• Blog
  • Ian Durham: A Formal Model of Consciousness and Emergent Free Will

What is the essence of free will? We have a belief that when we make a choice, what we choose has a high degree of probability of happening. Can we build a formal physical and mathematical model that capture this? In his talk at FQxI's 6th International Conference in Tuscany, Italy, Ian Durham describes his attempt to do this.

 Explore more:

Keywords: physics, free will, durha, Mind Matters Tuscany Italy Agency Consciousness Intelligence in the Physical World APW CPW IPW Fetzer Franklin Fund FFF

11 days later

My computer is affected by a Trojan, I think. All word-processing can be altered. Talk about a carrot becoming a pepper. Word spellings, their presence or absence, spaces too, unwanted words, repeated paragraphs, lost ones. As fast as I correct it, it changes the text. So i can't compile my writing. In order to self publish or submit to a pre-print archive. I spent too long on it hoping to adequately present what I've written. The idea of freewill in such circumstances doesn't work . This is written using another device.

.

I got to 3:51 of the 18 minutes and 53 seconds.

No, the “essence of free will” is NOT “if I open my refrigerator and … if I make the choice that I want a carrot at that particular moment I reach in and I grab a carrot … we have this this sense when we make choices that whatever we choose has a high degree of probability of occurring…”.

And no, the world is not divided up into “deterministic processes” (i.e. outcomes are determined by laws of nature) and “random processes” (i.e. outcomes are random), where “all realistic processes that we encounter in everyday life are somewhere between the two”.

In fact, in this world of living things, choice of outcomes occurs after logical analysis and collation of vast amounts of information coming from the senses, where this analysis is clearly a fallible aspect of the world (e.g. the cat that momentarily thinks that a leaf blown by the wind is a tiny creature).

These analysis, collation, and IF…THEN/ choice-of-outcomes aspects of the world can only be represented by the type of logical connective symbols used in computer programs. These outcomes can’t be considered to be “somewhere between” outcomes that are determined by laws of nature, and outcomes that are random.

    Lorraine Ford
    Physicists’ models of the world are based on relationships between potentially measurable categories, and numbers that represent the results of this measurement. This model has been shown to be correct.

    However, physicists do not have a model of why the numbers would ever move: they only have a model of number change that is due to mathematical relationship, but only when other numbers move. So, physicists do not have a complete model of why the numbers would ever move or continue to move.

    E.g., physicists do not have a model of how Ian Durham would ever be able to move/jump the numbers, i.e. physicists do not have a model of how Ian Durham could act, or choose an outcome like reaching into the refrigerator.

    The aspects of the world that logically analyse and collate information, and the aspect of the world that chooses outcomes (i.e. the aspect of the world that genuinely jumps the numbers), can only be represented by the type of logical connective symbols used in computer programs.

    As well as the aspects of the world that are represented by equations and numbers, there necessarily exists logical aspects of the world, that can only be represented by the use of logical connective symbols like IF, AND, OR, IS TRUE, and THEN.

      Georgina Woodward
      There are no excuses for your appalling grammar, punctuation, spelling, nonsensical made-up words, and half-finished sentences. Do you seriously think anybody would know what on earth you are talking about?

      How rude. I don 't claim all error and misunderstanding is due to malfunction of the device.If you have nothing nice to say, keep your ugly thoughts to. yourself.
      I've had days of frustration, from undermining my fee will to express myself.

        With those 2 foundational factors-
        Change of distribution can give rise to the variety of particles,
        ”. ”. Generation of particles _". ” ": *: chemical elements
        ”. ”. ”. ”.àrrangement of these gives materials
        and objects. From microscopic up to celestial bodies ,Further organisation and ongoing change gives galaxies.

        2 prerequisites for free will. Not dis-agreeing with Ian on this point.
        Object permanence. There has to be some continued existence when not actively observing the object. Carrots don’t dematerialize, for example. Can choose to retrieve them expecting them to be where put or near.
        Material Constancy. Objects don’t change into other things
        E.g carrot to pepper excepting development and change of state.,
        Important characteristics of Observation independent reality.

          The characteristic quality of living things is that “stuff” doesn’t “happen”. Living things make things happen in a way that can’t be explained by laws of nature: this is free will.

          Living things make movements, events and structures happen:

          • Termites build mounds.
          • Beavers build dams.
          • Human beings build houses.
          • Ian Durham bought a cap, which he placed on his head.

          Ian Durham chose to get up in the morning; he chose to dress himself in a certain way; he chose to walk towards the fridge and open the door; he chose to stand in front of an audience and speak. He didn’t have to do any of this.

          The issue is the free will of living things, who ALL make things happen in a way that can’t be explained by laws of nature.

          Living things make on-the-spot, there and then, outcomes happen in a way that can only be represented by the use of logical connective symbols like IF, AND, OR, IS TRUE, and THEN.

          Meanwhile, Ian Durham and Emily Adlam struggle mightily to concoct elaborate, old-style, mathematical explanations, and elaborate verbal explanations, for free will and consciousness.

            Lorraine Ford
            Re explanations for free will and consciousness:

            In the end, it could come down to Ockham’s Razor, i.e. the principle of parsimony:

            1. Awkward, clunky, elaborate mathematical equations with associated awkward, clunky, elaborate verbal explanations

            versus

            1. Simple explanations which involve logical connectives, which are an almost invisible, but more basic aspect of mathematics than equations are.

              The expression '"stuff happens"was used to refer
              to the foundational relationship, not anything about consciousness free will. In reply to your repeated question.

              Competition ,timing and environment seem relevant topics for consideration and when modelling this. I may choose to eat an afternoon meal today ; though the outcome matching the decision will depend upon how many people make the same choice. For example it could be a particular variety of pie ,from a limited number baked and pool of lunchtime customers who each could buy the last pie. Or I might be a refugee and though I've chosen to eat there is not enough food to go around,

                Georgina Woodward
                Size of the competing population is relevant. Is it the entire human population or a particular group, neighbourhood, or particular individual.

                Disability and free will is also interesting. What if I can imagine and choose an outcome but not enact the fullfill ment of it, needing a helper to do the action bit. Is that still freewill? The cerebellum carries out very many automatic functions that unimpaired we think are controlled by will. Its more like autopilot that doesn't need thinking about till it gets things wrong (that not what I intended) or stops working.

                  Georgina Woodward
                  Is causing an action to happen according to will using a robot limb or able bodied service dog or human helper different from using one's own body in fulfillment of the will. In a philosophical way how is it different?

                  If an assisted human still retains freewill, what about a domestic pet, house trained to use the garden for toilet breaks? That has to use body language or vocalisations to have a door opened for it.