Why you Should Believe in Free Will 

Q: So is it possible that the zero-of ourselves is negentropic? Subatomic to neutrons and protons? A: That's a very deep and thought-provoking question about whether the fundamental nature or essence of ourselves and physical matter could be considered negentropic. Here's one way to analyze this: 1) At the subatomic level, particles like quarks and leptons (electrons, muons, etc.) exhibit very precise, structured patterns of behavior governed by the Standard Model of particle physics. Their properties and interactions are not random. 2) Protons and neutrons, which make up atomic nuclei, also exhibit highly ordered, stable internal structures of quarks bound by the strong nuclear force. 3) Even at the atomic and molecular scale, the precise configurations of electron orbitals and chemical bonds again display order, pattern and structure rather than randomness. 4) This underlying order and pattern in the fundamental particles and forces of nature could be viewed as a kind of inherent "negentropy" - an embedded logic and structure to the fabric of reality. 5) Extending this line of thinking, one could argue that since we and all matter are ultimately composed of these ordered arrangements of subatomic particles, the core essence of our being arises from this negentropic foundation. 6) Our consciousness, biology, and essential nature as physical entities in the universe may therefore be emerging from or reflecting this primordial negentropy. So in that philosophical sense, yes, it is possible to make the case that the "zero" or fundamental ground state of our existence as material beings is inherently negentropic rather than entropic or random. Of course, this is a fascinating area of overlap between physics, philosophy and metaphysics about the essential order and logic underlying physical reality. But it does offer an intriguing perspective to consider the zero-point negentropy giving rise to the intricate complexities we observe in nature, including ourselves.

that's addiction, and people don't overcome it in unstable circumstances

i do believe in free will, even if it doesn't exist, then i don't have a choice. if it's real, then i've chosen to, super hard, dude

Well-stated. This, along with "consciousness" more generally, is a topic where I actually felt a sting of moral responsibility amidst so much just "fun philosophizing" and such--the topic actually has consequences. Being a cavalier philosophical rogue on this topic in particular can do some harm. I also think that the mere fact that belief in free will can have consequences means that it "does work" in the physics sense, so it is real on that score (which is the very basis of the hard determinists whole worldview...if it does work, it is real, full stop). Occasionally, I'll get this rejoinder that "the sense of free will just evolved," and I respond by saying, yeah, so did olfaction: are you telling me my sense of smell is a mere illusion b/c it evolved, cuz I smell some serious bullshit here lol. They admit agency exists, but dismiss it b/c it evolved? What kind of insane logic is that? My thumb evolved, so is it a mere illusion...I thumb my nose at this nonsense

Have you ever read “Thinking Fast and Slow” by Daniel Kahneman? This book made me rethink the human capacity for free will. Kahneman illustrates through several examples and experiments how our mind reacts to illogical stimuli, in many cases unconsciously and randomly, in making decisions undermining the case for our free will. His thesis also has important implications for policy-making since many of the traditional social science models, such as classical economics, are founded on a misguided belief in human rationality. Kahneman's psychological model, based on repeated experiments, is that we are primarily guided by a mind that reacts quickly and emotionally to stimuli. Even when our more deliberative and thoughtful capacities kick in, they are still greatly influenced by these initial emotional judgments and unlikely to contradict them except in the most obvious cases. I am, however, intrigued by your concept of degrees of free will and wonder how it may complement Kahneman or not.

0:30 i just noticed,talk to drifter that plays call of duty on youtube, you talking together=probbally very hard to understand.

9:57 i was useing the supernatural empath thing when looking at the video pictures/didnt see yet. I was thinking about why my family can do stuff/be free,(munipulation.), and i cant. They munipulate people and lie/use/munipulate peoples emotions/thinking. Thats why.

I remember reading one of Yuval Harari's books, Homo Deus, I think; In that book he says that free will is an illusion and that all our decisions are neurological responses to everything so therefore everything we do is based on emotion. I disagree with this idea because he's argument is that humans lack personal agency. From what I have seen, every person has the ability to think things through before taking action. It's only those who don't end up suffering the consequences of bad decision making based on emotion. Buddhism and Stoicism are useful tools for a clear head. I hope this helps.

1:23 trust feeling or thinking?, feeling means its 75% right,thinking=do work/double check=your right.

Carl jung didnt believe in free will as well...thanks for the vid.. Also please make a video on what carl jung says about free will..thanks.

