20 Free will
20 Free will
Free thinking (The gist)
Free will (The gist)
Reasons of the impression of free will (free thinking)
The simplest reason why free will does not exist
Requirements of free will
There is no free will (Proof)
The upper quantum cannot alter the actions of lower constituent quanta (Proof)
There is no free thinking (Proof)
There is no will (For insurance' sake)
An action which can change its own operating logic on its own doesn't exist
A possibility of changing the operating logic in the matter actions
Actually, there is no free thinking
《 Free thinking (The gist) 》
It seems that the thinking action, which is provided for consciousness, is fundamentally formed naturally, automatically, and dynamically as one which aims at forming (or, sustaining, updating) the broad physical order of a living body, from the computation action --one of the matter actions-- borne by the substances which constitute the living body.
And, it's presumed that this formation owes to the physical order forming effect arising from the reduction of entropy production rate within a living body. In a word, consciousness and the thinking action are advanced physical orders.
So, it's simply seems impossible for the strange thing called consciousness to (arbitrarily, freely) change its own thinking action by its intention.
In short, for this reason, there seems to be no free thinking in a strict sense. Moreover, free thinking doesn't seem possible also logically. (However, there seems to be indirect free will by the plasticity of the body and the brain).
The following are the rough reasons.
1) We don't at all do such an active operation as to change one's own thinking. We only sense the (senses of) thought which occur in one's own self. As to thinking, we operate nothing. In the first place, there are no such means in the framework through which consciousness and the thinking action are formed. Needless to say, we don't know the means.
2) The thinking action is formed naturally in the constructive and productive direction of forming (or, sustaining, updating) the broad physical order over the whole substances (living body) at the next moment, basing on the state, situation, and the physical properties of underlying substances. (For this reason, it's impossible for the thinking action to form (or change) itself by itself. (Fundamentally, consciousness is not provided with such an action as able to change its own thinking action)).
3) In each individual person, the thinking patterns have almost been formed already.
(Though it seems possible that the thinking patterns change as time passes, consciousness or the thinking action doesn't change them directly. This thing also implies that the content (movement) of thinking is basically fixed. Simply put, each individual person thinks in much the same way, because the thinking patterns are almost fixed).
4) A seed for thinking (initial input) is indispensable for thinking, but it's impossiblt for the thinking action to prepare the seed by itself arbitrarily. (Thinking has an aspect of domino and cannot start working voluntarily without being triggered by initial input. Or, even if some action has been equipped somewhere, it will be activated for the first time when some seed for working is input). The thinking action is one to think and is not provided with such an action. (Fundamentally, consciousness is not provided with such an action as able to prepare the seed for thinking on its own). The seed for thinking is fundamentally extrinsic. Moreover, to prepare the seed for thinking arbitrarily is impossible also logically. It's because it will fall into a vicious circle.
Therefore, the first one third of the question of free will --is free thinking possible?-- is denied. In consequence, free will is denied here.
Nonetheless, the thinking patterns formed in each individual's brain seems to be the core of individual's personality.
It seems that the thinking patterns can change over time under various influences, but it's not easy. Rather, the movement of the thinking patterns are subject to all extrinsic and material influences, including physical and health conditions. Moreover, the seeds as initial input to the thinking patterns also change greatly from moment to moment. As a result, activated thinking patterns and their operation change significantly.
The combination of the thinking patterns that are fixed basically and all extrinsic influences may be free thinking.
And, however, the last one third of the question --is it possible that body's substances move basing on thinking (that is done automatically)?-- seems possible. It is surmised that, (violating the known physical laws of present physics), every active movement inside living things occurs basing on microscopic thinking done in consciousness.
《 Free will (The gist) 》
The question of free will is presumed to be subdivided into three parts as follows.
1) Is free thinking possible?
2) Where is thinking performed? Which of the substance called brain or consciousness performs thinking?
3) Is it possible for body's substances to move based on thinking?
1) was denied.
As to 2). If thinking is performed in the brain, it follows that the thinking action is material (macroscopic). Or, if in consciousness, it's microscopic.
