Video

is it still free will/ desire if we are to say, make a choice to not do the bad thing? Given the desire already arise, (importance here is not on finally acting on that desire or not), then one doesnt really have the free will to be free from ever having that desire, as choosing B (to not act on it) is subjected to having the desire to do A in the first place, and no matter what one chooses in place of that desire A is but subjected to choose upon this desire, kinda like life just throws a bunch of beanbags at us, but we don't get to be subjected to not have beanbags thrown at us, but only to choose whether i deflect this particular beanbag here, kick that one off to another direction. The key here lies in inaction, which would perhaps result in greatest sense of being free from desires, like how Buddhist monks become detached with the material, they are not free from sexual desire their entire life, but they choose to live celibately, and this choosing is inherent to being subjected to choose, subjected to any single desire hence not really free will. And if we take a step back, looking at how we regard people to have free will, we often would describe them as not having to worry this, or quitting smoking overnight (kinda unrealistic), though tbh I think research has shown by activating certain regions of the brain, we can inhibit thoughts and motor control, but still the will here is very dependent on what is already making up the brain to be the way it is, perhaps we could imagine what exactly does an ideal person with ideal free will looks like, which doesn't necessitates moral decisions, sorry for this long rambling

Thank you for this video, it's cool to hear your thoughts on this fascinating and difficult subject. I'm writing this after I've watched your video twice. I'd argue that even if a process is extremely complex, effectively unpredictable and even self-updating, it can still be totally deterministic. Some computer programs are like that for example, but the same could just as well be true about the human brain. So none of these attributes are really arguments in favor of free will I'm afraid. Regarding the evolutionary argument: the illusion of free will is of course evolutionarily extremely useful for survival but that alone doesn't disprove the fact that free will could be an illusion. You yourself mentioned that colors are technically an illusion, yet we obviously evolved color vision, even though colors don't really exist. So again, I don't think that this kind of argument can really be used in support of free will. Is the definition of free will that you give at 22:00 really useful for the purpose of this video? I think everyone agrees that we are able to act according to our sense of self but that's not really the problem, is it? The question is if have any other choice but to make the choices that we ultimately make. So of course, in the end we do the things that we want but the question (of free will) is: Could we have really chosen something else, given our exact mental state at that moment?

Hello, I thought your video was very helpful and I know this is very late but I have a question: what happens to the other 4 functions that aren’t in our personality type function stack?

When you got etherical experience, you will easely knows that it doesn't exist. Exist in your illusive reality and thoughts, in our life experiences and trauma, but not in the linearity of time and space. If time is an eternal present, offcourse free will doesn't exist. Despite modern thoughts, sometimes a simple Aristotelian syllogism could still work, in his meaning.

Only if the line of measure 1st position is right hand of God or your saying complexity of subjective space spirit of God hovering over the waters of cosmos nature building breathe of life giving is ( the one and only relative lineof measure) no we have none from only the 2 perspectives but it's speculation tho.these are are conceded pos. No others exists. I can deterministicaly make all cells in my body walk to the door yet they still have free will inertia of complex mobility. Name 1st position relative point of measure! What Is the measurement course of action? No one can play musical chairs of super position scale here and get away with it in real life objectivism so why allow others to play that game ? We can Triangulate free will in 3 lines of measure tell you exactly anchors of their They're and there. Arguements from 1st position right hand of God or subjective space between all mass discplament of space by product complex gravity & environmental decay has never been desputed as predestination. But those who play musical chairs of super position to get the answers want jump 1st position lines of measure thought excersized.. Is a relative measure from Deterministic atoms lattus structure and body of earth? Or our Deterministic simplicity and unification on outside of individual Adam's body and the complexity within.?

