How does an atheist explain decision making?

[jimmy]

How do atheists reconcile that a decision can be made? If there is no god and everything is just chance, how do I decide between two or more possibilities? SPhysics says that the motion of an object will remain unchanged unless acted on by an outside force(3rd law of Newton?). If you have a poolball rolling on a frictionless table in a vacuum it will role with constant speed forever. Now, if I have a decision between two things, how do I affect the outcome of that decision considering this? It seems like it would be kind of circular that I cause the decision because it also seems that it is the change that causes the decision. Considering the example of the ball above, how can the ball change its direction without some outside force? Are all our decisions determined and predictable?

 

[Ryniev]

jimmy:

How do atheists reconcile that a decision can be made? If there is no god and everything is just chance, how do I decide between two or more possibilities?

I would assume they use their reason and intellect. I would also assume that they develop some sort of code that they feel comfortable living with. But I don’t know because I don’t know any self-professed atheists in real life.

 

[jimmy]

Ryniev:

I would assume they use their reason and intellect. I would also assume that they develop some sort of code that they feel comfortable living with. But I don’t know because I don’t know any self-professed atheists in real life.

That is not what I mean. What I mean is a specific scientific idea. It is the question, how is it possible for us to make a choice between two possibilities if science says that everything is by chance and that there is a scientific reason for everything. According to science how can I choose to hit the “k” on my keyboard instead of the “j”?

The only way I can reconcile science with decision making is the idea that every one of our decisions are determined. This would mean that my typing this post would be predetermined based on the physics of it. All my subsequent decisions could be predictable because they are the result of physical laws.

Maybe this is just a stupid question but it seems to make sense to me.

 

[Everstruggling]

Well, I’m agnostic, not really an atheist, and I don’t entirely understand your post, and I’m not a physicist or philosopher, but I’ll give answering you a try. Here is most of us reconcile it:

It never even occured to us to think about it.

But since you bring it up, here’s what I think:

I believe that the sub-atomic paticles that make up my physical being are governed by the laws of quantum dynamics (actually, it would be better to say that quantum dynamics is an accurate depiction of the laws that govern particles) There movement and organization were not governed by any divine forces. So on one level, what I am able to do is pre-determined by the particles that make-up me (I am subject to gravity, I can’t move at the speed of light). Because of the way these particles organised themselves, I’m biological life form. This particular way of organization has made me subject to a different set of laws (natural selection, cellular reproduction, genetic transference, energy storage).
The way I’m organized just so happens to allow for free will, and choice.

I don’t think I explained that very well. Here’s one more shot.

I’m typing on a computer, somehow, this machine is translating everything that I’m doing into 1’s and 0’s that are being transmitted all around the world. 1’s and 0’s can’t make decisions. They can’t opt to be another way of being, and yet somehow, if you program them into a machine, you can beat Kasparov at chess. They still follow all of the mechanical laws, but they can (or at least appear to) “chose” moves in a board game.

 

[jimmy]

I will try to explain a little better. In order for something to happen in the world there are certain things that must happen. When a poolball changes directions it is due to another poolball hitting it. When a chemical undergoes a chemical reaction it is first introduced to the chemical and the temperature is elevated to the correct temperature. If I look at chemistry, there are the laws of thermodynamics that say a liter of water at 25 degrees celcius and 1 ATM pressure will remain water and will not turn to ice. At -1 degrees celcius water spontaneously turns to ice. There is no decision in it, it just happens. The water can’t decide that it does not want to turn to ice when the temperature reaches -1 degrees, it is going to happen.

The will is a little different. Say I decide to go for a drive one day in my car. I come to an intersection in the road. I could choose to go left or right. There is nothing dictating that I have to go left and there is nothing dictating that I have to go right. Both ways are completely equal and completey unknown to me. I am at a crossroads and must decide, what do I do?

If it is all based on scientific laws then how can I make a choice that is not predetermined by the laws of the universe.

The computer program to beat the chess player, big blue or what ever it is called is based on rules of the computer program. The rules say if these circumstances occur then this is the response. These rules were set up by humans. So it is not really the same thing. A human is acting of himself. He is acting independantly of any rules. There might be social rules that say a human will often react in this way if he is put into this situation, but I can easily decide to go against that social norm.

