Select Page
Poker Forum
Over 1,292,000 Posts!
Poker ForumFTR Community

Your Aversion To Determinism Is Itself Predetermined

Results 1 to 31 of 31

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Quote Originally Posted by boost View Post
    Maybe the point I'm trying to make is that all histories start with an action of free will, and which action we chose(lol) as the starting point sets a bias for what follows-- and maybe I'm simply proposing that it be more common to include a caveat that the prime mover was actually not so, and that the prime mover themselves have a robust history.
    This sounds like a biased causal chain instead of a deterministic one.
  2. #2
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    This sounds like a biased causal chain instead of a deterministic one.
    I'm not following, but I'd like to.
  3. #3
    Quote Originally Posted by boost View Post
    I'm not following, but I'd like to.
    Decisions could exist within a probability field, where an effect might never be determined 100% by its causes. There could be a range of effects with a range of probabilities that derive from the causes that come before.

    If decisions are viewed as if they are chemistry or similar, they probably look determined. But I'm not sure decisions should be viewed like that. For all we know the causal chain of complex organisms contains randomness or something else.

    If at a later date we perfectly model the universe and perfectly model causality, we might find ourselves saying things like this: "well in this situation the entity says yes 84% of the time and no 16% of the time".
  4. #4
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    10,456
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    Quote Originally Posted by boost View Post
    [...] if determinism is the way of the universe.
    Well... it's complicated. We need to be careful about how we define and use the word "determinism" in this context.

    The universe is deterministic within a rigidly defined spread of probabilistic "allowed" outcomes.

    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    If at a later date we perfectly model the universe and perfectly model causality, we might find ourselves saying things like this: "well in this situation the entity says yes 84% of the time and no 16% of the time".
    This is pretty much what QM has revealed to us.

    For the systems which we can model perfectly, we see exactly this kind of causality. There are certain "allowed" evolutions of the prepared system, and those outcomes will happen at very well-defined probabilities. Plenty of systems will have only 1 allowed future, which happens at 100%, but plenty systems are not so straight-forward.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •