Determinism

src: i.ytimg.com

Determinism is a philosophical theory that all events, including moral choices, are wholly determined by the preceding causes. Determinism is usually understood to impede free will because it requires that humans can not act the other way around than they do. This theory holds that the universe is perfectly rational because the full knowledge of a given situation ensures that an appropriate knowledge of its future is also possible. Some philosophers suggest variants around this basic definition. Deterministic theories throughout the history of philosophy stem from a variety of overlapping and sometimes overlapping motives and considerations. The opposite of determinism is a kind of indeterminism (or nondeterminism). Determinism is often contrasted with free will.

Determinism is often regarded as a causal causin , which in physics is known as cause-and-effect. It is the concept that events in a given paradigm are bound by causality in such a way that each state (of an object or event) is completely determined by its previous state. This meaning can be distinguished from other types of determinism mentioned below.

Other debates often concern the scope of a given system, with some maintaining that the entire universe is a singular system that determines and the other identifies other more limited (or multiverse) determination systems. Much of the historical debate involves many philosophical positions and varieties of determinism. They include debates on determinism and free will, technically declared as compatibilistic (allowing both to co-exist) and incompatible (denying their coexistence is a possibility). Determinism should not be confused with self-determination of human actions by reason, motive, and desire. Determinism rarely requires a perfectly practical prediction.

Video Determinism

Variety

Although some of the above forms of determinism concern human behavior and cognition, others frame themselves in response to the debate about nature and nurture. They will suggest that one factor will completely determine behavior. Because scientific understanding has grown, however, the strongest version of these theories has been widely rejected as the single cause of error.

In other words, modern deterministic theory seeks to explain how the interactions of both traits and maintain fully predictable. The concept of heritability has helped in making this distinction.

Biological determinism, sometimes called genetic determinism, is the notion that every human behavior, belief, and desire is determined by the nature of human genetics.

Behaviorism involves the idea that all behaviors can be traced to a particular cause - whether environmental or reflexive. John B. Watson and B. F. Skinner developed a determinism that focused on this care.

Cultural determinism or social determinism is a theory that focuses on parenting that the culture in which we are raised determines who we are.

Environmental determinism, also known as climate or geographic determinism, proposes that the physical environment, rather than social conditions, determines culture. Proponents of environmental determinism often also support Behavioral determinism. The main proponents of this idea include Ellen Churchill Semple, Ellsworth Huntington, Thomas Griffith Taylor, and perhaps Jared Diamond, although his status as a determinant environmentalist is debatable.

With certain factors

Other 'deterministic' theories are actually just looking to highlight the importance of certain factors in predicting the future. These theories often use factors as a kind of guide or constraint in the future. They do not have to think that the full knowledge of one factor will allow us to make perfect predictions.

Psychological determinism can mean that man must act according to reason, but it can also be synonymous with some kind of Psychological egoism. The last is the view that people will always act in their best interests.

Linguistic determinism claims that our language determines (at least limits) things we can think and say and thus know. The Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis holds that individuals experience the world based on the grammatical structure they normally use.

Economic determinism is a theory that links the preeminence of economic structure over politics in the development of human history. This is related to dialectical materialism from Karl Marx.

The technology of determinism is a reductionist theory which assumes that community technology encourages the development of social structure and cultural values.

With free will

Philosophers have debated the truth of determinism, and the truth of free will. This creates four possible positions in the image. Compatibilism refers to the view that free will, in some cases, is compatible with determinism. Three incompatible positions, on the other hand, reject this possibility. The harsh incompatibilities hold that both determinism and free will do not exist, libertarianists whose determinism does not hold, and free will may exist, and the harsh determinism that determinism holds and free will does not exist.

The standard argument against free will, according to philosopher J. J. C. Smart focuses on the implications of determinism for 'free will'. However, it shows free will to be denied whether determinism is true or not. On the one hand, if determinism is true, all our actions are predicted and we are assumed not free; on the other hand, if determinism is wrong, our actions are considered random and therefore we do not appear to be free because we have no part in controlling what is happening.

In his book, The Moral Landscape , writer and neuroscientist Sam Harris also argued against free will. He offers a mind experiment in which a mad scientist represents determinism. In Harris's example, mad scientists use machines to control all desires, and thus all behavior, of a particular human being. Harris believes that it is no longer tempting, in this case, to say the victim has "free will". Harris says there is no change if the machine controls desires randomly - the victim still seems to have no free will. Harris then argues that we are also victims of unpredictable desires (but because of our unconscious brain machinations, and not from mad scientists). Based on this introspection, he writes, "This reveals the true mystery of free will: if our experience is consistent with its absence, how can we say we saw any evidence in the first place?" adding that "Whether they are predictable or not, we do not cause our cause." That is, he believes there is strong evidence of no free will.