The 1s and 0s follow a pattern as well. The human will does not have to follow any pattern. I am not speaking of the translation from my mind to the keyboard. What I am speaking of is the thought that causes that translation to the keyboard. My thought process has a choice between a “k” and a “j” what do I choose? Before I actually decide that “k” is the correct choice, I have this crossroads in my mind asking the question which is correct.

 

[cheddarsox]

Interesting discussion!

First, science does not claim everything happens through chance, Indeed, science is all about finding out the forces and laws which govern why things occur as they do.

Second, you are placing science in the role of having/being the thing that must account for everything if God isn’t believed in.
Science is a process of investigating. Thats’ it. It is not an institution or entity or Other God. Science is not some being or thing that pretends to have an anti-god answer to all questions.

Some atheists also use science in that way, but many don’t.

It is a really pointless and unproductive discussion that pits Science against God. It is not even apples and oranges, it is pigs and baseballs.

Most people who believe in God beleive God has all the answers. Science, by definition is seeking answers but never claims to have them, it just has the results of all the investigating that has been done up to this point, fully aware that tomorrow, we will have new info that we will have to integrate and alter our perceptions about things.

Most people who believe in God, beleive God doesn’t change, scientific knowledge is always evolving.

On the subject of predestination due to known scientific laws. I wonder about that myself quite a bit. Sometimes I suspect that it is all predetermined, but religiously, sometimes I suspect the same. So in the end, doesn’t make any difference. What is true, no matter where I put my money down, is that I am not in control of much, if anything. Humbling.

I am a scientist. I also am very spiritual and religious. My concept of the divine is quite different from the Catholic God, and to some people very “sciencey” but I don’t worship science or give it the place of God in my life. Science is a man made process that we use. A really great tool, but that is it. It can’t and wasn’t designed to answer all questions.

But then, neither was religion, another really useful but limited tool. I keep them both in my life’s tool box and use them daily. Perhaps in a predestined way…

cheddar

 

[jimmy]

cheddarsox, welcome to the thread. I don’t think that science claims to know everything but it does claim that all things of the physical universe can be explained by the laws of the universe. Nothing happens that is against the laws of the universe.

Take Organic Chem for example. Every chemical reaction can be explained by examining the physical nature of the chemcals being reacted. The bond angles, the bond strength between certain atoms, reactions between different atoms within a molecule, and etc. There is a reason why things occur the way they do.

Now, if there is no god and all things can be explained by the laws of the universe(both known and unknown) then the human thought process and decision making should be able to be described by a physical law. Consequently all our decisions should be predictable if you know those physical laws(what a depressing idea ).

Science and religion are not in conflict. In my opinion science can explain God but I think science means nothing apart from God. I don’t think everything can be explained by scientific laws.

 

[cheddarsox]

jimmy:

Science and religion are not in conflict. In my opinion science can explain God but I think science means nothing apart from God. I don’t think everything can be explained by scientific laws.

There are no scientific laws. There just is the way things are, the way things work. Science doesn’t make any laws or deem what is a law, it only discovers the way things work.

In my experience, studying science has only deepened my faith in the divine. To me, it is much more awesom and mind boggling that the divine works with an obvious system and order than to believe God is some capricious magic being in the sky that does things on a whim.

The sense and order that the scientific process has discovered is my faith saver!

I love a divine which works through and in creation in such awe inspiring ways. Personally, I believe that the divine does not ever work outside of its own laws, and I do believe that there IS a natural reason for everything that occurs, because everything is part of nature and I have never seen the divine to work in any other way.

That is so amazing to me, the compexity, the order. Supernatural is much more scary and depressing as far as I am concerned. Just, bam, stuff happens for no discernable reason except that “The Big Guy” decided so? Yuck! I hated that version of God that people tried to feed me. Now I know better, and I feel truly safe and secure in the divine order of things.

cheddar

 

[jimmy]

cheddarsox:

There are no scientific laws. There just is the way things are, the way things work. Science doesn’t make any laws or deem what is a law, it only discovers the way things work.

