[sciborg2]

Study Tackles Neuroscience Claims to Have Disproved “Free Will” by Matt Shipman

“Meanwhile, the journal articles that drew the most forceful conclusions often didn’t even assess the neural activity in question – which means their conclusions were based on speculation,” Dubljevic says. “It is crucial to critically examine whether the methods used actually support the claims being made.”

This is important because what people are told about free will can affect their behavior.

“Numerous studies suggest that fostering a belief in determinism influences behaviors like cheating,” Dubljevic says. “Promoting an unsubstantiated belief on the metaphysical position of non-existence of free will may increase the likelihood that people won’t feel responsible for their actions if they think their actions were predetermined.”

And this isn’t a problem solely within the neuroscience community. Earlier work by Dubljevic and his collaborators found challenges in how this area of research has been covered by the press and consumed by the public.

“To be clear, we’re not taking a position on free will,” Dubljevic says. “We’re just saying neuroscience hasn’t definitively proven anything one way or the other.”

[TLEILAXU]

Study Tackles Neuroscience Claims to Have Disproved “Free Will” by Matt Shipman

“Meanwhile, the journal articles that drew the most forceful conclusions often didn’t even assess the neural activity in question – which means their conclusions were based on speculation,” Dubljevic says. “It is crucial to critically examine whether the methods used actually support the claims being made.”

This is important because what people are told about free will can affect their behavior.

“Numerous studies suggest that fostering a belief in determinism influences behaviors like cheating,” Dubljevic says. “Promoting an unsubstantiated belief on the metaphysical position of non-existence of free will may increase the likelihood that people won’t feel responsible for their actions if they think their actions were predetermined.”

And this isn’t a problem solely within the neuroscience community. Earlier work by Dubljevic and his collaborators found challenges in how this area of research has been covered by the press and consumed by the public.

“To be clear, we’re not taking a position on free will,” Dubljevic says. “We’re just saying neuroscience hasn’t definitively proven anything one way or the other.”

This is important because what people are told about free will can affect their behavior.

Oh the irony (or not). I wonder what those 'Numerous studies suggest that fostering a belief in determinism influences behaviors like cheating' are. I'm biased here, but it sounds a bit like bullshit to me. What if it's more dependent on the tone of the text than the content? Imagine fostering a belief in free will by making people read Ayn Rand before taking a behavioral test, surely that could also have an impact.

[sciborg2]

Oh the irony (or not). I wonder what those 'Numerous studies suggest that fostering a belief in determinism influences behaviors like cheating' are. I'm biased here, but it sounds a bit like bullshit to me. What if it's more dependent on the tone of the text than the content? Imagine fostering a belief in free will by making people read Ayn Rand before taking a behavioral test, surely that could also have an impact.

Is Ayn Rand just about free will though? Isn't it more a kind of will to power type thing?

[Wilshire]

Oh the irony (or not). I wonder what those 'Numerous studies suggest that fostering a belief in determinism influences behaviors like cheating' are. I'm biased here, but it sounds a bit like bullshit to me. What if it's more dependent on the tone of the text than the content? Imagine fostering a belief in free will by making people read Ayn Rand before taking a behavioral test, surely that could also have an impact.

Is Ayn Rand just about free will though? Isn't it more a kind of will to power type thing?

The amount of things that Ayn Rand is purported to be either for or against is staggering. It seems you can almost always invoke her name on any subject and if the room has enough people someone will disagree and say she's actually a supporter of it.

People use her like they use the bible - cherry pick quotes and establish strong, unbending feelings about her without ever reading the whole and considering it for themselves. lol

[TaoHorror]

Oh the irony (or not). I wonder what those 'Numerous studies suggest that fostering a belief in determinism influences behaviors like cheating' are. I'm biased here, but it sounds a bit like bullshit to me. What if it's more dependent on the tone of the text than the content? Imagine fostering a belief in free will by making people read Ayn Rand before taking a behavioral test, surely that could also have an impact.

Is Ayn Rand just about free will though? Isn't it more a kind of will to power type thing?

The amount of things that Ayn Rand is purported to be either for or against is staggering. It seems you can almost always invoke her name on any subject and if the room has enough people someone will disagree and say she's actually a supporter of it.

