If DNA is basically a program. How does this fact influence the concept of free will?

Damn.

Do you have any evidence that souls exist?

Seems like an extraordinary claim.

>while (alive = true){ // what does "alive" even mean?
>If(sun=true)grow();
>If(moist=true)drink();
>if(someConditions=true)sprout();
>}
that must have taken you months of researching into your doctoral dissertation to come up with something so profound user

Is bioinformatics a good field or nah?

lol does Bill not know about GNU + Linux?

red*it/badphilosophy
you need to go back

Yes, your body is motivated by biological necessity to survive and reproduce. However, the way that cognition works is that you are able to play a role in the decision making process. Sensors != CPUs. Free will does exist in so far as your brain is able to selectively sequence information temporally. You do not have a soul. The 'event loop of the world' started when the universe began to expand, what started it was heat started expanding it, it ends with all particles freezing

>do we have a free will
Technically no, practically yes.

We make choices constantly, even a insect does. Everything you do or don't is a choice, and can be broken down into smaller choices. Naturally, the only things that influence these choices is your DNA and the past, so free will does not, technically, exist. However:
DNA is complex and not decoded, but even if we could get there, all the events that have happened and choices made are near-infinitely complex. Absolutely beyond human understanding, and unless you believe in some singularity completely beyond machine "understanding" as well.

Also, thinking you have free will exists affects your choices. If you think you can change your choices, you can. Thus, it makes a lot more sense acting like free will exists.

I will go even further, and say that people who vehemently argue that free will doesn't exist are arguing in bad faith, because they also behave like free will exists in their lives. They make choices as if they have free will, and when someone does something bad they act as if people have free will, they don't go "Huh, that's unfortunate but no one can be blamed for it.". In fact, all of society is based on judging people for their actions, and if you don't, it doesn't work.

>Take very simple life forms
>like plants

Determinism doesn't exist. So once you've fast forwarded the universe to the point you'd like to let it continue on its own. EVERYTHING, not just the human, will move differently. It will diverge from the main line similar to the Many Worlds Interpretation.
Free will genuinely exists. What influences choices is DNA + past + Random noise. Free will exists in the random noise.
Since every interaction in the universe is GENUINELY random due to Quantum Mechanics, so to are human decisions.
But perhaps the human brain is a machine designed to approximate determinism (like a computer) and doesn't rely on quantum phenomena. This line of thinking has recently been disproved as Wiger's friend has been tested. Right now evidence is leaning towards Consciousness collapsing the wave function which requires consciousness to have some kind of quantum element.
technologyreview.com/s/613092/a-quantum-experiment-suggests-theres-no-such-thing-as-objective-reality/

Consider the following.

>you cannot control the actions of the subatomic particles that ultimately make up your neurons
>because of this you really have no control over when your neurons start firing

Attached: DscPK5bVsAAhOkW.jpg_large.jpg (888x768, 63K)

Yeah, smoke a shitton of dmt and you can leave your body

Depends on how you define "you." If you identify as the laws of quantum chance that govern which of the multiple possible universes you happen to perceive yourself as occupying, then you actually do have control over those subatomic particles

If the self is an illusion then who is perceiving it?

Attached: _005.jpg (1280x1846, 609K)

>while (alive = true){
You are setting the alive to be true.
It is also more readable to just write
while(alive)

>if you identify as the laws of quantum chance
You can identify as whatever you want. It won't change shit unless you're Neo.

Free will is a perception, and the perception is likely caused by a lack of omniscience. Many of the decisions we make every day are predetermined by the subconscious long before we consciously consider the choice.

I would say that most edge cases (such as fully conscious decisions that seem to be free will) are really the result biological programming + memory/past experiences. The older one gets, the more weight is placed on the memory side of the equation.

With that being said, there's no reason why we can't have free will and predetermination existing at the same time. The idea of free will would only have to be tweaked slightly.

