Who am I?

Madman said:Meaning is a human construct, not some thing found in nature.

Can you give me a few more examples of these "natural categories" versus "human categories"? I'm honestly struggling to see where the line is... Like, where does this whole "unnatural" thing come from that lets us just invent categories against nature?

The one who manages to juggle everything they have without dropping a single ball... skill comes from experience, I guess.

A person isn't defined by stumbling over every little hurdle in their path...
Real character shows when you pull yourself up and keep moving forward—head held high.

lacerta said:🙂

It’s not quite as simple as the chicken and the egg.
I’d go as far as to say there isn't a single chicken to be found in the coop this morning. 😬

Sure, but that would require—as you put it—making a conscious change.
When you really start digging into how the brain works, it’s fascinating to look at the interplay between electrical and chemical activity. It isn't just one or the other; it's a constant, complex dance between the two. Think of the electrical side as the lightning-fast signaling—those rapid-fire impulses traveling along neurons to get a message from point A to point B. But that signal can't jump the gap between cells on its own. That’s where the chemistry kicks in. Once the electrical pulse hits the end of a neuron, it triggers the release of neurotransmitters—the chemical messengers that cross the synaptic gap to pass the baton to the next cell. It’s a perfect loop: electricity drives the chemistry, and the chemistry facilitates the electricity. Without that delicate balance, our thoughts, movements, and even our moods would essentially grind to a halt.
He basically took full control of his own biology.
First things first, you’ve got to use your head.

If you ask me, everything described above is entirely doable.
Explain it without even bringing up free will.
I don't see any reason to hire her for this.

Because of the environment they were raised in, given everything they had to deal with back then...
They managed to cover a few bases, which is exactly what gave them the edge.
They really did have luck on their side.

When it comes down to what we actually want versus how much freedom we’re willing to exercise, you really only have two ways this can play out:
Is free will something that’s always there, quietly running in the background, or does it only manifest in specific, defining moments?

Let's look at the first possibility: what does "from the very beginning" actually imply?
Does a baby have free will? And if so, does a fetus have it too?
Does that mean they have external stations too? 😕
It seems to me that the first option is actually a possibility.
So, we're talking about "souls" being the drivers of free will, are we? Interesting take.
Bringing a soul into the narrative feels like an unnecessary complication to me.

wow. I feel a deep sense of resonance with what’s been said here. That isn't necessarily a compliment; I’m just saying that reading this feels a lot like reading my own work. It’s that specific feeling of recognizing certain lines of thought.

I’m starting to feel like free will is more of a hypothesis than something backed by hard science. To be honest, the only thing actually supporting the idea of free will is my own subjective experience. It *feels* like I have agency—like I can choose whatever I want—but that’s just how perception works. It’s like looking at a circular plate from an angle; it looks like an ellipse, even though it isn't. Our senses can be incredibly deceiving.

I am certain of one thing, with as much conviction as I can muster: I am aware of myself. In other words, I possess self-awareness. It isn’t particularly difficult to break down what that actually means. Let's start with "consciousness." Consciousness is essentially just the process by which the brain handles sensory input. Any animal with a brain possesses this type of consciousness; they use it to process everything they take in through sight, sound, touch, and so on. You could say consciousness "perceives" a sensation. Self-awareness, then, is clearly the ability of a more advanced consciousness to "perceive" itself. Instead of focusing on an external stimulus, that consciousness turns its attention inward. It becomes capable of observing and analyzing its own existence, much like it would any outside force. As far as we know, among all living creatures on Earth, this is a capacity unique to human consciousness—though even then, most people, and certainly most children, rarely spend time focusing on themselves. Usually, their minds are occupied with more pressing matters. Kids are busy finding new ways to play, while adults are likely preoccupied with following the latest drama on a Netflix series. For those individuals we might describe as being "self-aware," their consciousness is almost always partially focused on itself. Every time they perceive something from the outside world, they are simultaneously examining their own reaction—the very process of perception itself. This parallel act of self-observation actually modifies both the initial perception and the subsequent reaction to it.