And, it's not conceivable that thinking is performed materially in the substance called brain. It's because, no matter how highly it is organized, the brain is nothing but an aggregate of innumerable substances that are third person objects and is not a single quantum. And, since it's not a single quantum, it doesn't have (microscopic) integrateness that can carry out thinking that needs to be broad and comprehensive.
Accordingly, if thinking is fulfilled in the brain, it follows that the brain is reduced to a soft emulator (machine) which has been programmed, is predictable, and doesn't have integrateness like a quantum. It's like, in a sense, domino.
(A machine necessarily needs to be designed and produced by others (first person subjects) who are intellectual and can move spontaneously, independently, and actively. This universe is ruled by the second law of thermodynamics that entropy increases (, Newton's laws of motion, the fundamental interactions, and the law of the conservation of energy), and a machine competent for autopoiesis --self-production / spontaneous, independent, and active production of one's own advanced and dynamic physical order-- cannot emerge on its own without some basises (mechanism, driving force) which defy these laws. It's because a machine which is not a single quantum cannot fulfill comprehensive thinking).
So, it's almost certain that thinking is fulfilled in consciousness.
Moreover, the fact that consciousness feels thoughts is also the basis. Even if consciousness perceives the material movement of the brain, it should be perceived only as some bodily sensation (the five senses). It's impossible that the mere movement of substances is felt as ideas of thought. It's like just material movements, such as the movement of a mechanical calculator, the movement of electrons in various electric circuits, CPUs, DSPs, and FPGAs, domino, rustling of leaves, etc., are felt as thoughts which are extremely strange.
As to 3). (Excluding the movement of organs), almost all motions of humankind (and animals) are consist of the muscular movement. And, as a subjective and empirical fact, it is judged that, including such motions as speaking or writing wearing mentality, almost all motions of humankind are started and controlled basing on thinking. At that time, it seems probable that the body's substances are not controlled materially and predictably by the material and macroscopic movement of the brain, but move on their own basing on the microscopic, uncertain, and unpredictable thinking performed in consciousness. (Details are described separately).
And, it seems that this movement cannot be probably explained by the currently known physical laws. It's because it's surmised that there is no material --macroscopic / external-- causality because of microscopicity of the thinking action (and consciousness). At present, there is a break between the thinking action and matter, and no physical causal relationship can appear there.
(To be presice, there is causal relationship on the input side of consciousness --bodily sensation or the five senses--. However, it's not on the output side --the muscular movement / the working of organs-- yet).
The brain is never such an emulator as an electric circuit, a computer, a FPGA, etc.
(The brain bears the extremely important role which makes consciousness and the thinking action emerge dynamically and continuously, basing on the material situation of the brain. And, reversely, the movement of substances bases on the microscopic, comprehensive, uncertain, and unpredictable thinking done in consciousness as a creature. The working of the brain is collaboration between the substance called brain and its consciousness).
(The movement of a living body comes under autopoiesis, but autopoiesis can never realized without collaboration between a living body which is an aggregate of innumerable substances and a single comprehensive consciousness which emerges in the whole living body).
The brain doesn't directly control the muscular movement materially as an emulator. The judgement and the control are done unpredictably by comprehensive thinking in consciousness. The substances move on their own referring the microscopic considered outcome.
(The substances, here, indicate ones which form the brain cells. The result of their movements controls various muscular movements of the body via motor nerves. It goes without saying that the movement of all cells of body is collaboration between matter and consciousness).
(The result came to the opposite of what we have expected. It's because free thinking is not likely and violating present physics is likely).
《 Reasons of the impression of free will (free thinking) 》
The following seems to be why we feel freedom in our consciousness. However, even if freedom is felt, it's not necessarily true that our consciousness is free actually.
a) The state of the brain is never the same. The state of the brain will never be the same. The material state in which the brain is placed is affected by every extrinsic thing and necessarily fluctuates with the lapse of time, For this reason, the thinking action --or the thinking pattern--, which is formed naturally, automatically, and dynamically based on the situation and properties of substances of the brain, also fluctuates subtly.
b) Moreover, the seed for thinking (initial input), which is basically brought from the outside via five senses, also fluctuates. Actually, the influence from the external world on various levels changes overwhelmingly. As a result, the consciousness feels that the thoughts (senses of thought), which are formed naturally, automatically, and dynamically every moment, also change diversely.
c) Furthermore, unlike the machines (emulators) already been programmed, it can never at all be predicted what thinking action will be formed in consciousness.
d) For these reasons, the impression of free thinking seems to be a result of all extrinsic and material contingencies. Unpredictability, uncertainty, or indefiniteness of the thinking action formed --so, in a sense, the thinking action is always new, subtly new-- may be the biggest factor. Possibly, unpredictability and subtle newness of the thinking action formed may be the origin of the impression of freedom.
