determinism

[thelittlefinch]

Now currently-determined, I accept. Right now, I'm about to eat the last piece of cake, which means that I can't eat any more of that cake in the future. Three hours ago, that wasn't the case. (I wanted ice cream then.   ... at least for tomorrow.

[Tank]

... The best advise I can give is to seek help.  Depression is nothing to mess with, and the answers probably won't be found on a forum or by riddling about determinism.

Please.  See your doctor.  Talk about real options to aid in getting better.

I wish you the best,
JoeActor

He's spot on there, depression is not an issue to mess with. Get help.

Tank

[The Black Jester]

Seriously?  I'm in a pretty deep depression and all you've got is that I'm pissing you off?  

That's the thing - I don't know who I am or what I want or how to feel much of anything that isn't nausea or panic these days.  Hasn't anyone here been through an existential crisis who knows how I feel who could offer a "hang in there" or something?

Not that it's relevant, but I'm a mother.

I've absolutely been in your position Still am, to some extent - the severity has lessened, however, so I can absolutely offer a "hang in there."  I also desperately want to go back to school, but have no means by which to do so.  Still, I've found ways to incorporate some of the interests into my life for which I would go back to school, if I were able to do so, and that has helped in some small degree.  

I battle depression every day, as does my wife.  Medication has helped enormously, as has finding a really good therapist (which can be tough, let me tell you).  But the others who have said so are right - it's no joke.  Don't mess around with it - seek help.  If it's that bad, you need to see a doctor you trust and talk about options.

[keithwdowd]

So no matter what the reality is, I will act the same and [determinism] has no effect on my life whatsoever.

I disagree with this statement.

The acceptance/rejection of determinism may have no effect on your life, but could have drastic implications for others. Psychologists refer to individuals who have adopted a deterministic/fatalist perspective as having an "external locus of control"; that is, believing that their volition has no impact on the physical world. Extreme cases of this condition (if you will) can lead to maladaptive behaviors and depression. My guess is that most people give no credence to determinism and so implicitly reject its stance that we have no free will. However, some people may give critical thought to this philosophical issue and reach the conclusion that determinism is the only "correct" conclusion one can reach, which, as I've said, can have extreme consequences for their mental health. So, while it is true that the "existence" of determinism has no impact on our daily physical lives (e.g., we will still perceive our choices as resulting from purposeful acts of our will), its "perceived existence" can have a dramatic impact on our mental lives (though not always in a negative way). An analogy could be made about religion: Whether or not we conclude that God exists has no real impact on our physical lives-the wind will continue to blow, the rain will still fall, and taxes will unfortunately keep being collected. But, our perception of the existence of God (just like our perception of determinism) can have very real consequences for our mental lives.

And, just for clarification, when I use the word "determinism" I'm referring to hard determinism.

[The Black Jester]

So no matter what the reality is, I will act the same and [determinism] has no effect on my life whatsoever.

I disagree with this statement.

The acceptance/rejection of determinism may have no effect on your life, but could have drastic implications for others. Psychologists refer to individuals who have adopted a deterministic/fatalist perspective as having an "external locus of control"; that is, believing that their volition has no impact on the physical world. Extreme cases of this condition (if you will) can lead to maladaptive behaviors and depression. My guess is that most people give no credence to determinism and so implicitly reject its stance that we have no free will. However, some people may give critical thought to this philosophical issue and reach the conclusion that determinism is the only "correct" conclusion one can reach, which, as I've said, can have extreme consequences for their mental health. So, while it is true that the "existence" of determinism has no impact on our daily physical lives (e.g., we will still perceive our choices as resulting from purposeful acts of our will), its "perceived existence" can have a dramatic impact on our mental lives (though not always in a negative way). An analogy could be made about religion: Whether or not we conclude that God exists has no real impact on our physical lives-the wind will continue to blow, the rain will still fall, and taxes will unfortunately keep being collected. But, our perception of the existence of God (just like our perception of determinism) can have very real consequences for our mental lives.

And, just for clarification, when I use the word "determinism" I'm referring to hard determinism.

Cogent and well argued - how do you answer "hard determinism" from a philosophical perspective?  Is it a perspective to which you give credence, or do you reject it outright - from a philosophical standpoint, only - irrespective of its impact on the psychology of individuals?  I ask because regardless of whether holding that perspective will negatively influence our mental health, it may, nevertheless, be true.