In my experience, studying science has only deepened my faith in the divine. To me, it is much more awesom and mind boggling that the divine works with an obvious system and order than to believe God is some capricious magic being in the sky that does things on a whim.

The sense and order that the scientific process has discovered is my faith saver!

I love a divine which works through and in creation in such awe inspiring ways. Personally, I believe that the divine does not ever work outside of its own laws, and I do believe that there IS a natural reason for everything that occurs, because everything is part of nature and I have never seen the divine to work in any other way.

That is so amazing to me, the compexity, the order. Supernatural is much more scary and depressing as far as I am concerned. Just, bam, stuff happens for no discernable reason except that “The Big Guy” decided so? Yuck! I hated that version of God that people tried to feed me. Now I know better, and I feel truly safe and secure in the divine order of things.

cheddar

I love the order of things as well. I love that the universe follows certain laws and patterns. It is beautiful. Even the theory of evolution and the big bang is a beautiful idea. To start from nothing and gradually grow to be what it is.

Somethings happened just because the Big Guy said so though. If you believe in miracles it is easy to say that God acts against nature at times.

I am sure you know what I mean when I say laws.

 

[Everstruggling]

Hmm.

I don’ t think that the presence of absence of God in the universe changes much.

If we live in a purely mechanical, predictable world that was set in motion by the big bang, then it’s true, we’d have no free will. Everything will follow a predefined course, if you wound it back, everything would follow the same path. This idea makes me rather ill; I hate it to the core.

The other side is that there is a degree of randomness to the world. If I understand quantum mechanics correctly, which I probably don’t, there are things that seem to happen randomnly. As Hawkings quote goes, “Not only does God play dice, sometimes he cheats.” If things at the quantum level are random at all, then we still don’t have free will. We have the appearance of choice, but it is a series of random event posing as being deterministic.

On the other hand, if you have a God that set everything in motion according to a plan, then can anything truly diverge from that plan. In the Bible it says that people have free will, but then again God is all powerful and all knowing. Is it really possible to choose something that will ruin God’s plans? Jesus says that one of his followers was destined to fall. (Don’t ask me the verse, it’s when he’s praying in the garden in one of the gospels) Could Judas have really thwarted the plan of God and not betrayed Jesus? I mean really, God chose my brain chemistry, he chose my parents, he chose what sperm would run the distance, he chose the egg, he chose what would happen in my home town, what kind of up bringing I would have. Sure people may have had free will, but they were constrained by what they had the potential to do. So how free were they?

So it doesn’t really look like people have a lot of choice wether they believe in God or not.

My take is that we live in a world where there is a combination of factors. Social, biological, and physical factors keep me from thinking or doing certain things, but the factors are so complex, and are so likely to act in ways of creating feedback, that my brain organizes them somewhat autonomously.

Wow, for a guy who isn’t entirely sure what he’s talking about, I sure use a lot of words.

Did I come any closer to being on the same wave-length that time?

 

[cheddarsox]

Miracles are our name for what we don’t understand. The divine doesn’t have to work outside of nature. Honestly, is a body that doesn’t deteriorate any more “miraculous” than one that does? No, it is just not what we expect. The reality is that the whole of everything is totally miraculous, totally outside of our realm of being able to completely comprehend it.

I think that pointing to miracles as some sort of proof of the divine is beyond ridiculous. Ignore the miraculous whole and base one’s faith on an anomoly, and then point a finger at someone else and say they base THEIR belief system on random events. Scratching my head over that one.

To me, that is like having a lover who writes eloquent letters to me everyday, sharing the depths of his soul. And rather than using those letters to discern who he is, try to discern his personality from the coupon mailer I received one day when his letter was delayed.

Miracles say so little about the divine, they say way more about us and how easily distracted we are by any little anomoly, and how much we like to assign importance to minutia.

That to me is the great secret of the universe. It is all miraculous. How we dare to declare one part more miraculous than another is beyond me.

Why search the skies for a sign from God and ignore the very breath that is in you?

cheddar

 

[AnAtheist]

jimmy:

The only way I can reconcile science with decision making is the idea that every one of our decisions are determined. This would mean that my typing this post would be predetermined based on the physics of it. All my subsequent decisions could be predictable because they are the result of physical laws.

