I can’t stop myself to write this (hehe). But this discussion about free will or no free will really bothers me.
There are two blog postings by Aaron Swartz that just got me on the topic again: Is there free will – and may quantum mechanics solve the whole question? It’s a very good blog – and his recent adventures are really interesting – but anyways: As everyone else so far, in my opinion he asks the completely wrong question. I do not understand the problem. And this solution with quantum mechanics certainly does not solve anything.
Let’s just assume something: One really smart mind finds out the answer to the question whether there is free will. Now he tells people “Hey people of the world, the solution is, there is no free will, its all deterministic!”.
What would happen? Nothing. Nothing would change – the world would run as it was.
So let’s assume something else: He finds out that we do have free will. Wow, everyone likes to hear that somehow, but what would actually change? Nothing. Again no one would do anything different just because he knows he has free will.
Ok, so for me the conclusion is: There is no difference. Its both the same – free will or not free will, the problem does not exist.
Oh yeah, there is this third option. The guy finds out: “Its easy, it’s all quantum stuff”.
Well first of all – I don’t get why anyone would conclude that this “reconciles free will”. By definition it means everything is random. No will at all and no determination.
Now what does that solve? Nothing at all. I would even suggest that it’s impossible – since an avoider (as Dennett calls it) could not exist.
Someone tell me please what I’m missing here.
Else the conclusion must be: the question philosophers ask is the wrong one. We do have to find the correct question first – then we can try to find the right answer.
[…] tried here before to argue about this in the case of “free will”. Which also shows you that these “false words” are not just keeping me and my friends […]