Free will—if we can even call it that—seems to stem from self-awareness. But honestly? I’m starting to think it’s just an illusion. So many "decisions" we claim to make happen entirely beneath the surface of our conscious mind. To me, there's no reason to label those unconscious impulses as actual decisions, let alone use them as proof that free will exists. Even when we do make conscious choices, I suspect they might just be a byproduct of how our self-awareness functions. It feels like a loop: after enough iterations, our consciousness "forgets" exactly where the initial impulse came from. This makes us feel like we conjured the decision out of thin air, when in reality, it’s more like a mental stew. We take a messy blend of past memories and subconscious cravings, throw them into a pot, and our self-awareness serves up a finished dish. If that's all it is, I don't see how we can justify calling that process "free will."

Alright, I need someone to help me make sense of this. Studies on identical twins—you know, two people with the exact same genetic code who grew up under the same roof and shared basically the same life experiences—have shown that they still turn out to be two completely different people.

Personally, I’m leaning toward thinking it’s because there's this deep-seated drive to be unique, even if just in one small way. So, free will, right?

Oops, my bad. Typo on my part. That last sentence was supposed to read: So... FREE WILL??

...Or maybe it’s just that little something extra—beyond our DNA and life lessons—that actually makes us individuals.

Apem - basically said:

But where do those different desires, interests, and talents actually come from? Is it all just stemming from how we perceive ourselves? Some kind of total fluke? If that's the case, why does everyone see things so differently? Even identical twins raised in the exact same house in Chicago?

Mary said:So where do our differing desires, interests, and talents come from? Is it all just different perceptions of self-awareness? Pure coincidence? Why does everyone perceive things differently then? Even identical twins raised in the exact same household?

There are far too many external factors influencing
an individual's personal development
to claim they are identical
just because they happen to live under the same roof.
Ultimately, the desire for twins to be different
isn't an expression of free will;
it's a matter of self-preservation—
which, again, stems directly from genetic code.
Where is the freedom in that?

Apemant said:I don't see why I should even call unconscious "decisions" decisions, let alone view them as proof of free will. As for conscious choices, it's possible they arise within that very process of self-preservation of our consciousness, where after countless iterations, the self "forgets" exactly where the impulses for a decision originated, making it feel as though it produced the choice "entirely on its own"... Again, I fail to see why that process should be labeled "free will."

resonance 🙂

What’s actually the point of being self-aware, anyway? I mean, animals seem to be doing just fine navigating life without it all.

They really do keep things up to code.

mellon said:I find myself wondering why I actually chose one path over another by my own free will...

I wonder if you really made that choice yourself, or if you just feel like you did, when maybe something else was actually choosing for you instead....

mellon said:It honestly feels like true experience is the only thing that comes from free will, since we use those experiences to build our own identities over time... but if you trace everything back and question all those "free" decisions, you eventually hit that very first moment where no prior experience existed, leaving nothing behind to influence the choice except genetics and circumstances. I guess I'm looking for someone to convince me otherwise and explain what MY actual role is in any of this, because when you look at the math of heredity, life experience, and environment, there doesn't seem to be much room left for my part in it?!

Free will seems to be a pretty tiny thing, probably way smaller than most of us like to think, so I suppose your individual role in the whole machine is likely quite small too. Maybe we are given the opportunity to work on ourselves so that through a massive amount of effort we can actually acquire some degree of free will, but I guess it's worth asking how many people actually succeed at that? And honestly, how many even try?

lacerta said:It seems to me that the first possibility is assuming there is some kind of 'soul' acting as the vessel for free will, but bringing a soul into the conversation feels like adding an unnecessary complication to the whole thing.

And I mean, why does it necessarily soul have to be the term for whatever carries free will, especially when there are so many other terms for the self that aren't nearly as vague or, as you might say, complicated?

And yeah, looking at the options you're laying out, I'd say it's pretty certain that nobody is born with free will. It's something that can be earned, or as you put it, manifests at a certain point in time.

That's just how I see it, I guess. 🙂

Mary said:Oh, my bad. That was a typo. The last sentence should actually read: So. FREE WILL??

...Or maybe it’s just that certain "something" that makes us individuals, beyond just our genes and experiences.

Just to be clear: I’m not saying I’m 100% certain about this. It is entirely possible that free will truly exists, but I am fairly convinced it doesn't emerge from any scientific observation. Therefore, free will remains firmly in the realm of mysticism (faith, religion, esotericism, etc.).

