathematics and experimentation are correct, and just delve into the philosophy of what such implies if so).

In other words, someone who is deemed an expert in their scientific field simply doesn’t mean that they are brilliant at everything they do. When it comes to quantum mechanics there is the physics involved, but there is also the interpretations OF the physics. Such interpretations tend to be seated smack dab in the middle of philosophy rather than physics. And this often makes even some of the most well educated physicists come to some poorly thought out philosophical conclusions.

In this article I’ll be criticizing Michio Kaku, a very popular and respected authority on theoretical physics. He’s been in a number of “Big Think” videos on a number of topics revolved around physics. The below video is 1¬†minute and 49 seconds long shot many years back (I believe in 2011), and in it Kaku decides to talk about “free will” – of course delving into philosophy and meta-physics from his own philosophical perspective that surrounds his understanding of¬†quantum mechanics. If you haven’t seen it please watch it here:

I do¬†hate to do this to Kaku, because he seems like a swell guy, but I’m going to pick apart this entire video¬†to see all of the problems spattered through a single 1 minute and 49 seconds of talking. Also to keep things in context. Continue reading »

Oct 152014
 

causal_point

Time and time again people express to me their feeling that if determinism is true and the “future is inevitable” due to this, that everything is “pointless”. ¬†That for some reason us being able to freely will a change in the future implies some sort of meaningfulness that an entirely causal universe doesn’t have.

This, however, is what is called a “non-sequitur” in philosophical terms. That means the conclusion (e.g. “everything is pointless”) doesn’t follow from the premises (e.g. the universe is deterministic, the future state is a causally inevitable, etc.).

Just because the universe is deterministic, doesn’t mean that¬†what we do is¬†futile. In this earlier infographic I stressed the differences between fatalism and determinism. Both fatalism and determinism are incompatible with free will, but only one has a reasoned foundation. And¬†only one is “futile” (meaning what we think, say, or do is pointless). In the infographic I made this comparison at the end:

fultility_compared-infographic

This distinction is extremely important. And it doesn’t just apply to “calling the doctor” but rather to the point of everything we think, say, and do…and how such actions causally lead to future outcomes. Rather than being “pointless”, our actions are very “pointed”. They are just causally pointed, which of course makes sense considering the absurdity of “uncaused pointedness”.

I’d also like to list a few common non-sequiturs (conclusions that don’t follow from determinism): Continue reading »

Oct 012014
 

I’ve been seeing the confusion between two different “no free will”¬†positions¬†crop up a lot recently – Determinism and Fatalism. Needless to say these aren’t the same thing. I created this InfoGraphic as a helpful tool to help crystallize the crux of the differences between these two lines of thought. ¬†If you find it helpful please share, spread around, or add it to your own site with a link back. Thanks – ‘Trick Slattery

DETERMINISM-VS-FATALISM-infographic¬†If you liked this InfoGraphic and found it useful, please download and share it on your website (please link back to the original), on social media, email, etc. There is also a Dutch version here:¬†Determinisme vs. Fatalisme InfoGraphic (DUTCH) Continue reading »

Aug 202014
 

Free Will Illusion Fairy

Naturalism is the belief that nothing exists outside of the natural world. ¬†Many people denote that if naturalism is true (which I believe is the case) that the laws that govern the universe are what make everything happen. That everything which happens in the universe is a physical play out through time. And that means everything single thing, including our conscious thought and decision-making. That these happenings aren’t some magical exceptions to the physics of the universe. In such a natural universe, things such as “free will” just don’t make sense. If our decisions are tied to the physical processes of the universe, then we only have a say in them in so far as the physical processes output what we will say about them. In other words, what we think, feel, say, and do are all an output of how the universe is playing out (both large scale and small scale processes).

And even if we accept that some events don’t have a cause (e.g. certain interpretations of quantum mechanics), those un-caused events are just part of the physical process that¬†we still have no control over.

Though I agree with such analysis for various reasons, I think the incoherence of free will has a much wider reach. In other words, we don’t have to accept a naturalistic worldview to understand that free will doesn’t make any sense what-so-ever.