Maybe this is just a stupid question but it seems to make sense to me.

We must distuingish between “determined” and “predictable”. All our actions and decision may be fully determined, but due to the complexity of the universe the outcome of a single act is not predictable (basic chaos theory).
The question is, are there in principle completely undetermined acts? Quantum physics suggests there are. Thus I see no scientific reason for us not being able to make undetermined decisions.

btw, what has that to do with the question, whether there are gods or not?

 

[AnAtheist]

Everstruggling:

I don’ t think that the presence of absence of God in the universe changes much.

Not for this question anyway.

If I understand quantum mechanics correctly, which I probably don’t, there are things that seem to happen randomnly. As Hawkings quote goes, “Not only does God play dice, sometimes he cheats.” If things at the quantum level are random at all, then we still don’t have free will. We have the appearance of choice, but it is a series of random event posing as being deterministic.

On the other hand, if you have a God that set everything in motion according to a plan, then can anything truly diverge from that plan.

If you have an allknowing, allpowerfull God, who set everything in motion, our fate is predetermined by him anyway. In a mechanical world, because it is predetermined by its laws, and in a quantum world as well, as an omnipresent observer causes any randomness due to quantum effect to disappear.

 

[forthright]

AnAtheist:

If you have an allknowing, allpowerfull God, who set everything in motion, our fate is predetermined by him anyway. In a mechanical world, because it is predetermined by its laws, and in a quantum world as well, as an omnipresent observer causes any randomness due to quantum effect to disappear.

I agree, if forced to contemplate the full ramifications of his position, the atheist would explain all action/reaction in a very similar way that a Christian explains free will/predestination.

As an atheist, I once believed that if it were possible to put every single atom back into the Big Bang, get them all moving at the exact same speed and position, then let it all loose again, then the entire evolution of the universe would be identical. (In short, with the exact same identical (name removed by moderator)uts, you would get the exact same identical outputs). However, I didn’t let this idea keep me from working to improve my life. If my existence, awareness, and happiness were all part of the chain reaction, then so was any effort I made to change my station.

As a Christian, it’s still pretty similar. Just because God set everything in motion, and He knows how everything plays out in the end (including the state of my salvation), doesn’t mean that I don’t put serious effort into understanding how I might acheive that salvation.

The difference is in the perspective. From the human perspective, we don’t know how things work out. Therefore we work within our limitations to improve ourselves and our surroundings to the extent we can.

 

[jimmy]

AnAtheist:

We must distuingish between “determined” and “predictable”. All our actions and decision may be fully determined, but due to the complexity of the universe the outcome of a single act is not predictable (basic chaos theory).
The question is, are there in principle completely undetermined acts? Quantum physics suggests there are. Thus I see no scientific reason for us not being able to make undetermined decisions.

btw, what has that to do with the question, whether there are gods or not?

If things are determined then they are predictable if you have the capacity to gather the information. If everything is determined then it is ultimately possible that the information can be gathered. The only problem is the current lack of knowledge. If everything is determined and I had enough knowledge about the way things work in the universe it would be possible for me to say with 100% accuracy who would win the 2010 superbowl.

How does quantum physics suggest that a free decision is possible. What new theory have they brought forth that could allow for it. There may be some randomness in the universe as cheddarsox or Everstruggling mentioned but that in no way indicates that a free decision is possible.

The connection to the question is that you can’t believe that free will is possible without having God to make it possible. As science is now, it is impossible.

 

[cheddarsox]

jimmy:

The connection to the question is that you can’t believe that free will is possible without having God to make it possible. As science is now, it is impossible.

As you said, as science is now. With a full understanding that at any time, our knowledge/understanding of how things work can and will change.

Science is not god. Not even to most atheists.They use it to inform them, as most modern humans do, but they also realize it is subject to change.

I don’t know if there is free will, whatever philosophy a person holds, but, like you, I try to make my corner of the world a more comfy place for all involved. The truth that remains for all of us, is that we don’t know, can’t know for certain.

So, we are left with faith…all of us.

Honestly, I think most of us use a mish mash of philosophies and faiths to get through the day, from dry science, to superstition, to habit, to a sense of daring, to religion, to apathy.

