tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9297799.post5623146591845027801..comments2023-10-26T10:02:51.761-04:00Comments on Dr. C.: Thoughts on Information VII – Free WillUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9297799.post-18811440532471725562007-07-01T18:22:00.000-04:002007-07-01T18:22:00.000-04:00For the last several months, I've been thinking al...For the last several months, I've been thinking alot about free will, and also the concept of self-awareness (or consciousness). I have concluded, from what I consider a very fundamental and simple scientific fact, that free will must exist. I am desperately looking for someone who can intelligently give me feedback on my reason for believing this, and after reading your article, I am hoping that you can do this, as you seem to be knowledgeable on the subject.<BR/><BR/>I've been extremely frustrated searching the internet for answers to my very specific observation, as I have not found a single article addressing it. Please tell me what<BR/>the flaw is in my claim, if you do believe it is flawed.<BR/><BR/>I believe that there are exactly 4 forces in the universe (ignoring that they may all have arisen from a single force). Gravity, electromagnetic, strong nuclear, and weak nuclear. When it comes to the signaling of neurons, I think it is safe to say that we are dealing exclusively with the electromagnetic force (which applies to both the signal travelling down the axon, and to the checical neurotransmitters).<BR/><BR/>Now, I can read on hundreds of web sites about the mechanics of the triggering of a neuron, and the action potential, and the synapse, etc. These mechanisms are fairly<BR/>well understood. However, if I try to find anything written about, for example, the path involved in someone deciding to lift (or not lift) a finger, then the starting<BR/>point is always something like "the brain sends a message to ...". I can't anything that addresses the key point, which is "what causes the first neuron(s) to fire".<BR/><BR/>Ok, here is the point that I just can't get past, no matter how long or hard I ponder. Let's say I am making a choice between lifting my left hand or my right hand. I think we would all agree that depending on my choice, my left hand will rise or my right<BR/>hand will rise. And isn't it true, that in the 2 cases, different neurons will "fire". Now isn't it also true that the first neuron(s) to fire in these 2 different<BR/>cases will be different? And for the first neuron(s) to be triggered, does this not require some movement (no matter how tiny) of one or more charged particles (some ions or electrons, for example). That is, when someone says "the brain sends a message<BR/>to the hand", doesn't this absolutely imply that at some point, the original neuron<BR/>(or neurons) that are at the origin of the signal to the hand, MUST have some chemical action applied to it? My understanding is that all neural activity occurs due to<BR/>electromagnetic forces (via movement of various ions, and chemical reactions). Am I missing something here? Almost certainly, gravity and the two nuclear forces play no part. And I believe it is probably safe to say that the ions and/or electrons near the<BR/>originating neuron don't decide to move on their own free will.<BR/><BR/>And I have to assume that when I move one of my hands, there HAS TO BE some change in the<BR/>electromagnetic field (to move the electrons or ions) that will trigger the originating neuron(s). How could it possibley be otherwise? Can anyone give me a coherent rebuttal to this most simple observation?<BR/><BR/>Electromagnetic fields don't just change by themselves (other than quantum effects).<BR/><BR/>So please, someone, give me a scientific explanation on how my desire to move some muscle in my body can possibly cause a change in the electromagnetic field, which is<BR/>ultimately required for an electron or ion to change it's motion as compared to what it's motion would have been due to purely quantum mechanical random effects. And please don't tell me that some hormone or chemical reaction is causing this, as I am asking<BR/>about the specific link between the "free will" desire to move some muscle, and the actual firing of the first neuron that otherwise would not have fired if I didn't will the muscle to move in the first place. I truly don't think there is a materialistic answer to this question. Maybe I will be surprised.<BR/><BR/>Thank you,<BR/>Ronald LemberAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9297799.post-75002367845595981522007-06-18T08:39:00.000-04:002007-06-18T08:39:00.000-04:00Thanks, Felix.Thanks, Felix.Dr. Chttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06255898610620668624noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9297799.post-50769620454631658312007-06-18T02:35:00.000-04:002007-06-18T02:35:00.000-04:00Thank you, Doc, for your magnum opus. I've read it...Thank you, Doc, for your magnum opus. I've read it only once, and have your argument (with which I can't disagree) bt will need both time and rereading before I can adequately reply.<BR/><BR/>Having seen your endpoint from the trajectory, I've begun the process already ... but it will still be a while. Bear with me.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com