It doesn't have to change anything, because who are you to say you aren't already the laws of probability? Who are you to say that by identifying with them, you're deluding yourself in some capacity, rather than simply fully realizing what your nature has been all along?

I don't think it matters in the end. Even if free will were an illusion, this won't actually change your perception of free will, of yourself or of the rest of the world. You will still perceive yourself to have free will and your body and mind will still act according to your will, so even if every single thing is fully deterministic inside an impossibly complex system, the illusion of free will does not break.

So, I'm going to keep enjoying my free will, or at least trying to do so. Even if it's an illusion, my perception does not actually change, probably because that perception is inherent to being human.

>If DNA is basically a program. How does this fact influence the concept of free will?
Only very indirectly.
DNA is a blueprint of how to build your body and which long-term processes should start under which conditions.
However, it doesn't really have anything with the thinking processes, since those are contained in the connections your brain makes.
Brain works basically like a giant adaptive branch predictor, with often-taken branches making stronger connections which in turn makes them preferred. DNA, being a blueprint of you, can influence details of how your brain is built, which can change the overall _character_ of your decisions, but doesn't really influence immediate thinking processes.

>DNA is basically a program
This board is filled with idiots

Attached: IMG_20181029_005749.jpg (1080x1088, 266K)

If you didn't have free will then you'd only be following a program that is the result of millions of years of evolution.
If that were the case, you wouldn't be here wasting your time.
You wouldn't be asking yourself if you have free will as that kind of thought process is completely useless when it comes to ensure the survival of your species.

If that were true then you would be able to influence or predict observable events regardless of distance. If you cannot do that then your hypothesis is false.

Free will is an evolutionary accident in the process of being phased out.
NPCs are actual humans. You are an anomaly.

>Since every interaction in the universe is GENUINELY random due to Quantum Mechanics, so to are human decisions.
The only thing that has been observed to be random on a atomic level or higher is the ejection of neutrons from radioactive materials, as far as I know. Anyways, quantum mechanics having randomness doesn't mean that everything has. Quantum mechanics doesn't make Newtonian physics somehow invalid. Likewise, something truly subjective existing outside someones head, in quantum physics doesn't mean that everything is subjective. Proof that everything observable is objective is still perfectly valid, but now with the exception of quantum particles.

>DNA + past + Random noise. Free will exists in the random noise.
If we assume that randomness from radioactive material affects us somehow, that changes nothing unless you control the randomness, which you don't.

>Since every interaction in the universe is GENUINELY random due to Quantum Mechanics, so to are human decisions
>Quantum mechanics are relevant on a macroscopic scale
>There is no perceptible time for fundamental particles therefore time doesn't exist
No. Just no. There is no "quantum" anything, this isn't poorly understood near magic effects of some mythical theoretical particle. This is simply electrons being so small they can move through any material at the path of least resistance, because nothing can exert 100% perfect electrical control over them. It is current leakage. It is nothing but current leakage. It is current leakage in short channel devices, and it happens at literally every feature size, it is not exclusive to small FinFET devices like upcoming 5nm EUV FinFETs. Even planar devices have extremely high degrees of leakage through their channels, directly under the gates, electrons still leak out. Yet despite this the transistors still function.

Quantum tunneling is a meme regurgitated by people who know nothing about the field of FETs.

I think the best answer is just not to worry about it.

How do you know you can't do that? The most you can know to that effect if that you can't *consciously* do that. At least not using the consciousness you think is yours at this moment.

>Determinism >en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Determinism
Wait, didnt know it was a theory already, i just came up with that. For years ive been thinking about it on my own and thats the conclution i reached. Im pretty proud of myself to be honest.

Attached: self_high_five.gif (300x300, 1.08M)

Yes, genes influence innate behavior, the way others treat you because of how you look which also affects you, and you can't choose the circumstances of your birth which shape how you act for the rest of your life. Even when you become an adult, you will rely on reasoning developed from what you definitely cannot choose. The path was already set from the beginning.