I know my days are pieced together from all of the above and then some. I just don’t have the concentration and will to be a purist about anything.LOL.

cheddar

 

[AnAtheist]

jimmy:

How does quantum physics suggest that a free decision is possible. What new theory have they brought forth that could allow for it. There may be some randomness in the universe as cheddarsox or Everstruggling mentioned but that in no way indicates that a free decision is possible.

In two ways. First, a purely mechanical universe is completely predetermined, as you said, if you know all parameters you can predict the future exactly. The randomness we see is “virtual”, because we do not know all parameters. Now quantum physics suggests there actually is true randomness due to the uncertainty principle. It is impossible ti gain knowledge about everything. Once you know something, you have altered it. There is no way to try to exactly predict the future without altering it.

Secondly, an act of Free Will must not be caused by the present state of the universe. If there is a causality between the state of the universe and a decision, that decision will be (theoretically) predictable. You need uncaused events to allow for free decisions. Quantum physics suggests, that uncaused event do occur. That is of course only an interpretation (the so called Copenhagen Interpretation), there are people who believe in hidden parameters causing those effects. But if the latter is the case - no Free Will.

The connection to the question is that you can’t believe that free will is possible without having God to make it possible. As science is now, it is impossible.

Interesting. I see it exactly the opposite way. As science is now, Free Will is possible, but only if no omnipresent god exists.

 

[jimmy]

AnAtheist:

In two ways. First, a purely mechanical universe is completely predetermined, as you said, if you know all parameters you can predict the future exactly. The randomness we see is “virtual”, because we do not know all parameters. Now quantum physics suggests there actually is true randomness due to the uncertainty principle. It is impossible ti gain knowledge about everything. Once you know something, you have altered it. There is no way to try to exactly predict the future without altering it.

Secondly, an act of Free Will must not be caused by the present state of the universe. If there is a causality between the state of the universe and a decision, that decision will be (theoretically) predictable. You need uncaused events to allow for free decisions. Quantum physics suggests, that uncaused event do occur. That is of course only an interpretation (the so called Copenhagen Interpretation), there are people who believe in hidden parameters causing those effects. But if the latter is the case - no Free Will.

That does not allow for free will, it allows for random things to happen. That is not free will. The thing is that I need to cause these uncaused events. If I am not causing them then my decisions are completely random. I might take the left road 47 percent of the time.

 

[AnAtheist]

jimmy:

That does not allow for free will, it allows for random things to happen. That is not free will. The thing is that I need to cause these uncaused events. If I am not causing them then my decisions are completely random. I might take the left road 47 percent of the time.

I have two objections:

1. Without quantum physics, ie. in a purely mechanical world, free will is impossible. The validity of quantum physics doesn’t make free will automatically existing, it is just not impossible any longer. That’s what I meant with “possible” = “not impossible”.
2. How can you be certain, that your decision was made by yourself? That is, not imposed by undetectable external sources (God, demons, spirits, fate, mechanical predestination)?
   And (IMPORTANT) how can someone else differentiate between your free and your random decision?
   Example: Is it your free decision to type a “k” or a “j”. Look here: Jehova. Was the “j” there my free decision? I wanted to type the word Jehova, ergo is my decision to type a “J” not free, that word is written with with a “J”.
   Now, look at this: Kehova. How can you differ between my free choice to type that or a random spelling error? I want to illustrate a point here, so the decision to type a “k” was based on the statement I wnated to make. Is that freedom?

 

[john_doran]

AnAtheist:

I have two objections:

1. Without quantum physics, ie. in a purely mechanical world, free will is impossible. The validity of quantum physics doesn’t make free will automatically existing, it is just not impossible any longer. That’s what I meant with “possible” = “not impossible”.

even if you’re right about quantum mechanics (you’re referring to only one model), it’s a stretch: the “causeless” events of quantum physics deal with the vacuum and virtual particles, but not the interactions between particles in the various fields, which still proceed according to physical laws.

AnAtheist:

And (IMPORTANT) how can someone else differentiate between your free and your random decision?

god is omniscient: he knows every true propositions and no false ones. if the proposition “I chose to type k” is true, then he will know it. if not, not.