Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt R.
If I am not interpreting what was done in the experiments correctly or the conclusions the authors came to, I'll probably need to read the full text or a more detailed explanation of the methodology.
You appear to have the basic idea of the experiments.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt R.
This is why, I believe, the question is empirically underdetermined (if this is the correct term).
.
I don't understand how exactly what you are saying here. Are you saying that we don't yet understand all the details of how our mind makes decisions? And more experiments are needed to improve our understanding? If so I don't think anyone disagrees.
The point I am making is that the issues are empirical. Meaningful conclusions can only come from doing scientific analysis of how the brain works. No science no advance. Everything about how we make decisions happens in the brain, the brain fits in a laboratory, we should be able to get there eventually.
The indeterminism or otherwise of the universe as a whole seems an entirely different area. Understanding the brain at the bimolecular level should be all that is needed for all issues concerning our decision making process to be resolved. Fundamentals of how the universe is structured probably needs 'sub quantum' considerations.
My basic instinct was that the universe is deterministic, however I have to accept the results of empirical evidence resulting in the uncertainty principle and allow that the universe is after all indeterministic.
However all indication are that the future only happens once. So retrospectively at least you can conclude that everything in the universe is preordained. So while the future might be indeterministic, I would claim it is never the less fixed and cannot be changed. OK, maybe this bit is underdetermined.
Last edited by Piers; 03-26-2011 at 08:10 AM.