Three Arguments Against Determinism

[118118]

Cribbage

Erm, I have no opinion on determinism. I'm much more interested in arguing against naturalism in general (I will have to at some stage next year, I hope).

But, I don't necessarily see why things would have to be un-determined at the macro level, specifically. Sure, you could try and infer that because of the qualitative difference, but I'm not sure that this would be apodiactic.

The fallacy of composition is, I think, fairly unarguable.

Apparently, you can argue that collapse is not part of objective reality, cos you have to see it - this determinsim is still true. But, I don't know anything on this topic.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

Cribbage

Erm, I have no opinion on determinism. I'm much more interested in arguing against naturalism in general (I will have to at some stage next year, I hope).

.

Did you happen to get a glimpse of the thread title?

 

[118118]

Did you happen to get a glimpse of the thread title?

Er, yeah. I can still but in occasionally though, can't I

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

But, I don't necessarily see why things would have to be un-determined at the macro level, specifically. Sure, you could try and infer that because of the qualitative difference, .

What qualitative difference?

 

[118118]

Is it necessary for the macro-level to be un-determined, just because we (I think) are assuming that our mind is on the macro-level? Why cannot it be the case that the un-determination is on the quantum level, and despite the qualitative difference between Macro-mind and quatum-un-determined (evidenced by the fact that one can have global properties that another does not), which would sugest that any freedom would be manifest only at a specific level, the macro-mind is still free.

I mean, it sounds alot more sensible to say that the mind must be undetermined, not just the universe, but, hey.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

Is it necessary for the macro-level to be un-determined, just because we (I think) are assuming that our mind is on the macro-level? Why cannot it be the case that the un-determination is on the quantum level, and despite the qualitative difference between Macro-mind and quatum-un-determined (evidenced by the fact that one can have global properties that another does not), which would sugest that any freedom would be manifest only at a specific level, the macro-mind is still free.

I mean, it sounds alot more sensible to say that the mind must be undetermined, not just the universe, but, hey.

I don't think many neuropsychologists would say that cognition was taking place at the sub-neuronal level, and neurons are part of the macro world.

 

[Jonti]

It doesn't form chemical bonds under normal conditions, so rules out explanations based on chemical reactions. It does dissolve in fatty substances, as found in nerve cell membranes, and takes up space, which can alter electrical capacitance and block moving parts of receptor proteins, an entirely mundane explanation accepted by many experts in the field.

QM is entirely mundane, of course -- QM theory is involved in explaining how our 'puters work -- and our eyes, come to that, photons being quanta and all. But I take your point -- Hameroff is somewhat, well, panpsychist, as Knotted pointed out.

Can you point me towards some (reasonably accessible) articles that discuss how Xenon (and the other gas anaesthetics) may work?

 

[samk]

Searching for xenon anesthetic or xenon anesthetic mechanism gave:

From http://www.expresshealthcaremgmt.com/20050515/criticare10.shtml

Pharmaco clinical advantage –Xenon exists as a monatomic gas under normothermic and normobaric conditions. Although virtually inert, the very large outer electron shell of xenon may get polarised and distorted by nearby molecules and permits xenon to interact with and bind to proteins such as myoglobin as well as bi-layer lipids. Xenon’s ability to interact with cell proteins and cell membrane constituents is presumably responsible for its anesthetic potency.

Xenon also inhibits plasma membrane Ca++ pump, an action similar to that of volatile anesthetics, which may be responsible for an increase in neuronal Ca++ concentration and altered excitability.

Franks et al found that xenon despite a relatively simple atomic structure, acts selectively by blocking the N-methyl-d-aspartate receptor. This NMDA receptor inhibitor is responsible for inhibition of nociceptive responsiveness of spinal dorsal horn neurons.

A review of inhalational anesthetics:
http://mail.med.upenn.edu/~tannerj/CurrAnes00.pdf

 

[Jonti]

Thanks, samk. That clarifies #147 nicely.

Something else ...

I had thought that the post you are referring to was implying that thought itself is independent in the now stage, it is only when it moves from the now that it take on meaning. I did a wiki for laplace's demon and can't find fault with his reasoning. Except there are some Quanta events that appear to have no causal effect, and therefore outside its remit. Though having said this I don't agree with an infinite choice of reality extending from the present.
For instance could I be sitting on earth writing this message and then in the next moment floating in orbit around the moon. The future is finite, and if its not then what good is the physical law of the universe.

"thought is independent in the now stage" captures the idea, alright, but I would rather express it, sentience is created in the now stage; and it is organised into meaning (more generally, the organism's sensorium) by subsequent processing.

As for Laplace's demon, Knotted put it this way ...

determinism just shifts the problem into the past, but it at least identifies a cosmological question. Where did all this negative entropy come from?

(Negative entropy here means organisation)

Quantum events can be uncaused, but they can have causal effects, thanks to the amplification properties of chaotic systems (of which there are many in Nature). That also undoes Laplace's demon. And It appears to contradict relativity, for relativity is strictly determinist.

 

[muser]

Thanks, samk. That clarifies #147 nicely.

Something else ...
"thought is independent in the now stage" captures the idea, alright, but I would rather express it, sentience is created in the now stage; and it is organised into meaning (more generally, the organism's sensorium) by subsequent processing.

As for Laplace's demon, Knotted put it this way ... (Negative entropy here means organisation)

Quantum events can be uncaused, but they can have causal effects, thanks to the amplification properties of chaotic systems (of which there are many in Nature). That also undoes Laplace's demon. And It appears to contradict relativity, for relativity is strictly determinist.

I agree with your interpretation, thank you. As I understand it negative entrophy is the ordered universe. Merlon wood (in another thread) posted a link to an article on bell's inequalities. An explanation for that phenomena may (in time) lead to a theory that goes beyond the 4 fundamental forces.
In dismissing Laplace so readily aren't we forgeting the lessons learnt from huygen and his wave theory of light.

 

[Jonti]

 

[Jonti]

Thanks

I wouldn't have thought Huygens would be much help to Laplace's demon at all; but what really does for it is the uncertainty principle and wave-particle duality. All quantum weirdness, and it does get well weird, stems from this. But check this thread for an intuitive way to grok the essential ideas.

There's no need to postulate any additional forces; the QM math works fine already. More, the calculations are stupendously successful and accurate. Only thing is, we don't really understand what the maths means, in the sense of what it is telling us about the world.

The problem that dare not speak its name in all this, is the evident contradiction between bifurcating quantum time; and the dimensional space-time of relativity, in which all events are already laid out.

 

[Jonti]

But the click of a geiger counter is supposedly simply the marking of one of the so called random quantum events.

No, it's just a contrived chaotic system that amplifies a particular type of QM event into "the macro level" as you call it. Thence your uncaused macroscopic events. Take it as a possibility proof, if you will. But chaotic systems are everywhere in Nature. You could even think of the visual cells in the retina as being like geiger counters, but working on photons.

A famous quantum mechanical problem is the time a pencil may be balanced on its point. It's about five seconds. For a real pencil, buffeted by thermal disturbance and wind it's only about a second. Five seconds is your fundamental limit. It's just a fact that determinism, of the Laplacian sort, is of only limited use when doing science.