[keithwdowd]

Cogent and well argued - how do you answer "hard determinism" from a philosophical perspective?  Is it a perspective to which you give credence, or do you reject it outright - from a philosophical standpoint, only - irrespective of its impact on the psychology of individuals?  I ask because regardless of whether holding that perspective will negatively influence our mental health, it may, nevertheless, be true.

Personally I would describe myself as an adherent to the Aristotelian notion of "active determinism"; that is, an acceptance that our actions are largely governed (determined, if you will) by biology and environment, but our ability as a species to actively reflect (or, metacognate) on our actions and behaviors (for better or worse) provides us with some utility of freedom and directed choice. Through reflection we can determine the external forces directing our behavior and work to counterbalance them. For me, life is like being a drifter in rapidly moving water without actually being aware that you are being pushed by the current. Only when you reflect and realize that your movement is directed by the external force of the stream can you act to push against the current to redirect your heading. Really, this is just another way of me saying that I am not convinced that we live in a hard deterministic world. Certainly there are events that interact to determine our behaviors (e.g., developed preferences, biological tendencies, learned SR chains, etc) but these forces can be overcome to a degree given our ability to investigate and critically evaluate our behavior, which allows for some semblance of free will and directed choice. But, as you said, everything-all actions, behavior, and choice-may be purely determined a priori, yet, even if this is true, the actual truth about determinism makes little difference for most people. It's the individual's perception of the truth that carries the weight in this case.

[The Black Jester]

Personally I would describe myself as an adherent to the Aristotelian notion of "active determinism"; that is, an acceptance that our actions are largely governed (determined, if you will) by biology and environment, but our ability as a species to actively reflect (or, metacognate) on our actions and behaviors (for better or worse) provides us with some utility of freedom and directed choice. Through reflection we can determine the external forces directing our behavior and work to counterbalance them. For me, life is like being a drifter in rapidly moving water without actually being aware that you are being pushed by the current. Only when you reflect and realize that your movement is directed by the external force of the stream can you act to push against the current to redirect your heading. Really, this is just another way of me saying that I am not convinced that we live in a hard deterministic world. Certainly there are events that interact to determine our behaviors (e.g., developed preferences, biological tendencies, learned SR chains, etc) but these forces can be overcome to a degree given our ability to investigate and critically evaluate our behavior, which allows for some semblance of free will and directed choice.

Your image is compelling, and I must admit this vantage point is certainly the most pleasing to me.  It is well articulated, and matches much of what I (currently) know about how the world operates, and yet allows for my humble attempts to forge my own destiny, within certain parameters.  While I must admit that my opinions are hopelessly amateur, and perhaps presently ill informed, I am not so sure if this perspective is actually true, in the end.  It presupposes that our ability to "metacognate," along with the details of said metacognition, is not itself determined in some fashion.  We could have a built-in mechanism for self-correcting behavior (behavior that deviates from certain goals of the organism, say) that, while conscious, nevertheless has defined responses for said deviations.

 Also, I am not quite clear on what, if any, difference there is between the concepts of an action (or thought, or whatever) being influenced by various factors, as opposed to the action being determined by those factors.  Can we coherently argue that some force or other influences our behavior without thereby meaning that it plays a part in determining our behavior?  

It could be that there are billions of determinants all acting upon us at any given time, but our inability to articulate or separate each and every one of them does not lessen the possibility that they act deterministically.  In other words, just because reality may be hopelessly complex beyond our ability to ever truly comprehend, and therefore beyond our ability to predict or fully explain any particular instance of behavior, it does not mean that that hypothetical instance is not determined.

But, as you said, everything-all actions, behavior, and choice-may be purely determined a priori, yet, even if this is true, the actual truth about determinism makes little difference for most people. It's the individual's perception of the truth that carries the weight in this case.

This brings up another point, that perhaps belongs on another thread - but I will give it a brief shot here.  It's always struck me that, for exactly the reasons you state above - that the individual's perception of the truth has such broad ranging ramifications - there might be cases in which the truth (the "truth" being an accurate representation of reality) is actually harmful.  So that to survive, our species had to develop certain "functional delusions" in order to survive - anathema as that is to my way of thinking.  If determinism is true, and if its realization by a conscious being results inevitably in maladaptive behaviors, might not evolution have pre-disposed us to believe in something like free-will for our own survival, even if such is not an accurate representation of reality?