That being said we're made to think and make judgements (even about whether free will exists), so in a practical sense you can say we have free will even if it doesn't really exist.

Obviously. Free will cannot exist in the magical sense people want it to exist. If you copy everything but the results are different, you obviously didn't copy everything.

So what you're saying is that we are all agents connected to a server

Everything you write is not factoring in quantum mechanics/dark matter at fucking all, you're making the exact same mistake with this machinist worldview that the commies did in the USSR, they also negated the existence of souls in living beings.

Here's a hint; The quantum realm is where "souls" actually come from. Humans operate on much higher resonance frequencies which is why they are able to do shit like self-reflection and stuff

mindpowernews.com/QuantumDeath.htm

>hurr Quantum mechanics is irrelevant at a macroscopic scale
I already disproved this by mentioning Wigner's friend and the new experiment that verifies it. Consciousness collapses the wave function. Fucking RTFM
Also this ignores the butterfly effect.

Honestly no.

Why?

You understand what that means right? If you can go back one day you can go back a month, or a year, or until the begging of the universe. It means that the end state of the universe is also fixed. Every action you take, every move, every thought you have was already determined by the start conditions of the universe. Choice is an illusion.

>he has an experiment that shows that consciousness collapses the wave function

Attached: Smile.jpg (600x600, 94K)

Joe Rogan

The only thing that makes sense to me is that

1. Free will and consciousness is indeed an illusion, life's behavior is just being determined by its material structure and the laws of physics,

and 2. Consciousness is explained by panpsychism, that the essence of consciousness is an inherent property of all systems, and again our mere structure is what determines how our consciousness is perceived by us. Of course this doesn't explain exactly how this mechanism works deep down, but at those fundamental levels consciousness is the least of our problems, we don't know exactly what other basic properties of the universe, like energy, is either.

>Every action you take, every move, every thought you have was already determined by the start conditions of the universe.
>Choice is an illusion.
Not him but I don't understand how the second of these two things you said follows from the first.
If your choices are all predetermined, it seems to me that just means it was predetermined that you would choose them. I don't see how it has to mean you didn't choose them all the same.

In other words, I don't see how allowing for the possibility that you could have done differently is a prerequisite of claiming responsibility for your actions. It seems to me that if you intended to bring about a consequence, whether good or bad, and took measures which by all rights you should have been aware would lead to the realization of that consequence, then you should claim ownership of and responsibility for that consequence regardless of whether it was actually possible for you to have made any other choice.

>this thread

>If DNA is basically a program
its not

A choice, by definition, is something that isn't predetermined. If it is predetermined, then it wasn't a choice, because there were never two options in the first place, your brain just mistakenly thought there were.

Do you physically leave your body during that time? No? DMT just fucks with your perceptions and makes you THINK you're leaving your body. Dumbass.

every concept gets fuzzy once you start autistically digging down, not just "free will"

>A choice, by definition, is something that isn't predetermined. If it is predetermined, then it wasn't a choice,
I don't think I can agree with this. Because:
>because there were never two options in the first place, your brain just mistakenly thought there were.
This is the only thing that matters. Whether there were actually two options is, or at least should be, completely irrelevant to the meaning of "choice." "Choice" is a cognitive function, so its meaning should only be expressed in terms of things that happen in or to the brain, not unrelated facts out in the world. Which is to say, if you *think* you have more than one option, and you settle on one of the options you *think* you have, then, in my opinion, you have indeed made a choice.

Let's consider the opposite circumstance to show how this holds: by contrast, if you're led to believe you *don't* have more than one option, and you settle on the *only* option you have any reason to believe you have, and it's later revealed that you had more options that there's no way you could possibly have known about, then I would say it would be most prudent to say you *haven't* made a choice, despite the fact you could have done otherwise from what you did.

