Free Will, Consciousness, Identity (Identity)

by dhw, Friday, August 10, 2012, 14:55 (4270 days ago) @ xeno6696

MATT: Fact: As humans, we can only DO one thing at a time. This has been cognitively demonstrated time and again. We're not good multitaskers.-ROMANSH: Matt as much as I agree with your conclusion, I am not convinced by your argument. Are you suggesting I can't walk and chew gum at the same time? Perhaps it explains a lot. The right and left hemispheres can't work sufficiently independently for a piano player to play a chord? -MATT: I am just now starting to get caught up, but you missed an important part of the discussion. When you're walking and talking with your spouse, do you consciously *will* the walking AND the talking? I argue no: Your conscious attention is going to be on the conversation. (Why else are they passing laws in the US about talking on the cell phone while driving, if we're not so darn "good" at *willing* two things at once?) -Like I said a couple weeks ago--and need to finish off with dhw--free will is not something I consider a valid question to ask anymore. Libet? Dennett? Decartes? Schopenhauer? Wasted their time on that question.-All this shows just how far apart we are in our understanding of what is meant by "free will". In my view, it has nothing whatsoever to do with walking and talking with your spouse or with your conscious attention on the conversation, unless you have an alternative to consider ("Um, sorry, dear, but wouldn't you rather watch the Olympics?"). The will ... whether free or not ... ONLY comes into play when there are conscious decisions to be made. Here yet again, to save you looking it up, is my definition: "An entity's conscious ability to control its decision-making process within given constraints". This does not mean that we go through life continuously controlling everything we do! Most of the time, our actions automatically respond to the requirements of our situation, and we don't NEED to exercise our ability to control our thoughts. You wrote earlier that thoughts come when they will. Generally, this is true. But when we have a decision to make, it is we who summon up the thoughts as we weigh the pros and cons, just as we remember things automatically, but when a piece of information fails to come to mind, we consciously search our memory. The fact (I agree with you) that we can't focus efficiently on more than one thing at a time is totally irrelevant if we have to make a choice between two courses of action. But if you do not accept my definition, you will need to supply one of your own to avoid further misunderstandings.-Let me remind you that so far, in trying to prove the irrelevance or invalidity of the subject, you have argued 1) that the actions remain the same whether we have free will or not. This is true, but your argument therefore "invalidates" all questions relating to explanations of what exists: e.g. the universe will be the same, whether there is or is not a God; we humans remain the same, whether we evolved by chance or by design. 2) We shall never know the definitive answer. This is also true, but it "invalidates" all philosophical questions. However, I'm sure you'll find a new way to finish me off!