<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Aptos;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Aptos",sans-serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle19
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Aptos",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple style='word-wrap:break-word'><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal>Your simple program could not have done otherwise. It followed a casual chain from its inputs. Had it encountered a \u201ctrue\u201d random source, it would have relinquished control the is environment and become driven by the environment.<br><br>Science aims to find the rules. Probabilistic rules, like quantum mechanics, are still rules. <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>So no, it is not worth \u201cinvestigating\u201d whether human biochemistry is not governed by rules. That would not be science, or an investigation, that would be mysticism. <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'>From:</span></b><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'> Friam <friam-bounces@redfish.com> <b>On Behalf Of </b>Pieter Steenekamp<br><b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, June 10, 2025 10:43 AM<br><b>To:</b> The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam@redfish.com><br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [FRIAM] Free will\u2014ghost in the machine or just clever wiring?<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal>In response to: "To have free will means that one really could have done otherwise."<br><br>I can write a simple optimization algorithm that evaluates alternatives and selects the best one. Would you say this algorithm possesses free will according to your definition\u2014that it "could have done otherwise"? I'm not asserting, just genuinely exploring whether such behavior satisfies the criteria you're proposing.<br><br>In response to: "From a mechanistic perspective, it is impossible. If we decide people aren\u2019t mechanisms, then we abandon science."<br><br>Again, I\u2019m not asserting a position but raising a question: Isn\u2019t investigating whether humans are more than mechanisms a legitimate scientific pursuit? Or are we prematurely closing off inquiry by simply declaring that humans are mechanisms and thereby rendering further exploration unnecessary?<br><br>For instance, would you consider Seth Lloyd\u2019s proposed Turing Test for free will (<a href="https://www.informationphilosopher.com/solutions/scientists/lloyd/Turing_Test.pdf">https://www.informationphilosopher.com/solutions/scientists/lloyd/Turing_Test.pdf</a>) unscientific? It seems to offer a rigorous and testable approach to a very difficult question.<o:p></o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><div><p class=MsoNormal>On Tue, 10 Jun 2025 at 19:00, Marcus Daniels <<a href="mailto:marcus@snoutfarm.com">marcus@snoutfarm.com</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p></div><blockquote style='border:none;border-left:solid #CCCCCC 1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-right:0in'><div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'>To have free will means that one really could have done otherwise. <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'>From a mechanistic perspective, it is impossible. If we decide people aren\u2019t mechanisms, then we abandon science. <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'> <o:p></o:p></p><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'><b><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'>From:</span></b><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'> Friam <<a href="mailto:friam-bounces@redfish.com" target="_blank">friam-bounces@redfish.com</a>> <b>On Behalf Of </b>Pieter Steenekamp<br><b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, June 10, 2025 9:43 AM<br><b>To:</b> The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <<a href="mailto:friam@redfish.com" target="_blank">friam@redfish.com</a>><br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [FRIAM] Free will\u2014ghost in the machine or just clever wiring?</span><o:p></o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'> <o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'>Before we tackle your robot's free will will, let me ask: how do you define free will? And do humans actually have it?<br><br>Now, let\u2019s flip it around. If this clever robot behaves just like a human \u2014 makes plans, learns from its past, even rewrites its own code \u2014 and we can't tell its decisions apart from a human's... what does that say about human free will?<br><br>Maybe it's not about a ghost in the machine, but whether there\u2019s a ghost in us. (Spoiler: I don\u2019t know. I\u2019m just as curious as the next guy.)<br><br>If everything we do boils down to physics \u2014 atoms doing their thing, maybe with a bit of quantum weirdness \u2014 then sure, a robot could, in theory, be built to match us, free will and all (whatever that means).<br><br>But if there\u2019s something more \u2014 some spark beyond physics \u2014 then maybe the robot hits a wall. That is, until physics catches up and figures out how to build a robot with that spark too. Maybe.<o:p></o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'> <o:p></o:p></p><div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'>On Tue, 10 Jun 2025 at 17:46, Marcus Daniels <<a href="mailto:marcus@snoutfarm.com" target="_blank">marcus@snoutfarm.com</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p></div><blockquote style='border:none;border-left:solid #CCCCCC 1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'>Consider a robot with sensors roughly comparable to humans.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'>The robot has access to all the energy it wants. It has a large memory and generous computing resources. It has executive processes with onboard state-of-the-art LLMs to access vast information and can run a wide variety of appropriate programs to plan its next actions. It can use the LLMs to write new programs. It can tune or fine-tune the LLMs constantly from new data. It remembers its actions and their consequences. It has video and audio recordings of every moment. It has time series data of its sensors since it was activated. Because of its general self-tuning ability, any guidance from its authors (like for the LLM) can be overridden. It has americium-241 onboard hardware random number generator that drives its LLM sampling and any other stochastic algorithm. <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'>Does this robot have free will? Why or why not?<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'> <o:p></o:p></p><div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'><b><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'>From:</span></b><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'> Friam <<a href="mailto:friam-bounces@redfish.com" target="_blank">friam-bounces@redfish.com</a>> <b>On Behalf Of </b>Jochen Fromm<br><b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, June 10, 2025 1:06 AM<br><b>To:</b> The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <<a href="mailto:friam@redfish.com" target="_blank">friam@redfish.com</a>><br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [FRIAM] Free will\u2014ghost in the machine or just clever wiring?