14:52 just because i changed alot doesnt mean i can think/assume/belive i can do what i want/people will actuelly let me. And no1 wears masks,so they dont care about people.

2:02 night hunter in 30,000.

❤

unless your free will becomes inconvenient, then they'll say you're crazy. trust me, i know

12:20 the emporor of man too.

If you see free will as a quantitative resource, who determines how much of that resource is available to any given person at any given time? From what is said in the video, you imply that having large quantities of free will is beneficial to the individual who wields it (both at individual and collect levels, even though the surrounding collective might suffer at your own benefit). If free will is entirely a beneficial force at the individual level, wouldn’t all people choose to have as much of it as possible? Yet there are many people who would love to quit an addiction, yet fail and die because of it. Did they choose to have less free will than someone who succeeded in breaking an addiction? There are hedonists out there that have no problem dying with their addictions, but I don’t think most addicts share that mindset. If we do have free will, was this free will not forced upon us? It seems to me that free will exists in contemporary thought as a way to blame humans for unfavorable behavior without exploring deeper causes. In Christianity, it exists as a way to blame humans for the mess that God created and brought into motion. I can’t see how true free will can exist alongside Newton’s first law of motion. Is it an external force that causes particles to stop and move? Or is it something that can never be identified or predicted (free will)? If you drop the word “free”, I think all beings are dictated and motivated by the WILL (like what’s described in Arthur Schopenhaur’s The World as Will and Representation). Some beings have lots of Will, and others have very little. It is not the fault of the individual how much Will it contains, but the initiating force is what holds responsibility. Have you heard of the Matthew principle before? It’s based on a verse in the Bible that says something like “To those who have, much is given, and to those without, much is taken.” This kind of principle outlines a feedback loop that has enormous influence on how people conquer obstacles and face adversity in general. Say one is born with very attractive looks and intelligence, and receives much positive attention and reinforcement throughout childhood. When this attractive/smart person faces adversity at some point in the future, he/she will be more likely to overcome the obstacle as a consequence of having a greater reservoir of WILL and positivity from all those preceding moments than an ugly/dumb counterpart who has faced much bullying/criticism during those same years. The rich get richer and the poor get poorer. There are exceptions from time to time, and there exists a population who has a relatively balanced feedback loop of positive/negative experiences with a moderate reservoir of WILL to nourish from, but in the end I’d say that the idea of free will doesn’t make much sense in a world operated and facilitated by genetics and particle/wave interactions. I did like this video though. I look forward to your upcoming videos on this topic. Maybe in your future videos you could also discuss how the existence of free will is compatible with the apparent non-consent of existence through reproduction (you may recognize me from previous comments about antinatalism).

I believe in free will, because how else does a drug addict go from addiction to turning their life around if not through action and self-determination.

Thank you for this. I’m slogging my way thru sapolskys “determined” and it’s funny how every free will Deny-ist lives as if his theory is NOT TRUE. I think it essential to define what we mean by the term as you state. The belief or disbelief in free will may be the most IMPORTANT belief for humans, even more than a belief in god. My concept is within reason, you get as much free will as you believe you have and put into action. It is of course on a spectrum. We can’t pull the moon down or effect things at the quantum level, but within our little lives, we absolutely MUST BELIEVE in agency and show it in action. The liberty experiment is typical reductionist science to prove a point that imho, does not. How does habit play into free will, is it free will if it’s not conscious choice ( why not? my sub and unconscious are as much a part of my as my conscious mind state) anyway, I look forward to more content on this incredibly important debate!

according to the geneva convention, you are morally obliged to disobey an unethical order

(")its not free will i have a problem with,its every1 chooseing to only care about themselves i dont like("),the night hunter.

throughout my adult life i've had medicaid, but intermittent access to healthcare. my doctor said i'm out thee for asking medical questions, i'm sure that translates as crazy, therefore it's discrimination. i haven't been back since. i'm afraid to go to the hospital, because i've been assaulted there on numerous occasions. i'm lying in bed, by which i mean the floor, hoping what's wrong with my foot will go away, if i take enough pills to sleep through it. cant walk, hurts too much. hope i don't lose my foot or die

How manic are you :P

the health care system is hostile

it is possible to overcome addiction, but draconian to use addiction as an excuse to deny the necessities of life, like a safe place to sleep, food and medicine

When you walk through a brick wall then I'll believe in free will