But let me get back to my point. How do identical twins develop into two distinct, non-identical people? Honestly, explaining this is pretty trivial. All you need is an hour to look into the most basic layer of deterministic chaos theory. You can practically find anything you need on Google regarding IBM; it’s typically illustrated with a bifurcation diagram of a population equation. There is so little math involved that even a middle schooler could wrap their head around it, and it perfectly illustrates the core aspect of IBM. Don't let all those intimidating terms scare you off—deterministic chaos, bifurcation diagrams—it's actually an incredibly straightforward theory.

Once you grasp that fundamental idea behind IBM, the explanation will likely occur to you immediately. Identical twins differ in countless ways. For instance, during the prenatal stage, they aren't positioned in exactly the same spot. Once they are born, they don't occupy the same space either; they exist in different locations. As adults, people don't always address both twins at the exact same moment—one might hear something while the other isn't even nearby. Every tiny discrepancy like that can trigger what people call the "butterfly effect." And just like that, you end up with two different individuals without ever having to factor free will into the equation.

Of course, this isn't "proof" that free will doesn't exist. It's simply proof that free will isn't a necessary concept to explain the phenomenon. So, by applying Ockham's razor, we can just leave it out of the calculation.

Mary said:What purpose does self-awareness serve, when animals survive just fine with only basic consciousness?

That’s an excellent question. My only critique is that you phrased it as if self-awareness must have a specific purpose. Mutations don't happen *for* a reason. A bird doesn't grow a long beak specifically so it can reach into a tree hollow. Instead, that beak develops through a pseudo-random mutation; because it turned out to be useful, birds with that trait had an edge over those without it, helping them survive and pass on their genes (I'm assuming you agree with the fundamental principles of Darwinian evolution here).
By that same logic, self-awareness has no inherent "purpose." It is simply a fact of our existence. If we assume self-awareness emerged naturally through evolutionary processes, then it arose via pseudo-randomness, just like any other mutation—without a goal in mind. However, individuals possessing this trait (humans) proved superior in terms of ensuring the survival of our species. At least, that's how it looks today. There's no guarantee that self-awareness isn't a ticking time bomb that might eventually lead to human extinction, much like what many contemplative sci-fi writers "predict"—though "imagine" is probably a better word.
By the way, when I use the term "pseudo-random," I'm referring to randomness as understood through deterministic chaos theory, where true randomness doesn't actually exist because everything is determined. Even chaos follows a pattern, even if it looks random from the outside and we can't even prove it isn't truly random. Man, if Plato knew about DTK...

nobody at all said:Could you give me some more examples of "natural categories" versus "human categories"? I’m struggling to see where the line is drawn... Where does this supposed "unnaturalness" of humans come from that allows us to just invent categories that go against nature?

Since we're essentially products of nature, someone could argue that everything we do is technically "natural." But honestly, that's not really what we're getting at here. It's not that humans are actively trying to defy nature; it's more that as we evolve, we have these specific desires and ways we try to fill gaps in our understanding. We end up inventing concepts that don't actually have a foundation in how things naturally flow.
The core idea is that humans try to define the world based on our own needs and perspectives, which means we often overlook the actual state of reality. For an example, think about how we measure time. We've invented these systems and act like time flows in a very specific, orderly way. But if you look at Einstein's theory of relativity—which is one of those massive scientific abstractions that goes way beyond basic human intuition—you see that time is just another dimension in the fabric of the universe. A clock or a calendar doesn't actually dictate its meaning.
If we're talking about purpose, I'd say the universe, the planets, plants, and animals don't exist because it "makes sense" for them to. They aren't searching for a deeper meaning either. They simply exist because it was possible for them to exist.

Look at it this way... you've got your dice, and genetics is just the numbers on those dice
What else are you missing? It’s the actual situation where you end up rolling them🙂
I mean... playing with dice is the easy part, but do you actually have every possible scenario mapped out on paper?😬

Human emotions aren't nearly as simple as math🙂

"I'm not really anyone—I'm just me, if I even am me..." 🙏 🙏

You're getting a little too philosophical here 😬

hotnix said:pace, you're getting a bit too philosophical here... 😬

philosophical 🙄 😍

Oops! I guess I just gave you a biological makeover 😍 😍 🤣

hotnix said:whoops—gave you a biological baptism...😍 😍 🤣

that wasn't even me anyway☕

🤣 🤣