Like the question of consciousness and whether it fits into a monist, dualist or pan-psychic theoretical structure, I believe the question of free-will, in Dennett's sense that "it could have been otherwise" is too speculative to be much more that a parlor game. Science needs to explain why we experience pain as unpleasant before we can start to answer either question and currently we don't even have a theoretical framework to form a testable hypothesis. Even though I believe that we cannot directly think of anything, I still believe conscious content may be underdetermined and subject to human origin.
"The existential question of whether time truly exists holds importance in the realm of knowledge, but does not impact our daily functioning." Interesting that this sentence couldn't avoid referencing the passing of time.
"Hossenfelder opines that if the illusion of free will serves as a helpful tool in one's life, then it is acceptable to maintain it." How generous of Hossenfelder. Does he explain what it would look like for any person to actually go around behaving as if they don't have free will? It seems that even if you don't believe in free will, everyone maintains some level of at least acting as though they do.
Sure... what a great way for people to deny responsibility for their actions. The whole question of free will is probably unanswerable, but it sure seems like modern physics says that reality isn't, until observed - and what we look for influences what we see. (Look for waves, we see waves, look for particles, we see particles - but first, we actually have to look.) And it's pretty clear that we have choices, and the freedom to make them - if only by flipping a coin. What we DON'T have, is the choice to do nothing - we can hold our breaths, but eventually we're forced into breathing - like everything else, our range of choice is constrained.
And, when it comes to 2 or more of us - reality is by consensus - we agree on terms, definitions, choices; make agreements; and then we (typically) follow up on them.
Like the question of consciousness and whether it fits into a monist, dualist or pan-psychic theoretical structure, I believe the question of free-will, in Dennett's sense that "it could have been otherwise" is too speculative to be much more that a parlor game. Science needs to explain why we experience pain as unpleasant before we can start to answer either question and currently we don't even have a theoretical framework to form a testable hypothesis. Even though I believe that we cannot directly think of anything, I still believe conscious content may be underdetermined and subject to human origin.
"The existential question of whether time truly exists holds importance in the realm of knowledge, but does not impact our daily functioning." Interesting that this sentence couldn't avoid referencing the passing of time.
"Hossenfelder opines that if the illusion of free will serves as a helpful tool in one's life, then it is acceptable to maintain it." How generous of Hossenfelder. Does he explain what it would look like for any person to actually go around behaving as if they don't have free will? It seems that even if you don't believe in free will, everyone maintains some level of at least acting as though they do.
Sure... what a great way for people to deny responsibility for their actions. The whole question of free will is probably unanswerable, but it sure seems like modern physics says that reality isn't, until observed - and what we look for influences what we see. (Look for waves, we see waves, look for particles, we see particles - but first, we actually have to look.) And it's pretty clear that we have choices, and the freedom to make them - if only by flipping a coin. What we DON'T have, is the choice to do nothing - we can hold our breaths, but eventually we're forced into breathing - like everything else, our range of choice is constrained.
And, when it comes to 2 or more of us - reality is by consensus - we agree on terms, definitions, choices; make agreements; and then we (typically) follow up on them.