[keithwdowd]

Your image is compelling, and I must admit this vantage point is certainly the most pleasing to me.  It is well articulated, and matches much of what I (currently) know about how the world operates, and yet allows for my humble attempts to forge my own destiny, within certain parameters.  While I must admit that my opinions are hopelessly amateur, and perhaps presently ill informed, I am not so sure if this perspective is actually true, in the end.  It presupposes that our ability to "metacognate," along with the details of said metacognition, is not itself determined in some fashion.  We could have a built-in mechanism for self-correcting behavior (behavior that deviates from certain goals of the organism, say) that, while conscious, nevertheless has defined responses for said deviations.

 Also, I am not quite clear on what, if any, difference there is between the concepts of an action (or thought, or whatever) being influenced by various factors, as opposed to the action being determined by those factors.  Can we coherently argue that some force or other influences our behavior without thereby meaning that it plays a part in determining our behavior?  

It could be that there are billions of determinants all acting upon us at any given time, but our inability to articulate or separate each and every one of them does not lessen the possibility that they act deterministically.  In other words, just because reality may be hopelessly complex beyond our ability to ever truly comprehend, and therefore beyond our ability to predict or fully explain any particular instance of behavior, it does not mean that that hypothetical instance is not determined.

But, as you said, everything-all actions, behavior, and choice-may be purely determined a priori, yet, even if this is true, the actual truth about determinism makes little difference for most people. It's the individual's perception of the truth that carries the weight in this case.

This brings up another point, that perhaps belongs on another thread - but I will give it a brief shot here.  It's always struck me that, for exactly the reasons you state above - that the individual's perception of the truth has such broad ranging ramifications - there might be cases in which the truth (the "truth" being an accurate representation of reality) is actually harmful.  So that to survive, our species had to develop certain "functional delusions" in order to survive - anathema as that is to my way of thinking.  If determinism is true, and if its realization by a conscious being results inevitably in maladaptive behaviors, might not evolution have pre-disposed us to believe in something like free-will for our own survival, even if such is not an accurate representation of reality?

Thank you for your kind words. I do enjoy exchanging and reciprocating ideas with others, and our conversation so far has been very interesting to me.

You may very well be correct. It is certainly possible that a self-correcting mechanism may be present within our subconscious that corrects for unadvantageous deviations from norms set by the organism. I’m rather skeptical of this viewpoint, however, because I would consider activities such as smoking, shooting up copious amount of heroin, or having a poor diet to be unadvantageous to the organism yet individuals persist in engaging in these activities. The more traditional way to think about determinism, I believe, is that our actions are guided by the physical forces operating on us at a molecular level. Given that our bodies are constituted by an interwoven fabric of subatomic particles, these forces then also act on us. This is a fact. The question is whether we are able to overcome these forces to act in a way consistent with our desires. Of course, given that our brains are also biological and composed of these particles too it may be that even our thoughts are fully directed and determined by these physical forces (i.e., our thoughts are prescribed). Think about it like this: If you were in a gym and threw a rubber ball against the wall, you could mathematically describe the physical characteristics of that ball (e.g., its velocity, acceleration, etc) and using that information could predict where it would land after bouncing off the wall and coming to a rest. Now pretend this rubber ball is a subatomic particle and imagine there are billions and billions of these “rubber balls” all shooting in various directions at different speeds. You could theoretically calculate the path of these “balls” using their physical characteristics (e.g., velocity, etc). Now, extending this argument further, given that higher-order constructions, such as people, are composed of these subatomic particles, do we have control over their [the particles that compose ourselves] direction or do they direct us? Determinism would suggest that latter; that is, that free will is a myth because we have no control over our actions and that our actions were prescribed at the moment when these particles first began moving (e.g., immediately after the Big Bang occurred).

So there is a very big difference, I think, in saying that behavior is determined or influenced. Determined implies no choice in directing our will; in fact, it implies no will at all. Influenced, however, suggests that forces interact with our will to form the choice we ultimately make. Your perception of the universe and whether it is deterministic or not ultimately guides which one of these terms you use. It is such a conundrum and, In fact, if the universe is determined then my anti-(hard) deterministic perspective was itself determined!

