There’s a difference between particles following their natural laws to create stars and planets and particles supposedly producing an illusion of free will because it supposedly benefits us. If our actions are predetermined then what benefits do the illusion of free will produce? Why even have consciousness in the first place? Why not direct us like automatons since that would be more efficient and productive?
Evolution doesn’t lead to the most efficient and productive outcome, it’s merely the name we have for the chain of mutations in cells which get reproduced and lead to changes in a group of organisms. As I’ve said they don’t need to be beneficial, the organisms with the change just need to reproduce more than those without it. Also as consciousness is an emergent property it is most likely the result of an incredibly large amount of mutations.
Ok, but that still doesn’t explain why the illusion of choice is better than than no illusion from a deterministic standpoint.
Also, it doesn’t make sense to say that properties can emerge from things in which those properties weren’t already present in some way. If consciousness can arise from a combination of particles then that implies that particles have mental properties, which I don’t think a materialist or a determinist would want to argue.
that still doesn’t explain why the illusion of choice is better than than no illusion from a deterministic standpoint.
It isn’t my opinion that the illusion is better or worse, but that it just is.
it doesn’t make sense to say that properties can emerge from things in which those properties weren’t already present in some way.
In the same way the property of being able play guitar isn’t a property of any of the cells in my body, it becomes possible when the brain, millions of sensory receptors, muscle fibers, neurons etc. are in a system together and interact with each other.
It is my belief that in the same way, consciousness and then free will occurs when all of the neurons in the brain get stimulated by external factors, and hormones, and so on in the body.
You haven’t provided a reason for the illusion of free will. If we can’t provide a good reason or explanation for something then that should be a red flag for us to reexamine our belief and why we think that is true.
The ability or instructions of how to play the guitar does need to be present in some way in the cells and everything else though. The particle has to “know” how to perform in concert with everything else in order to make music happen. One particle may just be one building block, or one piece of the puzzle, but it still has to know exactly what to do in its role in order to play a song, in the same way a particle “knows” how to obey all the laws of physics, and how to behave in every situation because they are innate in every particle.
There’s a difference between particles following their natural laws to create stars and planets and particles supposedly producing an illusion of free will because it supposedly benefits us. If our actions are predetermined then what benefits do the illusion of free will produce? Why even have consciousness in the first place? Why not direct us like automatons since that would be more efficient and productive?
Evolution doesn’t lead to the most efficient and productive outcome, it’s merely the name we have for the chain of mutations in cells which get reproduced and lead to changes in a group of organisms. As I’ve said they don’t need to be beneficial, the organisms with the change just need to reproduce more than those without it. Also as consciousness is an emergent property it is most likely the result of an incredibly large amount of mutations.
Ok, but that still doesn’t explain why the illusion of choice is better than than no illusion from a deterministic standpoint.
Also, it doesn’t make sense to say that properties can emerge from things in which those properties weren’t already present in some way. If consciousness can arise from a combination of particles then that implies that particles have mental properties, which I don’t think a materialist or a determinist would want to argue.
It isn’t my opinion that the illusion is better or worse, but that it just is.
In the same way the property of being able play guitar isn’t a property of any of the cells in my body, it becomes possible when the brain, millions of sensory receptors, muscle fibers, neurons etc. are in a system together and interact with each other. It is my belief that in the same way, consciousness and then free will occurs when all of the neurons in the brain get stimulated by external factors, and hormones, and so on in the body.
You haven’t provided a reason for the illusion of free will. If we can’t provide a good reason or explanation for something then that should be a red flag for us to reexamine our belief and why we think that is true.
The ability or instructions of how to play the guitar does need to be present in some way in the cells and everything else though. The particle has to “know” how to perform in concert with everything else in order to make music happen. One particle may just be one building block, or one piece of the puzzle, but it still has to know exactly what to do in its role in order to play a song, in the same way a particle “knows” how to obey all the laws of physics, and how to behave in every situation because they are innate in every particle.