If we could put in this super computer all the things that go on inside psyche and the laws of nature inside our universe I think it could accurately spit out information that would match our thoughts and actions in the future so I'm thinking no real free will even with our choices.
Einstein and Religion - with considerations of "Human Free Will"
by james_woods 50 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
james_woods
I think that Einstein meant "free will" in the sense of a totally random event, act, or result which had no deterministic rule to govern it. In other words, it could go either way at the totally indeterminate "will" of the participant - particle or human.
While I think he pretty much acknowledged that such things can happen at a quantum level (eventually) - I do not see that he ever thought that human activity or thought could work that way.
-
james_woods
If we could put in this super computer all the things that go on inside psyche and the laws of nature inside our universe I think it could accurately spit out information that would match our thoughts and actions in the future so I'm thinking no real free will even with our choices.
Computer scientiests (such as Douglas Hofstadter) are continuing to debate this - many do not think such a true simulation of human thought is anywhere close regardless of advances in the field.
-
Bobcat
James, thanks for the topic.
I know this mainly centers around Einstein. And perhaps since he wrestled with the idea, there can be some wrestling of it here.
At any rate, I wonder if this topic of "Human Free Will" suffers from a sort of false starting point. Namely, the "human" aspect of it.
Just as an idea to bump around, what if one viewed "free will" (which may or may not be the best description - but that is the term that everyone seems to prefer), but what if one viewed it as a universal commodity of sorts.
Before creation (assuming that and a creator), all of it belonged to the Creator. Then, as he creates intelligent beings (angels and humans), He, in effect, divies some of it out to each of them. A necessity required due to his granting them self-awareness - or perhaps as an integral part of their self-awareness.
On the human plane, "free will" would necessarily be of very limited proportion, since many of our daily activities are governed by basic biological activities (such as eating, sleeping, etc.). Even our interactions with other humans would impose further limits (marriage, children, friends, earth's resources, etc).
I'm still tossing the idea around in my own head, but I am curious how others would see it. The two types of free will that EP mentioned reading about seem to take an all-or-nothing point of view. I wonder if it makes more sense for there to be a middle ground viewpoint? And I wonder if Einstein struggled with the notion because of only seeing the two opposite ends of the argument rather than a middle ground approach?
Anyways, I gotta go for awhile.
Take Carre and thanks for the topic.
-
prologos
Einstein lived in very turbulent times on a continent that nearly self-destructed. His views on matters human, religious must have shifted. that is the interesting part. Much of his work was done with an understanding of a creator, " the absolutely Old One" who would be sorry if his (Einsteins) theories would be wrong.
He felt that god should have intervened in the slaughter of WW1 when asking: "Where IS Jehovah" ?* He might have later concluded that it was all to big a disaster to have come from mans' free will alone. A wealthy and educated Jewish gentlemen that employed me, said to me once about Hitler: " he could not help doing it, we can not really blame him, it was an unavoidable development, he was genetically predestined to do it.
so an expert on physics might be swayed by emotion on other matters. Einsteins' comment on the immortal Soul question:" ---come on" or to that effect, hard to translate.
He might have felt that HE, Einstein was selected, had a unique destiny, a direct line into Gods mind, wrestling with God like Jacob, but He could not have believed I think ALL is predestined, in the recall of all my reading. * referenced on beabeorean.com from the book; Einstein in Berlin.
-
EntirelyPossible
Uh, yeah, you have no idea what Einstein "must" have been thinking. Read what he wrote, if you want to know.
-
-
frankiespeakin
Einstein got it wrong can you do better:
http://www.science20.com/hammock_physicist/einstein_got_it_wrong_can_you_do_better-85544
-
james_woods
I knew this thread was going to be a tangled knot of worms when I started it - but I think we may have slipped into a couple of wrong thoughts:
First - even if Einstein was WRONG about deterministic actions on the level of quantum physics, this does not necessarily mean that he was wrong in thinking that human behavior (i.e. human free will) is also deterministic. Human thought and action is a macro-level phenomenon and is not necessarily controlled to any macro level by quantum events.
Second - I think it is totally bogus to make the assertion that Quantum Mechanics somehow proves "Human Free Will". If anything, it seems to me that if random events shape can somehow shape human thought, this argues AGAINST the religious notions of "human free will".
Let the debate continue.
On a personal level, I am rather enamored by the Einsteinian religious system of thinking.
-
botchtowersociety
Great OP, James. And Einstein's deterministic views made him not too happy over quantum indeterminacy.