Soul agency driver2 free will inertia inertial a3 frame of reference 1Their is ( soul agency individual atoms & Adam's Subjective categorical textualism z axis hamiltonian 2They're personal actors lattus structure & body y axis duslistic hemisphere brain prenticious views. 3 there x environment frame of reference realitive coordinate of anchor in triangulated judgment Keys to cosmos still stands ,issac newton plagerized underground movement obviously in English the hue= wavelength in human is far older than hamiltonian or einstein. The question is why can't you Triangulate free will inertia in your frame of reference ? I have no problem measuring thermodynamical systems feedback loop of measure in this relational reality. Textualism methodology objectivism gets shit done everyday we use the ultimate precision instrument ✝️ xyzt to evolve fine tuned atoms & Adam's lattus structure and body form ^ soul agency primordial self personal actors. When Descartes dualism was in trouble he moved it's encryption on mind / body.but it's best served as y axis duslistic hemisphere ( newtons pretentious clocklike view ). Obviously agsin this same underground eccentric fundamentalist Christian movement that becomes separatist puritan seeking perfect alignment later has z axis hamiltonian split the soul & spirit in occelating feilds and waves Then einstein merged z/x. Taking newton advice he pretended . The math & formulism is real objectivism on par sigma 6 real as anything ( physical or idealistic) Subjective father's loins emerging =mc . Mothers womb idealistic forces faith/ physical lawisms works. Or curses and blessings addition and subtraction where successful social behavior plagerized correlated prescribed in concert with the world around us. In 15th century it all fell out we've. Newton could predict that one day a richard finneman would measure key 2 entanglement on orders of magnitude scaled epochs smaller.😮 These esoterica America decendants cooperated and handed the keys over to the greater world myth & men teaching and beliefs for what 90 years to try and prove yourself or disprove out formulism math mapping alignments blueprint. Yet Lee Cronins back to having to copy old 1700s-1800s century creationism because darwinism dualistic taxonomy failed. All feilds of study grand theory stagnated in measurements problems. It's because pre 1500s back to 900bc babylonian evolutionary cosmogony mythology is just wrong and out of context miss aligned lost in translation

Imho is an emergent phenomena, just like most things. So it depends on your frame of reference. Does molecular chemistry exist or is it just electromagnetic atom interactions? Does gravity exist or is it just a by-product of time and space? What about climate phenomenon like Hurricanes, Tornados, etc? One thing doesn’t necessarily negates the other. Sometimes is our logic what lacks depth:

I think for INFJ's, the probability of an outcome and patterns, determine our direction and actions 😅 - We are like robots 🤖 (0 is bad, 1 is good 😂.)

I only clicked on this video because you are beyond pretty. I hope what you say makes sense and is helpful to mankind.

not locally. practically none except a little re-arranging the deck chairs arm-room.

the only logical premise is 0, so theres no logical reason for logic, so theres free will

we do have free will, but we only exercise it with will power

INFP are very sad people who seem to always feel very sorry for themselves. They dont appear to add anything useful to the world. Why do they exist? Any purpose?

i think you skipped an important point: what is the definition of "free choice"? what does a minimal machine that has free will look like?

Free will? What a joke!