Finally, I think your point that our species may have evolved certain “functional delusions” (as you put it) is an apt and thoughtful one, and we can see evidence of that in certain psychiatric disorders. For example, children who have suffered harrowing and traumatic abuse at an early age are thought to be unable to process and integrate these experiences into their overall mental model and, as a result, repress the memories of the events such that they are forgotten, as if they never happened at all. This is akin to a “functional delusion” in my opinion. I suppose you could further extrapolate this line of reasoning and argue that, as a species, we evolved the ability to cope with our deterministic universe by deluding ourselves into believing that it is not actually deterministic. In fact, perhaps consciousness itself is an evolutionary product designed for just that purpose!

[Davin]

So no matter what the reality is, I will act the same and [determinism] has no effect on my life whatsoever.

I disagree with this statement.

The acceptance/rejection of determinism may have no effect on your life, but could have drastic implications for others. Psychologists refer to individuals who have adopted a deterministic/fatalist perspective as having an "external locus of control"; that is, believing that their volition has no impact on the physical world. Extreme cases of this condition (if you will) can lead to maladaptive behaviors and depression. My guess is that most people give no credence to determinism and so implicitly reject its stance that we have no free will. However, some people may give critical thought to this philosophical issue and reach the conclusion that determinism is the only "correct" conclusion one can reach, which, as I've said, can have extreme consequences for their mental health. So, while it is true that the "existence" of determinism has no impact on our daily physical lives (e.g., we will still perceive our choices as resulting from purposeful acts of our will), its "perceived existence" can have a dramatic impact on our mental lives (though not always in a negative way). An analogy could be made about religion: Whether or not we conclude that God exists has no real impact on our physical lives-the wind will continue to blow, the rain will still fall, and taxes will unfortunately keep being collected. But, our perception of the existence of God (just like our perception of determinism) can have very real consequences for our mental lives.

And, just for clarification, when I use the word "determinism" I'm referring to hard determinism.

It would have been nice if you responded to my premises instead of my conclusion, because the conclusion comes from the premises that you haven't addressed. I do understand that the dichotomy I listed is probably not all the possibilities, they're just all the ones I see right now and if you have another possibility I'd like to hear it. Anyway, like my point on if everything is determined: I will act however it is that I'm determined to act whether I'm determined to believe in determinism or I'm not determined to believe in determinism. However I act, am, believe, disbelieve, don't act, every thought has been determined if there is hard determinism.

Secondly, while I can understand that other peoples mental health or at least state of mind may be affected by the belief or lack of belief in something, mine will not likely be affected at all. That is why I made the statement about myself, because I can't say such a bold statement about how anyone else will be affected by what they believe. It appears you assumed that I made a statement about everyone, if not, then I can continue on how it will not affect me.

[keithwdowd]

It would have been nice if you responded to my premises instead of my conclusion, because the conclusion comes from the premises that you haven't addressed. I do understand that the dichotomy I listed is probably not all the possibilities, they're just all the ones I see right now and if you have another possibility I'd like to hear it. Anyway, like my point on if everything is determined: I will act however it is that I'm determined to act whether I'm determined to believe in determinism or I'm not determined to believe in determinism. However I act, am, believe, disbelieve, don't act, every thought has been determined if there is hard determinism.

Secondly, while I can understand that other peoples mental health or at least state of mind may be affected by the belief or lack of belief in something, mine will not likely be affected at all. That is why I made the statement about myself, because I can't say such a bold statement about how anyone else will be affected by what they believe. It appears you assumed that I made a statement about everyone, if not, then I can continue on how it will not affect me.

I didn't mean for my response to come across as an attack against you or your comment. You are right:I should have addressed your premises prior to jumping on your conclusion. My intention was only to make a point about one possible effect of accepting a hard deterministic perspective of the universe. As you pointed out, however, if everything is ultimately determined then your actions are going to take on a specified (predetermined) path, which, in the end, (for you at least) has minimal impact on your state of mind regardless of whether the universe is a deterministic one or not. Finally, I am aware that you were only referencing yourself when you stated that believing (or not believing) in determinism had no effect on you or your mental well-being. I was only extrapolating what you said and offering my opinion on how belief in determinism may affect the general population.