Some research (funded by John Templeton Foundation) suggests that reducing one's belief in free will is dangerous, making them less useful and more aggressive. This can happen because the individual's sense of self-efficacy suffers.

With soul

Some determinists argue that materialism does not present a complete understanding of the universe, since while it can depict a definite interaction between material things, it ignores the conscious mind or soul of a conscious being.

A number of positions can be described:

1. The immaterial soul is all that exists (Idealism).
2. The immaterial soul exists and uses a non-deterministic causal influence on the body. (Traditional free will, interactionist dualism).
3. The immaterial soul exists, but is part of the deterministic framework.
4. The immaterial soul exists, but it does not use causal influence, free or determined (epiphenomenalism, occasionally)
5. The immaterial soul does not exist - there is no body-mind dichotomy, and there is Materialistic explanation for conflicting intuition.

With ethics and morality

Another topic of debate is the implication that Determinism has on morality. Hard determinism (belief in determinism, and not free will) is particularly criticized because it seems to make traditional moral judgments impossible. However, some philosophers find this acceptable conclusion.

Philosophy and incompatibilities Peter van Inwagen introduces this thesis as follows:

The Argument that Free Will is Needed for Moral Judgment

1. The moral judgment you should not do X implies that you should do something else instead.
2. That you should do something else, instead implies that there is something else for you to do
3. That there's something else for you to do that implies that you can do something else
4. That you can do something else means you have free will
5. If you have no free will to do apart from X, we can not make a moral judgment that you should not have done X.

However, a compatibilist may have problems with the Inwagen process because one can not change the past like the center of his argument. A disagreement centered on a plan for the future may suggest:

1. The moral judgment you should not do X implies that you can do something else instead
2. That you can do something else instead implies that there is something else for you to do
3. There's something else you need to do to say you can do something else
4. That you can do something else implies that you have free will to plan the next step
5. If you have a free will to do apart from X we can make a moral judgment you should do other than X, and punish you as the responsible party for having done X that you know you should not do can help you remember not to doing X in the future.

Maps Determinism

History

Determinism has been established by Greek philosophers, during the 7th and 6th centuries BC in the 6th century BC by the Presocratic Heroclals, Leucippus and especially by the Stoics with universal causal determinism and Aristotle. Some of the main philosophers who have dealt with this issue are Marcus Aurelius, Omar KhayyÃÆ'¡m, Thomas Hobbes, Baruch Spinoza, Gottfried Leibniz, David Hume, Baron d'Holbach (Paul Heinrich Dietrich), Pierre-Simon Laplace, Arthur Schopenhauer, William James , Friedrich Nietzsche, Albert Einstein, Niels Bohr, Ralph Waldo Emerson and, recently, John Searle, Sam Harris, Ted Honderich, and Daniel Dennett.

Mecca Chiesa notes that probabilistic determinism or selection of B.F. Skinner consists of a completely separate concept of determinism that is not mechanistic at all. The mechanism of determinism assumes that each event has an unbroken chain of events, but a selection or probabilistic model does not.

Western Traditions

In the West, some elements of determinism have been expressed in Greece from the 6th century BC by Heroccitus Presocratic and Leucippus. The first full idea of ​​determinism arises from the Stoics, as part of the theory of universal causal determinism. The resulting philosophical debate, which involves meeting the elements of Aristotelian Ethics with Stoic psychology, led in the 1st-3rd century in Alexander's works of Aphrodisias to the first recorded Western debate on determinism and freedom, an issue known in theology as a paradox of free will. Epictetus and Platonic Epistles and early Christian thought were instrumental in this development. Jewish philosopher Moses Maimonides said of the deterministic implications of the omniscient god: "Does God know or does He not know that certain individuals will be good or bad? If you say 'He knows', then it means that [man] is forced to act as God knows beforehand he will act, otherwise God's knowledge will be imperfect.... "

Determinism in the West is often associated with Newtonian physics, which describes the physical matter of the universe as operating according to a set of laws that can still be known. The "billiardball" hypothesis, a product of Newtonian physics, states that once the initial conditions of the universe have been formed, the rest of the history of the universe will follow. If it is really possible to have a complete knowledge of the physical matter and all the laws that govern the material at one time, then it is theoretically possible to calculate the time and place of any event that will ever happen ( the Laplace devil ). In this sense, the fundamental particles of the universe operate in the same way as rolling balls on a pool table, moving and attacking each other in predictable ways to produce predictable results.