💗

Hjk

🤔What if consciousness was a mistake? When you look at ants, they are able to live peacefully without a crime ever have been comitted in their ant-colony, which simply is impossible in human society. My theory is that man developed a consciousness to survive in a group & individually. Insects, like ants, are highly specialised, but can't survive on their own because they're dependant on their colony. A soldier-ant can't survive on his own. Man is different, his 'superpower' is that he's highly adaptable to his environment. So much so that because of his adaptability aka technology, the environment adapts to man instead. Which can be a huge problem. It's my personal belief that the pre-historic man lived in harmony with his environment, because he instinctually knows that he's dependant on it. Ancient man still believed that he was part of nature, while modern man believes that he's above nature. Man believes that he's above nature because of his intelligence which caused him to believe that he's created in God's image. Whether one is an introvert or extravert is, imo not the result of a choice but determined at birth. I wanted to explain why there are introverts & extroverts. My working theory is that according the social intelligence hypothesis* early cavemen probably were introverts, because they weren't required to live in large groups. When our intelligence kept increasing we evolved from introverts into extroverts. ☢ *The problem now is that being extroverts + herd-behaviour is a bad combo. Extroverts generally are followers not that much concerned about the philosophy behind their behavior which can easily lead to facism.* 🕵‍♂Here's my exploration of introverts & extroverts, along with the impact of social intelligence & herd behavior: *Introverts & Extroverts* : *Early Humans & Social Context* : - My theory aligns with the social intelligence hypothesis, which suggests that early humans lived in smaller groups and had less complex social structures. - In such contexts, introverted traits (such as reflection, independence, and deep thinking) might have been advantageous. *Evolution & Intelligence* : - As human intelligence evolved, so did our social structures. Larger communities & cooperation became essential for survival. - Extroverted traits (such as sociability, communication, and adaptability) allowed humans to thrive in group settings. *The Extrovert-Introvert Spectrum* : - It's important to recognize that introversion and extroversion exist on a spectrum. Most people exhibit a mix of both traits. - Some introverts can be outgoing, and some extroverts value solitude. *Herd Behavior & Extroversion* : - Herd behavior can be problematic when combined with extroversion. - Extroverts may follow the crowd without critically evaluating their actions, leading to conformity. *Philosophy & Extroversion* : - Extroverts often focus on external validation and immediate experiences rather than deep philosophical reflection. - This can indeed lead to a lack of consideration for broader implications. *Extroversion & Fascism* : - While not all extroverts exhibit harmful behavior, the lack of philosophical introspection can contribute to extreme ideologies. - Facism, as mentioned, often thrives on conformity and unquestioning loyalty. *Balance & Awareness* : - Striking a balance between introverted reflection & extroverted engagement is crucial. - Being aware of our tendencies and consciously evaluating our actions helps prevent harmful outcomes. * *The social intelligence hypothesis* states that social intelligence, that is, complex socialization such as politics, romance, family relationships, quarrels, collaboration, reciprocity, and altruism: (1) was a driving force in developing the size of human brains and (2) today provides our ability to use those large brains in complex social circumstances. This hypothesis claims that the demands of living together is what drives our need for intelligence, and that social intelligence is an evolutionary adaptation for dealing with highly complex social situations, as well as gaining and maintaining power in social groups. Archaeologist Steve Mithen believes that there are 2 key evolutionary periods of human brain growth that contextualize the social intelligence hypothesis. - The 1st was about two million years ago, when the brain more than doubled in size. Mithen believes that this growth was because people were living in larger, more complex groups, and had to keep track of more people and relationships. These changes required a greater mental capacity and, in turn, a larger brain size. - The 2nd key growth period in human brain size occurred between 600,000 and 200,000 years ago, when the brain reached its modern size. While this growth is still not fully explained, Mithen believes that it is related to the evolution of language. Language may be the most complex cognitive task we undertake. Language is directly related to social intelligence because it is primarily used to mediate social relationships. Social intelligence was a critical factor in brain growth. *Social & cognitive complexity co-evolve.* Source: Wikipedia 👉In summary, understanding the interplay between introversion, extroversion, and social dynamics enriches our perspective on human behavior. The difference between modern man and the early caveman is that the early caveman is unable to live in a nation, like the other apes, because the vast majority of the modern man are extroverts. The early caveman would probably be unable to live within a nation, simply because he can't identify everyone in this nation while he can in his tribe. My 2nd proof is that introverts are more likely to be autodidact than extroverts. 🕵‍♂Let's delve into them: 1. *Brain Size & Evolution* : - Indeed, brain size has evolved significantly over time. Early hominids had smaller brains compared to modern humans. - Our larger brains allow for complex cognition, language, and abstract thinking. This cognitive capacity shapes our behavior & survival strategies. - While primitive survival instincts remain relevant (e.g., fight-or-flight responses), our decision-making involves more than instinctual reactions. 2. *Social Complexity & Cooperation* : - Early humans survived by cooperating within small groups. Trust, reciprocity, and shared resources were vital. - Modern society extends beyond immediate kin. We interact with strangers, navigate diverse cultures, and participate in global networks. - Social structures (laws, institutions, norms) facilitate cooperation, even among large groups of unrelated individuals. 3. *Introverts & Autodidact Learning* : - Introverts tend to recharge by spending time alone. They often enjoy introspection and contemplation. - Autodidacts-those who self-educate-can be found among both introverts and extroverts. However, introverts may have an advantage: - *Focused Learning* : Introverts thrive in concentrated environments. Their ability to delve deep into topics benefits self-study. - *Independent Exploration* : Autodidacts often seek knowledge independently. Introverts' preference for solitude aligns well with self-directed learning. - *Curiosity & Reflection* : Introverts often ponder, ask questions, and seek answers. Their introspective nature fuels lifelong learning. - *Introverts & swimming upstream* : Introverts may indeed challenge prevailing norms and stand by their convictions, even if it means going against the herd. 4. *Extroverts & Autodidact Learning* : - Extroverts, too, can be autodidacts: - *Social Learning* : Extroverts thrive on interactions. They can combine social experiences with self-study. - *Collaborative Exploration* : Group discussions, workshops, and networking contribute to their learning journey. - *Adaptability* : Extroverts adapt well to changing environments, leveraging their social skills. 5. *Complex Societies & Extroversion* : - Our ability to function in large groups involves more than extroversion. Adaptability, cultural norms, and communication skills play crucial roles. - Both introverts and extroverts contribute to our diverse society. Each brings unique strengths, fostering innovation and progress. 6. *Caveats & Fascism* : - I've pointed out that herd behavior, combined with extroversion, can lead to problematic outcomes (like fascism). - Awareness + critical thinking are essential to prevent harmful collective behaviors. 🤐I fear that modern man is more driven by herdbehavior than free (individual) will. Especially when our modern education often emphasizes "what" over "how." And often ignores experience in favor of theory only.