>"Choice" is a cognitive function

I guess we disagree on semantics, because I don't think so. By choice I mean an objective state of the world in which it could proceed one of several ways. And in this context which of the ways it goes would be determined by our brain.

CONGRATS! you're fucking retarded

Attached: sarcastic-man-closeup-portrait-young-giving-thumbs-up-sign-showing-everything-alright-reality-bad-is (1324x1300, 95K)

>Hugenot has wondered whether the consciousness of living human beings as well as the "souls" of the dead reside in dark matter or dark energy.
just ew
ewww

>while (alive = true){ // what does "alive" even mean?
This loop will run forever. Also, the variable "alive" is set but not used.
>If(sun=true)grow();
The call to grow() will always occur, so you don't need the if statement. Also, the variable "sun" is set but not used.
>If(moist=true)drink();
The call to drink() will always occur, so you don't need the if statement. Also, the variable "moist" is set but not used.
>if(someConditions=true)sprout();
The call to sprout() will always occur, so you don't need the if statement. Also, the variable "someConditions" is set but not used.
>}

In short -- and I take it you didn't realize this -- the '=' operator typically denotes assignment, not equality. When you write an '=' operator with an lvalue expression on the left, the reference produced by that lvalue expression is assigned the value produced by the expression on the right, and the whole '=' expression evaluates to the value thus assigned. So, for example, the expression 'alive = true' will always evaluate to 'true', and have the side effect of setting 'alive' to 'true'.

If your intention is to COMPARE 'alive' to 'true', you want to use '==', not '='. But even then, you should probably just leave off '== true' altogether; when a variable contains a boolean value -- or, in some languages, even if it doesn't -- that variable by itself can be used as a boolean expression. In other words, if 'alive' is a boolean, then the expression 'alive == true' will always have the same value as just the expression 'alive'.

Actually it depends on the language, smartass. There are several in which = can be used for comparisons.

>he doesn't know how to program in DNA

this thread is shit and 4chin is just embarrasing

Of course your soul leaving your body wouldn't be a physical action. Also, since our perception is what defines our observation, saying that DMT makes you leave your body vs saying DMT makes you think you're leaving your body are of equal weight.

>DNA is data
>DNA is code
>God programmed the universe in LISP
aren't you happy to be running on LISP?

seeing how this world and people are total shit and agony ridden literal hellhole its most likely written in javascript

Came to post this

The answer is theological and you brainlet code monkeys struggle seeing past your dick so there is no chance you comprehend it.

>tfw people are actually programming bacteries now
Seriously how the fuck does this work? I tought we still were behind on DNA studies but they are already changing DNA of things and inputting useful functions on it? seriously just what happened?

Attached: 1503462179708.jpg (1280x720, 78K)

The fact that the universe is, as far as we can tell, deterministic rules out free will already
But it's not like that means "My actions were the predetermined result of the initial conditions of the universe" is a valid defense for murder, so that fact has no real bearing on life beyond teenagers first existential crisis.

Think of it as a program for a pick and place machine. Its the code to make the product, its not the operating system.

outside of personal experience, near-death experiences

Sure, but any language that uses = for comparisons AND uses C-like syntax is INVARIABLY a dumbed-down shitlang.

That's nothing, people have found a way to program a fucking chain of ions

Nature has only enabled free will within certain boundaries that benefit our chance for survival and reproduction. Our "free will" is just a tool to socialize more effectively and to evolve our consciousness. Whenever there is danger of death or injury, free will flies out the door and instincts kick in to save our slow-thinking asses - it's not always fast enough though.

DNA is just a partly recursive, partly explicit set of blueprints for our body cell structure. If we see it as a program, it would be the body constructor class that includes various machine learning methods for our "free will" and "soul" objects and shit.

>If DNA is basically a program.
It isn't.
It's nothing like a program. The idea of DNA being like code is a very poor analogy that is parroted mainly by intelligent design advocates to argue for the requirement of a "programmer".