《 The simplest reason why free will does not exist 》
The origin of this universe is energy, and this universe is the world of monism based on energy. And everything that exists in this universe is embodied (composed) with energy. (However, these things cannot be proven).
And energy and what is embodied with energy are physical. (Energy is the core meaning of the word physical, and the word physical is an adjective that comes under energy and what is embodied with energy).
For this reason, everything that exists in this universe is physical. (This is because everything that exists in this universe is embodied (composed) with energy that is the origin and is physical). (However, this also cannot be proved).
And, although it seems impossible to demonstrate this to others, our consciousness definitely seems to exist --emerge and disappear-- as a dynamic physical event in this universe.
Therefore, the formation of consciousness and the function of consciousness (the function of sensation and thinking) are also physical.
And the word physical includes the meaning of automatic too. Thereby, it follows that the formation of consciousness and the function of consciousness are also fulfilled automatically.
In short, there is no free will in an exact sense.
《 Requirements of free will 》
Free will includes thinking.
And, nothingness doesn't exist, and nothing is not embodied with nothingness. Accordingly, thinking also needs to be embodied with something that performs thinking --this can be considered to be the thinking action-- other than nothingness.
Moreover, in order for the thinking action to be activated, an initial input --a seed for thinking-- that causes it is also indispensable.
The thinking action has rough features such as above, and the requirements of free will that includes such thinking action seem to be as follows.
a) Free will can produce a seed for thinking freely. (Self-prepararion of the cause of thinking)
b) The thinking by free will is not fixed. Every time free will starts thinking based on a seed for thinking it prepared, it can on the spot also create instantly a new way of thinking which is not restricted to a particular way. (Freeness also implies being able to think in every way about one seed for thinking). (Instant creation of an unrestricted and diverse way of thinking)
c) Through the way of thinking created on its own, free will can develop thinking and give outcome. (Developing thinking and giving outcome)
d) Free will has physicality, can have a causal relationship with matter, and can physically interact with matter. (This is because bodily movements occur based on free will). (Physicality)
e) Free will, according to the thought it formed, can intentionally control the movements of substances which compose the material body in which it is borne. (Strictly, free will must be able to operate substances of its body. However, even if it's not that much as the operability of free will on substances is required, it's at least indispensable for the realization of free will that a living body can move based on the thought by free will. And, the fact that a living body moves based on the thought means that substances which compose the living body move based on the thought --or, influenced by the thought--). (Intentional control of bodily movements)
《 There is no free will (Proof) 》
In general, thinking requires a seed --cause of thinking-- enough to start operating.
(For some action to fulfill concrete operation, input as an object of the action's operation is inevitably necessary.
For example, let's say that there is an action to fulfill a certain function here. And, let's say the action has started, is on standby, and idle. However, for some outcome to be output from the action, extrinsic input that is the origin of the outcome is indispensable. Meaningful outcome cannot be output from actions without extrinsic input).
And, if free will prepares a seed for thinking by itself according to one of the requirements of free will, before it, the free will needs to have such intention.
However, the intention is a thought in the first place, and another thinking is necessary to form this thought.
Then, a question arises where the seed for this prerequisite thinking came from. And this falls into a vicious circle.
For this reason, it follows that it's impossible for the free will to produce seeds for thinking freely on its own. In a word, the will cannot prepare seeds for thinking on its own.
And it follows that one of the requirements of free will is not satisfied.
Thereby, there is no free will.
(However, this is an argument in a case where the will prepares the seeds for thinking by itself. And, this logic is not applicable to the case where the will doesn't participate in the occurrence of seeds for thinking. However, in that case, it follows that there is fundamentally no free will.
The seeds for thinking is extrinsic. And, the thinking is an action, and its work is always started by an extrinsic cause or trigger.