We just need to understand that an event (something “happening”) must either have a cause (be an output of something that already exists), or not have a cause (just happen – not the output of anything in existence). These are the only two possibilities for events. Not just “naturalistic” events, but any event. A so-called “supernatural” event simply can’t escape this dichotomy. Continue reading »

Jun 102014
 

What do you mean I don’t deserve what¬†I’ve worked hard for!

I mean you don’t deserve¬†it any more than anyone else.

I worked hard for it. Of course I deserve it.

One doesn’t follow from the other.

Of course it does. Someone who didn’t work for it¬†wouldn’t ¬†deserve it. I did work for it!

They couldn’t have, of their own accord, worked for¬†it, and you couldn’t have not worked¬†for it.

Why couldn’t they have? And why couldn’t I have not?

Because causal events have led them and you to the only possibility. And if there did happen to be another possibility due to non-causal events, those would be entirely out of  theirs and your control anyway. There is no free will.

Fine, let’s assume that’s the case. So?

So basically you are saying that you deserve X quality of life because you worked hard for it, while another person doesn’t deserve X quality of life, because they did not work hard for it (they deserve Y, not X). X being a better quality of life than Y.

You better believe it. I put my hard work, sweat, and time into obtaining X quality of life. If they had as well, they’d deserve X quality of life as well.

But again, they couldn’t have and you couldn’t have not.

Fine, then they couldn’t have X and I couldn’t not have X as well.

That doesn’t mean you deserve X over them. It just means that you have X¬†and they don’t.

What, do you think – I should give them half of X even though they didn’t work for it?

I didn’t say that.

It’s implied in saying I don’t deserve X over them.

No, it’s implied that you don’t deserve X over them, not that you should give them half of X.

Wouldn’t it be unfair for me not to give them half of X if they deserved it just as much as I do? Continue reading »

Jun 082014
 

Only a few¬†hours left for downloading the most awesome kindle book everrr! ….on topic of (the lack of) free will! Breaking the Free Will Illusion for the Betterment of Humankind!

Hurry up, at midnight tonight the launch promotion ends! Of course it’ll still be way worth the few bucks when it does end, but hey…why not grab it now absolutely free? And if you like it or learn something new, or if it just gives you some “food for thought” I’d love it if you gave me a Kindle review. It is new and could use some causal support!

Click on a link below and get your FREE awesomeness today!

DOWNLOAD FREE BOOK

AMAZON.COM -USA

AMAZON.CA РCanada

AMAZON.CO.UK РUnited Kingdom

AMAZON.DE РGermany

AMAZON.FR РFrance

AMAZON.CO.JP РJapan

AMAZON.IN РIndia

AMAZON.IT РItaly

AMAZON.ES РSpain

AMAZON.COM.BR РBrazil

AMAZON.COM.MX РMexico

AMAZON.COM.AU РAustralia

Jun 052014
 

Though I wrote a book arguing against free will, I just came up with the mechanism that allows free will! It’s so simple:

Free_Will_The_Mechanism-INFOGRAPHIC

If you like this infographic please share it around. Educate people on the mechanism that allows free will. First the available options you think about get sucked up and taken to the system which is outside of space and time (of course). They then get thoroughly spun in the contradiction mixer, confusing any contradictory thoughts. Then, of course, they get pulled into a large box of ¬†magic dust where they sit for around a year (though since they are outside of space and time, to willer this happens almost instantaneously). ¬†This magic dusts gives such it’s magical ability. It then goes through the tubes of nonsense and into the logic removal system which strips any need for logical consistency or identity. Then it goes to the free will decision injector which of course injects the freely willed decision back into the physical realm and into the brain of the person. There you have it, the free will mechanism. And since the infographic shows a picture of it, we can say it’s scientifically proven. Why not. ūüėČ

Have fun with this infographic. All I asked is you don’t change it.

And if you really really like this, you might want to check out the shirt with this mechanism on it!

Also, support my efforts and check out the book Breaking the Free Will Illusion for the Betterment of Humankind on Amazon Kindle today!

Thanks,

‘Trick