</span><o:p></o:p></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'> <o:p></o:p></p><p style='margin:0in'><span style='color:black'>You argue "free will is a pattern, a relentless stubbornness in doing". It fits to Robert Sapolsky who says it is all wired and (pre-)determined and there is no free will. And to Schopenhauer's pessimistic view "A man can do what he wants, but not want what he wants" ("Der Mensch kann tun, was er will, aber er kann nicht wollen, was er will")</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'> <o:p></o:p></p><p style='margin:0in'><span style='color:black'>To me it looks like free will is the opposite: we are the only animals which have the ability to break the patterns that govern our behavior. You have the freedom to choose what you want to be on fire about - at least in principle</span><o:p></o:p></p><p style='margin:0in'><span style='color:black'><a href="https://youtu.be/4vtVOJB2r4Q" target="_blank">https://youtu.be/4vtVOJB2r4Q</a></span><o:p></o:p></p><p style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></p><p style='margin:0in'><span style='color:black'>J.</span><o:p></o:p></p><p style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'> <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'><span style='color:black'>-------- Original message --------</span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'><span style='color:black'>From: Nicholas Thompson <<a href="mailto:thompnickson2@gmail.com" target="_blank">thompnickson2@gmail.com</a>> </span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'><span style='color:black'>Date: 6/10/25 1:47 AM (GMT+01:00) </span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'><span style='color:black'>To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <<a href="mailto:friam@redfish.com" target="_blank">friam@redfish.com</a>> </span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'><span style='color:black'>Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Free will\u2014ghost in the machine or just clever wiring? </span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'><span style='color:black'> </span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'>I am overwhelmingly happy to take a position on free will for Marcus:<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'> <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'>You don\u2019t have it, I don\u2019t have it. George doesn\u2019t have it. Will is not the sort of thing that can be had. It is a pattern, a relentless stubbornness in doing.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'>Sent from my Dumb <span style='font-size:17.0pt'>Phone</span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;margin-bottom:12.0pt'><br>On Jun 9, 2025, at 2:36<span style='font-family:"Arial",sans-serif'>\u202f</span>PM, steve smith <<a href="mailto:sasmyth@swcp.com" target="_blank">sasmyth@swcp.com</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;margin-bottom:12.0pt'><span style='font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif'>\ufeff</span><br>On 6/9/25 12:25 PM, Jochen Fromm wrote:<o:p></o:p></p><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'>Why do you call ChatGPT George? I must have missed it. Or who was George?<o:p></o:p></p></blockquote><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'> <o:p></o:p></p></blockquote><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'>We have a bar named George R in Berlin by the way, in the quarter where I live. It is named after George Remus, an American bootlegger during the Prohibition era<o:p></o:p></p></blockquote><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Remus" target="_blank">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Remus</a><o:p></o:p></p></blockquote><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;margin-bottom:12.0pt'><br>someone might add an extra R in homage to our own George R.R. (Martin)?<br><br>I'm surprised the "George" reference slipped by you, I don't know if it was Stephen or Nick who first started making the reference to GPT (any version) in that mode, but it was a variant on another personal name I think Stephen used for a while with "Gupta" as the surname? I think it was intended to suggest a serious collaborator, but somehow (d)evolved to George? If I weren't so lazy, I'd go dig through the archives... I think someone with a higher fidelity memory or implicated in that origination will pile on here?<o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'><OpenPGP_0xD5BAF94F88AFFA63.asc><o:p></o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'>.- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. / ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..<br>FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv<br>Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom <a href="https://bit.ly/virtualfriam" target="_blank">https://bit.ly/virtualfriam</a><br>to (un)subscribe <a href="http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com" target="_blank">http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com</a><br>FRIAM-COMIC <a href="http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/" target="_blank">http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/</a><br>archives: 5/2017 thru present <a href="https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/" target="_blank">https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/</a><br> 1/2003 thru 6/2021 <a href="http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/" target="_blank">http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/</a><o:p></o:p></p></div></div></div></div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'>.- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. / ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..<br>FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv<br>Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom <a href="https://bit.ly/virtualfriam" target="_blank">https://bit.ly/virtualfriam</a><br>to (un)subscribe <a href="http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com" target="_blank">http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com</a><br>FRIAM-COMIC <a href="http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/" target="_blank">http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/</a><br>archives: 5/2017 thru present <a href="https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/" target="_blank">https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/</a><br> 1/2003 thru 6/2021 <a href="http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/" target="_blank">http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/</a><o:p></o:p></p></div></blockquote></div></div></div><p class=MsoNormal>.- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. / ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..<br>FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv<br>Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom <a href="https://bit.ly/virtualfriam" target="_blank">https://bit.ly/virtualfriam</a><br>to (un)subscribe <a href="http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com" target="_blank">http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com</a><br>FRIAM-COMIC <a href="http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/" target="_blank">http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/</a><br>archives: 5/2017 thru present <a href="https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/" target="_blank">https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/</a><br> 1/2003 thru 6/2021 <a href="http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/" target="_blank">http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/</a><o:p></o:p></p></div></blockquote></div></div></body></html>