[Davin]

I didn't mean for my response to come across as an attack against you or your comment. You are right:I should have addressed your premises prior to jumping on your conclusion. My intention was only to make a point about one possible effect of accepting a hard deterministic perspective of the universe. As you pointed out, however, if everything is ultimately determined then your actions are going to take on a specified (predetermined) path, which, in the end, (for you at least) has minimal impact on your state of mind regardless of whether the universe is a deterministic one or not. Finally, I am aware that you were only referencing yourself when you stated that believing (or not believing) in determinism had no effect on you or your mental well-being. I was only extrapolating what you said and offering my opinion on how belief in determinism may affect the general population.

Don't worry, I never take offense, even when I probably should. In this case I'm pretty sure I shouldn't. I understand your point and I can see with many people I know, that the concept could affect their mental well being. I didn't disagree with your statement as a generalization, just as it applied to me, which is what it looked like you were disagreeing with. I didn't intend to sound offended or upset in any way, but often I am assumed so because of the language I choose to use.

[Icarus]

Those who seriously consider determinism as a reality have not done the right homework.   Here are some  book titles for you.....The Drunkards Walk..sub title..How randomness rules our lives...Leonard Mladinow..............Chaos...subtitle...Making a New Science...James Gleick, ........Lonely Hearts of The Universe.....sub...The story of the scientific quest for the secret of the universe....Dennis Overbye   Each of these books contain some heady stuff but they are fairly easy reads and they introduce the reader to cosmic realities that are not ordinarily discussed at Starbucks.  We can easily put the determinism thing to rest by learning about or studying randomness.

[The Black Jester]

Those who seriously consider determinism as a reality have not done the right homework.   Here are some  book titles for you.....The Drunkards Walk..sub title..How randomness rules our lives...Leonard Mladinow..............Chaos...subtitle...Making a New Science...James Gleick, ........Lonely Hearts of The Universe.....sub...The story of the scientific quest for the secret of the universe....Dennis Overbye   Each of these books contain some heady stuff but they are fairly easy reads and they introduce the reader to cosmic realities that are not ordinarily discussed at Starbucks.  We can easily put the determinism thing to rest by learning about or studying randomness.

Thank you for the suggestions.  I have wondered about this - and assumed determinism would be undermined by modern theories of Chaos.  However, does that help the free will issue at all, which seems to be at the heart of the (psychological) problem of determinism, as far as many people are concerned.  Does a random, unpredictable cause really make "my choice" my choice.  Just because our physical brains might be effected by random, unpredictable influences, rather than measurable and predictable influences, doesn't mean the locus of control returns to me.  It just means my behaviors may have a certain element of unpredictability, not that I truly "control" them.  They still could be caused by forces in the brain over which "the self" cannot be said to have any proper influence.  The self could still be an effect, rather than a determining factor.

[dogsmycopilot]

how do you all cope with hard determinism?  quite often lately i've been rather depressed about it all.

I don't. Not believing in free will does not require determinism. I recommend Galen Strawson. (And use first and last name when you look him up or you may pull up works by his dad- which will just give you a headache.)  http://believermag.com/issues/200303/?r ... w_strawson

[Deneb]

I was searching up on determinism because I also initially felt depressed when I started believing in determinism. I came up with this topic and just had the urge to post.
I'm sorry if I'm digging up an old topic and for breaking the forum rules, etc. I just felt I could help jrosebud if he/she is still depressed about this (yes, I tried PMs but it didn't work for some reason).

To jrosebud:
I could offer some help if you're still feeling depressed about it. I think the problem lies in how you're viewing the concept of determinism.
In one of your posts you described it as something/someone making you or controlling you... this (although not always consciously) can lead to the horrible feeling of not having control over one's own life, hence, depression starts.

Remember that this "someone/something" is not a separate entity. You are a part of this someone/something... it's called the universe.
We as humans were made to do what we want, seek pleasure and avoid pain. We do what we want, even if it has a predetermined cause (genetics, someone else [peer pressure], or simply your own intellect), you're still doing what you want to.
I've been thinking about this for the longest time, and I've come to the conclusion that determinism and free will are synonymous... we're still doing what we want.

People who think that removing all causes that determine an action, makes that action free. They're right.
Without a cause, an action is free. But it's random. And it doesn't describe free will. Without a cause free will can't exist. Our will to live and do what pleases us needs actions.

Also if you think that because our genetics makes us chose what we chose and be who we are makes us have no free will. You're going into an infinite logical loop. You can't possibly choose your genetics because you didn't exist yet.
In that case, free will would be impossible unless you placed your "soul" (if it exists) before the beginning of time and THEN chose how things played out...