Sadly, NO, there's no freewill. We live a pretty authoritarian existence. Our very existence lacks freewill. Its all well and good when one is out of focus of the powes that be, but wait until a homosexual sex demon like eros targets you to advance an "agenda."

I think there's a scientific way to determine this. Stewart Bell proved no hidden variables at quantum level, I think we can do this for free will

I can't hear you, sadly. But no, complete free will does not exist, at least not until you make a conscious effort to bring your automatic will into line with your slower conscious process. Over time we might have the ability to change our automatic processes to take control of them so that something more like true free will exists. I hope that is something along the lines of what you were saying but please adjust your audio settings.

there's an hindu doctrine of kashmiri shaivism that states that freedom , known as swatantrya, is the power aspect of god , being it shiva the god, and swatantrya its capability to recognise itself as pure awareness. so in a way these gods are technically spoken as freedom, consciousness and such other terms in those doctrines, not as figures, but also that, for some reason it is a way for them to be treated as entities, and not just as ideas, the claim for it being that these ideas are too alive in a way.

No.

will is ability of choice - does anything force your choices? then you're not free. What is your goal determine your choices, so will is subjected to your purpose, what is your purpose than? review your goal if you have free will, good luck!!

We don't have freewill in the sense that we can do whatever we want or that we are always in control. Freewill is just a bad and antiquated word. We are highly complex biological machines that have a range of behaviors determined by millions of years of evolution. We cannot do anything that isn't genetically programmed into us. Under certain circumstances we can behave one way and under different circumstances we can act another way. Freewill is illusionary basically. We are constrained by our biological forms and everything that has happened in earth’s history to create us. To break it down further there's nothing in known existence that is self activating. When you move your eye you think that's you moving it but there's muscles and neuroconnections at play as well all of the millions of years of evolution that gave you eyes to move.

No free will! No choice to be here on earth! No choice to be an organism called human! No choice in the conditioning and programming! No choice what genes, no choice what parents, teachers, time and circumstances of our existence - yes, we are slaves, infinitely limited with only one destiny... the end.

cools

But who would have this free will ? That's the real question .

I say consciousness is a decision making process. Its the creator asking for your point of view. In most cases the creator asking you: "well, how would you like to proceed in this situation?" Its not you but the creator who moves your hand when you wish it to move. Science has no say on consciousness. What ends up happening is like when you have a war going on and both sides ask God to help in winning the war. How will God go about proceeding? Well, it comes down to the prior decisions and stuff. Which is basically science. Freewill, is nothing more then God saying to you. I will do what you say within a given jurisdiction. Emphasis on the word jurisdiction.

