Do you craft/choose your thoughts before you have them?

[FBM]

I think I see what you mean.
It seems to me that a lot of thoughts arise from association with external input or follow naturally from previous thoughts while others (mysteriously) seem completely random and without any cause. - Like that image of a formula 1 tyre with "Goodyear" written on it I just had. No idea where that one came from.

Could have been a random firing of neurons or something working in your unconscious, I suppose. Random doesn't mean uncaused, of course.

Cheese.

[NoFreeWill]

I suppose the question looks further back and asks what is the source of volition itself. Is a volitional act preceded by a volitional thought preceded by a volitional choosing/crafting of the thought?

No, how can it be? The buck must stop with something that is not volitional.

Where does volition come from?

The brain/body system.

Is it just an electrochemical activity?

Essentially yes.

If so, how can we be said to choose it?

Choices do occur but they are never "free" choices.

Seems to me that the concept of volition requires an uncaused cause somewhere along the line.

I agree.
I think the confusion originates from a remnant of religion that we haven't yet expunged out of our belief system that true sceptical atheists need to scrutinise, namely the concept of the supernatural soul. If we had a supernatural soul then we could have an ultimate source of volition. Like most atheists I reject the supernatural and consequently reject an uncaused source of volition.

[Animavore]

Is it possible that a more primitive part of our brain is always thinking out shit in order "feel" out the world and itself, like a rat wondering "what's over here?" "what's over there?" "what's that sound?"...etc while another part, through conditioning and reasoning is looking at this as if reading data (and even "wording" it out like when you read a book or interpret any other data) ?

For instance; did you ever have a really immoral thought, something that repulses yourself, come into your head for a sec and then shake it off and ask yourself "Why am I thinking that" and the say to yourself "Don't be thinking that"?

[FBM]

...I agree.
I think the confusion originates from a remnant of religion that we haven't yet expunged out of our belief system that true sceptical atheists need to scrutinise, namely the concept of the supernatural soul. If we had a supernatural soul then we could have an ultimate source of volition. Like most atheists I reject the supernatural and consequently reject an uncaused source of volition.

Thanks for that. It's very insightful, and I've thought much the same about it. This sense of volition, which IIRC is associated with the frontal lobe, then, doesn't point to actual volition as it's commonly assumed to be? If that's the case, in what way can we be said to be moral agents? I seem to recall that the sense of agency is associated with the parietal lobe, but I'd have to look that up to be sure.

[FBM]

Is it possible that a more primitive part of our brain is always thinking out shit in order "feel" out the world and itself, like a rat wondering "what's over here?" "what's over there?" "what's that sound?"...etc while another part, through conditioning and reasoning is looking at this as if reading data (and even "wording" it out like when you read a book or interpret any other data) ?

For instance; did you ever have a really immoral thought, something that repulses yourself, come into your head for a sec and then shake it off and ask yourself "Why am I thinking that" and the say to yourself "Don't be thinking that"?

Yep. I do that lots (not necessarily with immoral thoughts) in order to 'correct' my behavior. It's beginning to sound like there isn't a single entity in this brain that doing the work of producing volition, but rather a handful of parts working in concert. Does that sound right to you?

[NoFreeWill]

If that's the case, in what way can we be said to be moral agents?

If we truly believe in right and wrong we can act as moral agents as these beliefs will have some influence on our actions.

[Animavore]

Is it possible that a more primitive part of our brain is always thinking out shit in order "feel" out the world and itself, like a rat wondering "what's over here?" "what's over there?" "what's that sound?"...etc while another part, through conditioning and reasoning is looking at this as if reading data (and even "wording" it out like when you read a book or interpret any other data) ?

For instance; did you ever have a really immoral thought, something that repulses yourself, come into your head for a sec and then shake it off and ask yourself "Why am I thinking that" and the say to yourself "Don't be thinking that"?

Yep. I do that lots (not necessarily with immoral thoughts) in order to 'correct' my behavior. It's beginning to sound like there isn't a single entity in this brain that doing the work of producing volition, but rather a handful of parts working in concert. Does that sound right to you?

Well that's what Steven Pinker thinks and this book here talks about it too.