Whether or not it includes all in doing, Newtonian mechanics deals only with events that are caused, for example: If an object starts in a known position and is beaten to death by an object with some known speed, it will be pushed straight toward another predicted point. If it goes elsewhere, Newtonian argues, one must question the measurement of a person from the original position of the object, the exact direction of a striking object, gravity or other field accidentally ignored, etc. Then, they retain, retest and increase accuracy will always bring one's observations closer to theoretically predicted outcomes. When confronted with the situation on an ordinary human scale, Newtonian physics has been so successful that it has no competition. But it fails spectacularly as the speed becomes some substantial fraction of the speed of light and when the interactions on the atomic scale are studied. Prior to the discovery of quantum effects and other challenges to Newtonian physics, "uncertainty" was always a term applied to the accuracy of human knowledge of cause and effect, and not to cause and effect itself.

Newtonian mechanics as well as the following physical theories are the results of observation and experimentation, and hence they describe "how it all works" in tolerance. However, old western scientists believe that if there is a logical connection found between the cause and effect observed, there must be some absolute natural laws behind. The belief in the perfect law of nature that moves everything, rather than simply describing what we should expect, leads to the search for a series of universal laws that govern the world. This movement significantly encourages a deterministic view in western philosophy, as well as related theological views of Classical Pantheism.

Eastern Traditions

The idea that the whole universe is a deterministic system has been articulated in both Eastern and non-Eastern religions, philosophy and literature.

In I Ching and Taoism Philosophy, the ups and downs of favorable and unfavorable conditions suggest the least easy path is resistance (see wu wei).

In Indian philosophical schools, the concept of the exact and persistent effect of the law of Karma on the existence of all living things is analogous to the western concept of determinism. Karma is the concept of "action" or "action" in Indian religions. This is understood as causing the entire cycle of cause and effect (ie cycles called sa S R Ra) originating from ancient India and treated in Hinduism, Jain, and Sikhism. Karma is thought to have been determined and deterministic in the universe, and in combination with the decisions (free will) of living beings, accumulates to determine the futuristic situation facing living beings. See Karma in Hinduism.

src: www.theartofancientwisdom.com

Modern scientific perspectives

Generative process

Although it was once considered by scientists that any uncertainty in quantum mechanics takes place on a scale that is too small to affect biological or neurological systems, there is an indication that the nervous system is affected by quantum indeterminism because of chaos theory. It is unclear what its implications for the problem of freedom will provide the possibility of a reaction to the problem in the first place. Many biologists do not give determinism: Christof Koch argues against it, and supports the libertarian free will, by making arguments based on a generative process (emergence). Other advocates of emergentist or generative philosophy, cognitive science and evolutionary psychology, argue that certain forms of determinism (not always causal) are true. They instead suggest that the illusion of free will is experienced because of the generation of infinite behavior of the interplay of a set of deterministic-limited rules and parameters. Thus the uncertainty of behavior arising from the deterministic process leads to the perception of free will, though free will as an ontological entity does not exist. Certain experiments that observe neuroscience from free will can be said to support this possibility.

As an illustration, the game-chess and Go game strategy has strict rules in which no information (such as card face values) is hidden from one player and no random events (such as dice-rolling) takes place in the game. However, chess and especially Go with its very simple deterministic rules can still have an unpredictably large number of unpredictable movements. When chess is simplified to 7 or fewer, however, there are endgame tables available that determine which moves to play to achieve the perfect game. The implication is that given the less complex environment (with 32 original pieces reduced to 7 or fewer), predictable chess games can be achieved. In this scenario, the winning player will be able to announce the most number of schemes occurring in a certain amount with perfect defense assumptions by the loser player, or fewer moves if the defender chooses sub-optimal movement as the game progresses into the inevitable, predictive conclusion. With this analogy, it is suggested that free experience arises from the interplay of finite rules and deterministic parameters resulting in almost unlimited and practically unexpected behavioral responses. In theory, if all these events are accountable, and there is a known way to evaluate these events, seemingly unexpected behaviors will become predictable. Another example of the generative process is the John Horton Conway Game of Life that can be played. Nassim Taleb wary of such models, and coined the term "ludic error".

Compatibility with science presence

The philosophers of certain sciences argue that while causal determinism in which everything including the brain/mind is subject to the law of causality compatible with the mind capable of science, fatalism and predestination does not. These philosophers make the difference that causal determinism means that each step is determined by the previous step and therefore allows the sensory input of the observational data to determine the conclusion of what the brain is achieving, while the fatalism in which the steps in between does not relate the initial cause to the outcome. would make it impossible for observational data to correct a false hypothesis. This is often combined with the argument that if the brain has a fixed view and its argument only after a consequent no-cause construct to conclusions, science will not be possible and the use of arguments will be a waste of meaningless energy without persuasive effects on the brain with fixed views.