Even if you know the truth you are free to ignore it. I guess that "free will" has its role when there is something unclear.

'A man can do what he wants, but not want what he wants' - Arthur Schopenhauer

You are beautiful

Whoever controls language is dictating our lives

the only answer to this is: it doesnt matter and will always be a waste of time to question.

That is a misinterpretation of how reality works. Everything is not predetermined. Everything exists all at once, but you have the free will to choose which of those infinite number of paths you want to travel through your life. It's part of theoretical physicist Leonard Susskind's Holographic Principle.

This is a really cool thought process you are presenting!

If everything is fake, then is fake the only real?

It's all frequency. War & violence resides in a low frequency. Hatred resides in low frequency. Jealousy ect. Low frequency. The Draconian Reptilian resides in a low frequency. Raise your frequency. Remove what no longer serves you. Delete and remove all who post negativity. Only keep high vibers , peace heads and love pushers and watch your reality turn into bliss. It's frequency. Land where you want to be. You are in control. Let go and station your vibration in love.❤❤❤❤❤❤

Yes of course, just because many actions are automatic and many people choose to live without agency does not mean there is no free will.

the hardcore content was still in the works .. lol jk..

How does memory fit in to this? How does information come when we are being directed or judging things? I’m just starting to think. I’m not sure of Evolution’s goals. Interesting video. Carry on.

How about Ni Fi Te Se?😂😂

too "emotional and weak" for INTJs, too "cold and technical" for INFPs, too "stupid" for INTPs, but another INFJ feels like a brother to me anyone else?

I find FI users selfish.

infpها فکرکنم بیشترین شباهت راباintpهادارند وگاهی متاسفانه بایک دیگراشتباه گرفته میشن

Me - infp, just read the title and click the video cause title AND Naruto. And yea, i write the Comment before i see the video.

1,000% right. And also reasons should be logical and ethical not egotistical, i concur

This doesn’t even need to apply to some really broad life-changing purpose or cause. I find myself at a crossroads in relationships of all types and wonder if there is purpose and if not what next… we are always moving forward - it’s our nature to. It’s not like us to just settle and sit still. We are truth seekers fundamentally. Everything else is just context.

4:15 🖐I disagree, the concept of fairnes existed long before man appeared on earth and is called balance. Nature is all about balance, the problem is that we don't see nature as balanced, because this would mean accepting certain natural laws we humans find 'unfair.' One such natural law is: Natural Balance is > Society's Acceptance The concept of balance is indeed fundamental in both nature & human societies. 🕵‍♂Let's explore this further. *Nature's Balance* : - In the natural world, balance is pervasive. Ecosystems thrive when there's equilibrium among various components-predators & prey, plant life & herbivores, climate cycles, and nutrient cycles. - Nature operates based on intricate feedback loops that maintain stability. For instance, predator populations keep herbivore populations in check, which in turn affects plant growth. - The laws of physics, such as the conservation of energy and matter, also contribute to maintaining balance. *Human Perception of Balance* : - We humans often perceive nature as "unfair." This perception arises because we tend to view balance through our own lens of preferences, desires, and societal norms. - What seems "unfair" to us might be a natural consequence of underlying principles. For example, the survival of the fittest-a fundamental concept in evolution-can appear harsh, but it ensures adaptation and progress. - Our societal constructs, including laws, ethics, and cultural norms, shape our perception of fairness. Sometimes, these constructs conflict with natural balance. *Natural Balance vs. Society's Acceptance* : - My statement that "Natural Balance is > Society's Acceptance" highlights an intriguing tension. - Natural balance operates independently of human opinions or judgments. It follows universal laws. - Society's acceptance, on the other hand, varies across cultures, historical periods, and individual perspectives. What one society deems fair may differ from another's view. - When societal norms clash with natural balance (e.g., environmental degradation due to human activities), tensions arise. 👉In summary, the interplay between natural balance and societal acceptance is complex. Recognizing this complexity allows us to appreciate the delicate equilibrium in nature while acknowledging our role in shaping our world.

I LOVE THIS CUTUE PIE, AND THE DUTCH ACCENT.