(Consciousness is a microscopic and big action, and cannot activate itself on its own. Consciousness comes active passively only after receiving an extrinsic initial input. (Being idle --being empty (emptiness) about actions or action outcome-- until some input is given and the action starts to run like this way is one of the essences of consciousness). (This is the same with the fact that, until concrete instructions are given, a CPU or a DSP continues to repeat NOP (No OPeration) instruction, which does nothing, endlessly, on every clock signal))).
Moreover, it also seems to be indispensable that, to think, the thinking action of consciousness is formed from something like a thinking algorithm.
(This is difficult to express. This is because it's surmised that the thinking action of consciousness is physically and automatically formed instantaneously and completed instantaneously. However, still, what constructs the logic of thinking action is necessary. We call it something like a thinking algorithm tentatively).
And, the same can be said also about the formation of something like a thinking algorithm as the seed for thinking. This is because something like a thinking algorithm must also be brought by a prerequisite seed for thinking, something like a thinking algorithm, and prerequisite thinking. And this also falls into a vicious circle.
Then, it follows that, as to something like a thinking algorithm, one of the requirements of free will will not be satisfied.
Therefore, there is no free will.
(However, this is an argument in a case where the will forms something like a thinking algorithm by itself. And, this logic is not applicable to the case where the will doesn't participate in the formation. However, also in that case, it follows that there is fundamentally no free will).
《 The upper quantum cannot alter the actions of lower constituent quanta (Proof) 》
An upper quantum is formed from lower constituent quanta.
Here we assume that the upper quantum can alter the actions of lower constituent quanta. That is to say, we assume that such an action is also implemented in the upper quantum. (The true identity of a quantum (matter) is matter actions, and altering a quantum means to alter the matter actions inherent in the quantum).
By the way, for example, it may be good to imagine a water molecule and its constituent hydrogen and oxygen atoms as quanta.
However, as soon as the upper quantum begins to alter the matter actions of lower quanta, the action of the upper quantum comes to an emergency stop immediately. This is because, if the upper quantum begins to alter the actions of lower quanta, its own actions also change on the spot, resulting in an inconsistency of the actions.
This is a bug in the action of a quantum and is by no means acceptable. This is because, if such a thing is permissible, it follows that every matter of this universe will immediately stop urgently, and this universe becomes not to exist in the first place. This is because, the fundamental interactions are also compelled to halt.
For this reason, if this universe exists, the upper quantum cannot in the first place alter the actions of lower constituent quanta.
And, because consciousness is a great quantum, it means that consciousness also cannot alter the action of substances that form itself. Hence there is no free will.
This is because, being able to alter the logic of thinking equipped in its own self arbitrarily is one of the requirements of free will. And, this is because, in order to alter its own logic of thinking, consciousness must alter the lower quanta. For this reason, if altering is impossible, it follows that there is no free will as a matter of course.
However, even though consciousness doesn't directly alter the actions of constituent substances --in the first place, consciousness doesn't have material operability because of being microscopic entity which deals with ideas only--, a possibility that it can indirectly influence the movement of substances in some way or other still remains. For instance, it's a possibility that some information --for example, a course or guidance about the movement of substances. By the way, information is an idea and static stuff (so to speak, scalar)-- is transmitted to substances from consciousness and the information indirectly participates in (has an effect on) the movement of substances.
《 There is no free thinking (Proof) 》
First of all, nothingness doesn't exist. And it's impossible that nothingness thinks. Then, even if there is the thinking action in this universe, it follows that it can only be embodied with something other than nothingness. That is to say, in this universe, the thinking action is fulfilled by something other than nothingness.
And, things other than nothingness are matter, including the space formed by Higgs bosons. And, (it is said that the morphological true identity of matter is a particle, but), the real true identity of matter is the matter actions inherent in matter. (Particles we recognize are nothing but morphological traces --(static physical properties, scalars-- gained (left) by observation. There are no solid particles themselves in this universe). Since the actions inherent in matter continue to work always, matter can be matter. (Matter is said to be equivalent to energy. Energy is the foundation of this universe. And energy embodies actions of matter directly). That is to say, in this universe, the thinking action is embodied and carried out by matter actions.
