Re: free will

On 17 Jan, 16:41, Boikat <boi...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


The answer to the last is *no*. �Trees have no minds, and therefore,
make no decisions involving choices. �Trees have no free will, since
they have no mind.



Obviously trees do have alternatives, but most of the alternatives
come from outside, from the weather and such. The trees are forced, by
what the weather wills. But trees also have autonomous free
processes.

But. They. Do. Not. Have. A. Mind.


Mhh, as Thomas Nagel did not quite put it: how is it like to be a
tree? To play a bit devils advocate: Assuming free will is real. (I
subscribe at the monet to that view despite some counterevidence)
Further assume that it is somehow connected to the concept of "mind",
even though its status is more problematic than that of free will, and
we are in danger of an explanation obscurum per obscurious ("free
will" has an explanatory function in at least some theories, applying
Quine's criteria of ontological relativity that is enough to accept it
temporarily, but "mind" as far as I know is lacking such an
explanatory role)

We normally accept that humans have free will, based partly on
introspection, partly on observation. Based on observation alone, some
of us are willing to grant it to other animals as well - with of
course the danger that we might be anthropomorphising. We also have
some reasons ot belief that an organism can loose its mind/free will
if the underlying biological structure is damaged - persistent
vegitative state e.g.

From an evolutionary perspective, this I'd say assumes that free will
(or mind) evolves at some point as an emergent property of underlying
biological features. However, since we do not really have a theory of
the mind, or free will, we do not know if there is an "in principle"
cut off point. It might be something that comes in degrees for
instance, with "proto-sentient" features possibly more prevalent in
nature than we think.

at the moment, this is largely speculation outside science proper, but
any speculation ought to be consistent with what we know
scientifically. Under the (loaded) assumptions above, the notion that
trees have free will/mind cannot be ruled out on scientific grounds
alone - which yould of course take as a reductio argument for the
existence of free will/mind in the first place.

I'm just a bit worried that singling out humans, without sound
scientific reason, looks more like a "special status" religious
argument than a "scientifically informed" speculation

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Theory-Think (story-storming)
    ... not using some mesmeric powers to project a state of mind upon you. ... someone protesting the evils of money when using materials that simply ... world is because that bit matches evolutionary thinking. ... make an argument of that kind about trees, one would have to be making ...
    (rec.arts.sf.composition)
  • Re: Waterfall Critique
    ... Keep in mind that a conversion to black and white, ... ratios. ... like there is snow or ice, ... trees (although a couple of local farmers edit their trees for ...
    (alt.photography)
  • Re: plz answer my simple question...
    ... > there is a question in my mind from last few days.. ... > trees,poles etc looks to move backwards very fast as compared to those ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Removed bushes - now what to replace?
    ... sidewalk, and in full sun year round. ... If I didn't mind watering, I might plant azaleas and some large specimen ...  But I think I would rather have small trees there, ...
    (rec.gardens)
  • What did Taysseer suck in front of all the proceedings? We cant grow markers unless Quinton will wi
    ... manner laid at the root of the trees, that every tree which brings not ... "Haste and escape for your lives, look not behind you, escape to the ... THOUGHTS ON MIND AND ON STYLE ... THE FUNDAMENTALS OF THE CHRISTIAN RELIGION ...
    (sci.crypt)