It's reckoned that different parts of the brain are at odds with each other with some parts vetoing others. The book above is really good. I think I might read it again because I forget a lot of it. He starts each chapter with a moment someone had to make a decision and then tries explain it using examples of studies and experiments. He reckons though that a lot of what we think of comes from experience. He gives an example of a firefighter who, when a bush fire changes direction suddenly and fastly towards the firefigthers, had the quick idea to burn the grass in front of him until it burned out and then jump into the charred ground. The fire consumed and killed all the other firefighters and he survived. He argues that although it seemed like volition the firefighter was the oldest and most experienced there and had witness hundreds of types of fires and had seen it all and could "predict" what would happen were as the others couldn't. There probably wasn't that much thought put into it at all.
And aeroplane pilots are thought all types of simulations of various scenarios like engines going out so that if they happen in real-life they're not relying on their thinking but will automatically kick into action.
Even things like good habits and beneficial thoughts may come more from conditioning as a child which is why we sometimes suppress things as well as from experience like "fire burns" and "water is dangerous". A lot of this is done out of self-preservation.
So it's hard to say how much of anything is done by choice. Did you ever leap from a car before it flew into a ditch? It happened to me before and there wasn't much of a choice there. Some people might freeze throw their hands up and end up with their head put through the windscreen as the car folds in two and some, like myself, bail and land in the bushes with only a heap of scrapes. Is there a moment of choice between bailing and freezing? Or would both people have taken the same action on different days depending on how their brain is wired?

I waffling now. My brain is going 90 thinking about this. I'm getting breakfast.

[charlou]

Seems to me that the concept of volition requires an uncaused cause somewhere along the line.

I agree.
I think the confusion originates from a remnant of religion that we haven't yet expunged out of our belief system that true sceptical atheists need to scrutinise, namely the concept of the supernatural soul. If we had a supernatural soul then we could have an ultimate source of volition. Like most atheists I reject the supernatural and consequently reject an uncaused source of volition.

Actually I think it's the other way round, that religion, or aspects of it, arise out of our tendency to think we have free will and our desire to explain that.

[charlou]

For instance; did you ever have a really immoral thought, something that repulses yourself, come into your head for a sec and then shake it off and ask yourself "Why am I thinking that" and the say to yourself "Don't be thinking that"?

Yes.




Also, my dreams (sorry for adding the dreams can of worms to this) ... There can be shit in there that is nothing whatsoever like anything that goes on in my conscious mind.

[NoFreeWill]

Actually I think it's the other way round, that religion, or aspects of it, arise out of our tendency to think we have free will and our desire to explain that.

Yes. That would make more sense.

[FBM]

Yep. I do that lots (not necessarily with immoral thoughts) in order to 'correct' my behavior. It's beginning to sound like there isn't a single entity in this brain that doing the work of producing volition, but rather a handful of parts working in concert. Does that sound right to you?

Well that's what Steven Pinker thinks and this book here talks about it too.

[img]http://images.contentreserve.com/ImageT ... 00.jpg/img]

It's reckoned that different parts of the brain are at odds with each other with some parts vetoing others. The book above is really good. I think I might read it again because I forget a lot of it. He starts each chapter with a moment someone had to make a decision and then tries explain it using examples of studies and experiments. He reckons though that a lot of what we think of comes from experience. He gives an example of a firefighter who, when a bush fire changes direction suddenly and fastly towards the firefigthers, had the quick idea to burn the grass in front of him until it burned out and then jump into the charred ground. The fire consumed and killed all the other firefighters and he survived. He argues that although it seemed like volition the firefighter was the oldest and most experienced there and had witness hundreds of types of fires and had seen it all and could "predict" what would happen were as the others couldn't. There probably wasn't that much thought put into it at all.
And aeroplane pilots are thought all types of simulations of various scenarios like engines going out so that if they happen in real-life they're not relying on their thinking but will automatically kick into action.
Even things like good habits and beneficial thoughts may come more from conditioning as a child which is why we sometimes suppress things as well as from experience like "fire burns" and "water is dangerous". A lot of this is done out of self-preservation.
So it's hard to say how much of anything is done by choice. Did you ever leap from a car before it flew into a ditch? It happened to me before and there wasn't much of a choice there. Some people might freeze throw their hands up and end up with their head put through the windscreen as the car folds in two and some, like myself, bail and land in the bushes with only a heap of scrapes. Is there a moment of choice between bailing and freezing? Or would both people have taken the same action on different days depending on how their brain is wired?

I waffling now. My brain is going 90 thinking about this. I'm getting breakfast.