Mathematical model

Many mathematical models of physical systems are deterministic. This applies to most models involving differential equations (in particular, they measure the rate of change over time). Mathematical models that are not deterministic because they involve randomness are called stochastic. Because of the sensitive dependence on the initial conditions, some deterministic models may appear to behave non-deterministically; in such cases, the deterministic interpretation of the model may be useless because numerical instability and quantity of precision in measurement are limited. Such considerations may motivate stochastic model considerations even if the underlying system is governed by a deterministic equation.

Quantum mechanics and classical physics

Daily physics

Since the beginning of the 20th century, quantum mechanics - very small physics - have revealed aspects of previously hidden events. Prior to that, Newtonian physics - the physics of everyday life - was dominated. Taken in isolation (not as an approach to quantum mechanics), Newtonian physics describes a universe in which objects move in a perfectly defined way. On the scale at which humans exist and interact with the universe, Newton's mechanics remain useful, and make relatively accurate predictions (eg calculate trajectories). But while in theory, the absolute knowledge of the forces that accelerate the bullets will produce a truly accurate prediction of the course, modern quantum mechanics throws reasonable doubts on the main thesis of this determinism.

Relevant is the fact that certainty is never absolute in practice (and not just because of David Hume's induction problem). The equations of Newtonian mechanics can show a sensitive dependence on the initial conditions. This is an example of the butterfly effect, which is one of the subjects of chaos theory. The idea is that something as small as a butterfly can cause a chain reaction that causes a storm many years later. Consequently, even a very small error in the knowledge of the initial conditions can result in arbitrary large deviations from predictable behavior. The chaos theory thus explains why it may be practically impossible to predict real life, whether determinism is right or wrong. On the other hand, the problem may not be so much about the human ability to predict or attain certainty as much as it is the nature of reality itself. For that, a closer scientific view of nature is needed.

The quantum nature

Quantum physics works differently in many ways from Newtonian physics. Physicist Aaron D. O'Connell explains that understanding our universe, on a small scale like atoms, requires a different logic from everyday life. O'Connell does not deny that it is all interconnected: the scale of human existence finally emerges from the quantum scale. O'Connell argues that we must use different models and constructs when dealing with the quantum world. Quantum mechanics is the product of the careful application of scientific methods, logic, and empiricism. Heisenberg's uncertainty principle is often confused with the observer's effect. The principle of uncertainty actually illustrates how precisely we can measure the position and momentum of particles at the same time - if we increase accuracy in measuring one quantity, we are forced to lose accuracy in measuring the other. "This uncertainty relationship gives us a measure of freedom from the limitations of classical concepts necessary for a consistent description of the atomic process."

This is where statistical mechanics comes into play, and where physicists begin to need a rather intuitive mental model: A particle path can not be precisely determined in its full quantum description. "Path" is a classic and practical attribute in our everyday life, but which is not owned by quantum particles. The probabilities found in quantum mechanics still arise from measurement (from the perceived path of the particles). As Stephen Hawking explains, the result is not a traditional determinism, but a determined probability. In some cases, quantum particles may indeed track the right path, and the probability of finding particles in the path is one (definitely true). In fact, as far as predictions go, quantum development is at least as simple as the classical movement, but the key is to describe the wave function that is not easily expressed in everyday language. As long as the thesis of determinism is concerned, this probability is, at least, sufficiently determined. These findings from quantum mechanics have found many applications, and allow us to build transistors and lasers. In other words: personal computers, Blu-ray players and the internet all work because humans find the probabilities that are determined from the quantum world. None of it has to be taken to imply that other aspects of quantum mechanics are not still debated.

On probable predictable topics, double-slit experiments are a popular example. Photons are fired one by one through a double slit apparatus on a distant screen. Surprisingly, they do not get to a single point, or even two points that line up with a gap (the way you expect from a shotgun fired by a fixed gun at a distant target). Instead, light arrives in various concentrations at a widely separated point, and the distribution of collisions with targets can be reliably calculated. In this case the behavior of light in this tool is deterministic, but there is no way to predict where in the interference patterns produced each individual photon will make its contribution (though, there may be ways to use weak measurements to obtain more information without violating the principle of Uncertainty ).