Moreover, these things can be said about consciousness.
And, among the matter actions, there is the computation action which is ideological. This is what fulfills ideological computation processing and can be called a thinking action in a figurative sense. It operates spontaneously, independently, and actively in matter (quantum).
And, when matter evolves into a living thing's cell, in the macroscopic cell, the computation actions of the innumerable constituent matter form a comprehensive thinking action of the consciousness of the cell by the physical order forming effect originating from the generation of heat and entropy, discharging of them to the outside, and the reduction of entropy production rate.
Moreover, the thinking action is equipped with the logic of thinking. Thinking, namely, an ideological computation action cannot be fulfilled without logic. The outcome of thinking by matter is produced by the work of the the logic of thinking.
Furthermore, the output from a certain seed for thinking, viz., the outcome of thinking, is uniquely determined by the logic of thinking. In a word, the thinking action is a function.
However, still, if the seeds for thinking differ, different results of thinking are output. This means that the thinking process and the results of thinking fluctuate easily. And, this seems to be the basic cause of the fact that consciousness feels the impression of free thinking.
Furthermore, the computation action of matter is also given a priori to matter. This is also the case for the thinking action of a living body. And, the upper quantum cannot intervene in the work of lower constituent quanta. For this reason, neither matter nor a living body can change the logic of the action given to them a priori, on their own.
In other words, the computing (thinking) logic of matter or a living body is not only a function but also cannot rewrite itself with a new one on its own. In short, the logic of thinking of matter is in principle fixed.
Therefore, there is no free thinking. And, there is no free will either.
By the way, although there is no free thinking, it's conceivable that the thinking action (logic) may be subject to suffer changes caused by external factors.
《 There is no will (For insurance' sake) 》
Nothingness doesn't exist. And, in this universe, things other than nothingness are matter, including Higgs bosons which form space and bring mass to matter. For this reason, anything that occurs in the flow of time in this universe is, at the root, embodied with matter. Then, even if some actions exist in this universe, it follows that they are also embodied with matter.
Now, let's think about will. It is, by convention, thought to be something which performs corporeal actions as well as mental actions. (Corporeal actions are also included here because being able to move its corporeal body by its intention is also a requirement of will). However, in this universe, no matter what they are, actions fundamentally need to be embodied with matter. For this reason, the actions (thinking and corporeal actions, etc.) which are considered to be performed by will are also actually embodied and carried out by matter. In other words, will itself doesn't carry out its own actions.
Then, that cannot be will. This is because, as to both mental and corporeal actions required of will as essential requirements, will doesn't fulfill them, but they are carried out by matter --the place where will is supposed to occur--. Hence there is no will. There is no will in a strict sense.
Moreover, the assertion that there is no will in a strict sense doesn't exist means that there is no active will. For this reason, there is also no free will.
Matter is the true identity of will. In the underlying part where the actions, which, in general, are supposed to be fulfilled by will, are actually fulfilled, inanimate matter just moves.
It is conjectured that what we think to be will is like a passive shadow which arises from the physical movement --for example, physical activity in the brain cells-- which occurs at matter which is the place where our will emerge.
《 An action which can change its own operating logic on its own doesn't exist 》
This is like nonsense, but is an additional explanation about whether or not there is free will (free thinking).
First of all, no substance can touch itself. So, an action which can touch itself doesn't exist. For example, assume that an action to touch is equipped in the tip of an earthworm. However, no matter how it makes the body twist, the tip can by no means touch itself. This may be obvious.
Then, it follows that an action which can change its own operating mechanism or algorithm on its own more than touch itself doesn't exist. There are no ways to change because it cannot touch to begin with.
Then, it follows that, even though there is a thinking action in this universe, the action also cannot change itself. Then, it follows that, in this framework --a framework to change itself by itself--, there is no free thinking. This is because it's not able to change its own way of thinking (logic of thinking) on its own.
It can also be said that a self-operating logic changing action --an action which keeps on changing its own operating logic endlessly-- can never exist.