Good examples. I once went off a 10-ft embankment on a motorcycle, over a barbed wire fence and into a cow pasture. (Seemed like I was in the air for a very long time.) Anyway, there was no way I could have planned or chosen how to land; it just happened. I hit feet-first, tucked my right shoulder and rolled and rolled and rolled until the energy of the fall had dissipated. The only explanation I have is the martial arts training, which included a lot of breakfalls and rolling, kicked in. Muscle memory accounts for a huge chunk of what we do, seems. Even typing. On the one hand, I'm intending to type these words, but on the other hand, I learned to touch-type in high school, so I'm not even conscious of the exact process that goes into hitting the keys I want to spell the word I want. Seems to me that such conditioning serves the purpose of taking conscious control out of the equation, perhaps to make it more efficient. Piano players sure can't think about every note or chord. If they did, they'd never be able to play all the extremely fast and complex music that so many of them do.

I'm wondering if the sense of volition isn't an illusion of perspective altogether. I can see how it might have evolved (the sense, I mean), if it aided survival and/or gave some reproductive advantage.

If...and I do mean if...we get our sense of selfhood/identity from the interplay of various parts of the brain, then does that mean that a person's self/identity isn't a singular thing, but a composite?

[FBM]

Actually I think it's the other way round, that religion, or aspects of it, arise out of our tendency to think we have free will and our desire to explain that.

Yes. That would make more sense.

Agreed. I rikey.

I've recently started contemplating on whether or not individuality/selfhood has some quasi-religious overtones to it. In Western socieities, individual rights, uniqueness of perspective, opinion and the like seem to have been elevated to something like a holy status. When I question selfhood and individuality as ultimately real, I usually get some pretty, uhm, energetic responses that eventually cease to be based on experience or necessary inference. Reification. Everybody does it.

Probably.

[Animavore]

If...and I do mean if...we get our sense of selfhood/identity from the interplay of various parts of the brain, then does that mean that a person's self/identity isn't a singular thing, but a composite?

It would explain how we could adapt as a situation dictates. I remember I was in this pub in Dublin known for being rough which was generally full of Dublin gangsters and IRA supporters (and probably members) and talking to them in a very anti-English, pro-IRA, anti-immigrant type of way and actually believe what I was saying (I was only 18 and scared, it's not something I would do now) in the intrests of self-preservation. So I basically "flipped" my thought process from liberal to nationalist (like going from Democrat to Republican) which to me would seem to imply we have both modes of thought inside us (fear and acceptance of things foreign, pro and anti war) and whichever we become, or to what degrees we become or identify with any amount of traits, would probably depend, through experience and teaching, on whichever ones win out (NoFreeWill's sig is very apt in this case The will to overcome an emotion, is ultimately only the will of another, or of several other, emotions.
Friedrich Nietzsche).

[FBM]

If...and I do mean if...we get our sense of selfhood/identity from the interplay of various parts of the brain, then does that mean that a person's self/identity isn't a singular thing, but a composite?

It would explain how we could adapt as a situation dictates. I remember I was in this pub in Dublin known for being rough which was generally full of Dublin gangsters and IRA supporters (and probably members) and talking to them in a very anti-English, pro-IRA, anti-immigrant type of way and actually believe what I was saying (I was only 18 and scared, it's not something I would do now) in the intrests of self-preservation. So I basically "flipped" my thought process from liberal to nationalist (like going from Democrat to Republican) which to me would seem to imply we have both modes of thought inside us (fear and acceptance of things foreign, pro and anti war) and whichever we become, or to what degrees we become or identify with any amount of traits, would probably depend, through experience and teaching, on whichever ones win out (NoFreeWill's sig is very apt in this case The will to overcome an emotion, is ultimately only the will of another, or of several other, emotions.
Friedrich Nietzsche).

I have a vague recollection of a statement to the effect that what you do determines who you are, not the other way around. I may have made that up myself. Not sure. It may be that our thoughts and actions arise first, then we build an identity with them as raw material. Then, maybe, things get flipped around until we start to assume that there is a homunculus or something inside that is creating the thoughts and willing the actions.

[Animavore]

Another thing I love about the brain is how easy it is to fool yourself and manipulate your own emotions.
Any time I walk through Dublin city there are always college students doing work for various charities asking can they speak to you for a sec and then proceed to try to get you to sign up for their charity and they take a lump sum every month.
Now I hate being accosted. If I'm going to do something I'll do it out of my own... eh,, volition (?) so it used to make me really angry, angry with guilt, when I had to say "No thanks" and pull away from them.
But then I was walking down the street with my friend and some girl approached and he said "I'm already a contributor" (which he was) and she smiled and said "Thanks for your support" with a thumb up.
So now when they come near me now say "I'm already a contributor" and get the same warm "Thank you" and I end up walking away smiling feeling good about myself even though I know I'm lying and then when I point this out to myself I smile even harder knowing I just pulled a fast one.