Some (including Albert Einstein) argue that our inability to predict is more than probability just because of ignorance. The idea is that, beyond the conditions and laws we can observe or conclude, there are also hidden factors or "hidden variables" that determine really in which photons reach the detector screen. They argue that the course of the universe is absolutely determined, but humans are filtered from the knowledge of determinative factors. So, they say, it just seems that things go in a determinative way that is only probabilistic. In fact, they continue in a very deterministic way.

John S. Bell criticized Einstein's work in his famous Bell theorem that proved that quantum mechanics can make statistical predictions that would be violated if local hidden variables do exist. There are a number of experiments to verify such predictions, and so far do not seem to be broken. Better and better tests continue to verify results, including the 2015 "Loophole Free Test" that installs all known sources of error and the "Cosmic Bell Test" of 2017 underlying experimental cosmic data streamed from different directions toward Earth, precluding the possibility of a source data can have previous interactions. However, it is possible to add quantum mechanics with non-local hidden variables to achieve a deterministic theory appropriate to the experiment. An example is Bohm's interpretation of quantum mechanics. Bohm's interpretation, though, violates special and highly controversial relativity whether or not it can be reconciled without succumbing to determinism.

More advanced variations on this argument include Quantum contextual, by Bell, Simon B. Kochen and Ernst Specker in which arguing that the theory of hidden variables can not "make sense," which here means that the values ​​of hidden variables inherently depend on devices used to measure them.

This debate is relevant because it is easy to imagine a particular situation where the arrival of electrons on the screen at a particular point and time will trigger an event, whereas his arrival at another point will trigger a completely different event (eg see SchrÃÆ'¶ dinger's cat - a thought experiment used as a part of a deeper debate).

Thus, quantum physics cast a reasonable doubt on classical traditional determinism, Newtonian physics as far as reality does not seem to be fully determined. This is the subject of the famous Bohr-Einstein debate between Einstein and Niels Bohr and there is still no consensus.

Adequate determinism (see Varieties, above) is the reason why Stephen Hawking calls libertarian free will "merely an illusion". see free will for more discussion on this topic.

Other things of quantum determinism

All the uranium found on Earth is thought to have been synthesized during a supernova explosion that occurred some 5 billion years ago. Even before the laws of quantum mechanics are developed to the present level, the radioactivity of these elements has posed a challenge to determinism because of its uncertainty. One gram of uranium-238, a common radioactive substance, contains atoms of 2.5 × 10 ²¹ . Each of these atoms is identical and indistinguishable from all tests known to modern science. But about 12600 times per second, one of the atoms in the gram will decay, emitting alpha particles. The challenge for determinism is to explain why and when decay occurs, because it does not seem to depend on external stimuli. In fact, no physical theories exist that make testable predictions about exactly when certain atoms will rot. At best scientists can find the probability specified in the half-life of the element.

Persamaan Schrö¶dinger tergantung waktu memberikan turunan pertama dari negara kuantum. Yaitu, secara eksplisit dan unik memprediksi perkembangan fungsi gelombang dengan waktu.

${\ displaystyle i \ hbar {\ frac {\ partial \ psi (x, t)} {\ partial t}} = - {\ frac {\ hbar ^ {2} } {2m}} {\ frac {\ partial ^ {2} \ psi (x, t)} {\ partial x ^ {2}}} V (x) \ psi}  ÂÂ$

So if the wave function itself is a reality (not the possibility of classical coordinates), then the evolution of the unity of wave functions in quantum mechanics can be said to be deterministic. But the evolution of the unity of the wave function is not the whole of quantum mechanics.

It affirms that quantum mechanics is deterministic by treating the wavefunction itself because reality may be thought to imply a single wave function for the entire universe, starting from the origin of the universe. Such a "wave function of all things" will bring the possibilities of not only the world we know, but any other possible evolving world. For example, a large void in the distribution of galaxies is believed by many cosmologists to be derived from quantum fluctuations during the big bang. ( See cosmic inflation, primordial fluctuations and large-scale structures of the cosmos.)

However, both the assumed reality and the extraordinary and extraordinary accuracy of wave function and quantum mechanics on a small scale may imply or reasonably indicate the existence of a single wave function for the entire universe. The quantum mechanics of breaking gravity everywhere becomes significant, because there is nothing in the wave function, or in quantum mechanics, predicting anything about gravity. And this is obviously very important on a larger scale.

Gravity is considered a large-scale power, with a longer range than others. But gravity becomes significant even at a very small mass compared to the mass of the universe.

The waves of the size of the universe might have succeeded in modeling the universe without gravity. Our universe, by gravity, is very different from that predicted by quantum mechanics alone. To forget this is a colossal error.

Source of the article : Wikipedia