It's fraudulent, but it's also able to think linguistically. A thinking action is one which do thinking as the name indicates. If a self-operating logic changing action is also equipped in the thinking action, it becomes a compound action. And, it must be called a thinking and self-operating logic changing action. Thereby, seeing also from the linguistic viewpoint, a self-operating logic changing action is not equipped in the thinking action, and free thinking is impossible.
Substance cannot touch itself. And, whatever the action is, the action cannot change its own operating logic on its own. This is the case of simple and single actions. And, as to the single actions, the following can alco be said. (There are repetions partly).
1) A self-operating logic changing action --an action which keeps on changing its own operating logic endlessly-- can never exist.
2) In general, an action which is equipped with a single action cannot change its own operating logic on its own.
3) Linguistically, an action which is equipped with some single action is not an action to change its own operating logic. (A single action which changes its own operating logic cannot exist).
4) Assume that the design of the new operationg logic or the logic itself as a substitute has already been equipped. However, a substituting action is necessary to substitute with them. And, this becomes a compound action. And what is more, to prepare them limitlessly is impossible. For these reasons, the case that substitutes are already equipped is not acceptable. It's not able to change its own operating logic on its own through the method that substitutes are prepared beforehand.
5) Assume that the design of a new operationg logic or the logic itself as a substitute is contrived or produced on the spot. This also becomes a compound action. And, moreover, to contrive something new (*) is almost impossible in the first place. So, also in this case, it's not able to change its own operating logic on its own.
(*) The question about the emergence of newness or novelty seems difficult. Still, it seems that, regardless of the distinction between static ones, dynamic ones, macroscopic ones, and microscopic ones, it seems that the newness is brought by the physical order forming effect fundamentally. The physical order forming effect simply tries to form order according to the present physical situation, and doesn't try to form new order deliberately. Still, if the order formed --including pure idea, intuition, or artistic idea, etc.-- is one which has never before emerged, as a result, it may become the emergence of newness. But, there are no criteria for judging whether new or not, and it is only interpreted by humankind. Furthermore, it is subtle whether or not things gained by combining existing things are regarded as new ones.
6) Assume that it's able to change incoherently without designs, substitutes, or new contrivance. (However, this is also NG practically because of being a compound action). However, this is nothing but destruction.
Then, if it is some compound action --for example, like matter actions--, it may be possible that the operating logic of an action is changed by some other action. This possibility cannot be denied.
《 A possibility of changing the operating logic in the matter actions 》
Here, let's look into the matter actions. Because there is a possibility if it's a compound action, it may be possible that the operating logic of the computation action can be changed by the operation action. However, this possibility is denied by the following thing.
a) The computation action of substance (quantum) is an action to compute the next state of the whole of the substance, and is not an action to compute the computed result (idea) which requests that its own operating logic is changed. For this reason, a request (idea) to change the operating logic of the computation action is not notified to the operation action, and the algorithm will never be changed.
b) By the way, the matter actions are actions which are equipped a priori. Whichever action it is, it doesn't know the details of implementation of them, and doesn't know the method to change the operating logic of them. (Moreover, it doesn't have the ability to design a new operating logic). Furthermore, the operation action is an action which changes the state of the matter concerned to the new state which is computed by the computation action, and is not an action to change the operating logic of the computation action. For these reasons, whichever action it is, it will not be changed by the operation action.
《 Actually, there is no free thinking 》
From the foregoing things, it is surmised that, at such a primordial living body as microorganism, single-celled organism, cell, etc., an outcome of thinking which requests to change its own operating logic is not computed by the thinking action --big computation action--. Moreover, even if such a outcome of thinking was computed, the method to change the thinking logic directly according to the request doesn't exist. This is because the thinking action (logic) is formed a priori and continuously every moment following completely the present situation and physical properties of constituent substances, in the constructive and productive direction of forming (or, sustaining, updating) the physical order of the living body concerned. Nothing can intervene in this formation.
For these reasons, it seems that the thinking action (logic) doesn't wear arbitrariness, and direct free thinking doesn't exist.
This is a repetition, but, in short, physically, on the fundamental level of living things such as microorganisms or cells, the way of thinking (thinking logic) is formed a priori and physically according to the present situation and physical properties of constituent substances, and the thinking motion or the outcome of thinking cannot participate in the formation. For this reason, there is no direct free thinking provided the level is the fundamental level of living things.