People use her like they use the bible - cherry pick quotes and establish strong, unbending feelings about her without ever reading the whole and considering it for themselves. lol

Well, whatever you think/take from the work, Atlas Shrug was a very fun read. Was the bible for conservative economic views until her atheism was illuminated in political discourse. It's a beautiful example of how personal experience impacts the development of our world view. But you're right, these "bibles" are ripe for misunderstanding and misapplication.

EDIT: And yes, Sci - she was a fan of Freddy. But she distinguishes herself as it's choice in lieu of endemic to our natures if one becomes "powerful".

[sciborg2]

EDIT: And yes, Sci - she was a fan of Freddy. But she distinguishes herself as it's choice in lieu of endemic to our natures if one becomes "powerful".

Ah I'm not familiar with either her or Nietzsche - could you distinguish them more if you get the chance as I am not sure about this sentence due to my ignorance of this topic. Thanks!

[TaoHorror]

EDIT: And yes, Sci - she was a fan of Freddy. But she distinguishes herself as it's choice in lieu of endemic to our natures if one becomes "powerful".

Ah I'm not familiar with either her or Nietzsche - could you distinguish them more if you get the chance as I am not sure about this sentence due to my ignorance of this topic. Thanks!

You haven't read Nietzsche? Your usage "will to power" is a title to one of his books, The Will To Power ( not an actual book in that it's a collection of notes compiled by his sister after his death ). Read The Antichrist, it's not long and it's a nice glance on his thinking - he is considered history's greatest critic of philosophy and religion ( until R came along  ), broke new ground in breaking from traditional Judea/Christian cosmology. The English translation of the last page of The Antichrist is banned in America, but can still get it in the original German ( I had a college student translate it for me - it's quite a treat, which is saying something coming from a Christian such as myself ). If I can find it on the internet, I'll post it here. The Nazi's leveraged Fredrick's works in developing their positions ( some, such as myself, say they corrupted it - Fredrick was witnessing such a thing and had to declare his contemplation were not about people, but belief and parishioners should be left alone ). I've said too much, check him out if you have the time - intense, even by today's standards. He differs from Rand in that those "who are great", successfully become powerful "have it in them", while Rand claims it's "free will", a choice each of us to become "better". Nietzsche's discussion of "the herd" is still referenced ( mostly unknowingly, it's part of the popular conscious now ).

He was the first to coin, "we all get our 15 minutes of fame", but in his day it wasn't about "famous", but more we each at times in our life come close to greatness, but something inside our pathology prevents us from going further and becoming truly great. Only the very few go all the way.

[sciborg2]

You haven't read Nietzsche? Your usage "will to power" is a title to one of his books, The Will To Power ( not an actual book in that it's a collection of notes compiled by his sister after his death ). Read The Antichrist, it's not long and it's a nice glance on his thinking - he is considered history's greatest critic of philosophy and religion ( until R came along  ), broke new ground in breaking from traditional Judea/Christian cosmology. The English translation of the last page of The Antichrist is banned in America, but can still get it in the original German ( I had a college student translate it for me - it's quite a treat, which is saying something coming from a Christian such as myself ). If I can find it on the internet, I'll post it here. The Nazi's leveraged Fredrick's works in developing their positions ( some, such as myself, say they corrupted it - Fredrick was witnessing such a thing and had to declare his contemplation were not about people, but belief and parishioners should be left alone ). I've said too much, check him out if you have the time - intense, even by today's standards. He differs from Rand in that those "who are great", successfully become powerful "have it in them", while Rand claims it's "free will", a choice each of us to become "better". Nietzsche's discussion of "the herd" is still referenced ( mostly unknowingly, it's part of the popular conscious now ).

He was the first to coin, "we all get our 15 minutes of fame", but in his day it wasn't about "famous", but more we each at times in our life come close to greatness, but something inside our pathology prevents us from going further and becoming truly great. Only the very few go all the way.

Ah thanks for this, will check Nietzche out. I should've said I've read excerpts and works that reference him but never read an entire book of his.

The question of "selective potential for greatness" vs "pure freedom to be great" is an interesting one, I suspect the truth is somewhere in the middle.

[Madness]

TH, you're showing !