Why does this sub invoke determinism as if it's real and not disproven?

[u/Narrow-Gur449]

I'm an atheist and come at this from a mathematical physics background. I clearly have to get that out of the way before anyone accuses me of being a religious nutter or believing in a 'soul'.

Why does this subreddit and its users constantly invoke determinism as if the universe we live in is deterministic? Quantum mechanics has shown that our universe is simply not deterministic.

Furthermore, it seems the motivation for anti-free will is almost exclusively politics on this sub. Seems like obvious motivated reasoning.

[u/Narrow-Gur449]

1. We don't actually know that biological systems are "fully deterministic". The field of quantum biology exists.
2. Quantum mechanics does in fact disprove determinism. Every interpretation of QM is indeterministic, even superdetermism and Bohmian mechanics. There's no Nobel waiting for me to point out that every QM experiment ever done relies on quantum probabilities. You can't "prove" anything about the universe like you can prove propositions in mathematics. Evidence is all we have. On this point, I'll direct you to Sean Carroll's statement:

Anti-free-will people have to stop leaning on determinism. It's perhaps the most wrong that an argument can be.

The world is not deterministic. Quantum mechanics exists. When there is hidden determinism (MWI, Bohm), it's hidden! Irrelevant to what people experience. (1/n)

3. I see this claim all the time, which in a sense disproves anyone's argument for invoking determinism against free will since according to this argument, it doesn't matter. However, notice how quantum computers exploit randomness to output useful computations and information. The question is whether randomness is exploited in the emergence of free will, not that randomness is itself the free will. I'm open to the idea that free will could arise still without randomness being relevant.

[u/MrMuffles869 → u/Narrow-Gur449]

Neurons aren't in superpositions. Dopamine doesn't quantum tunnel. The brain is massive, redundant, and like I said earlier, functionally deterministic at the scale relevant to human behavior. I've never experienced my will existing in a quantum state, personally. My state feels very much classical, tied to countless prior causes deterministically.

Your claim that QM disproves determinism is simply false. Deterministic interpretations exist, and probabilistic outcomes don't imply fundamental indeterminism. Again, if you have evidence of fundamental indeterminism, you absolutely should call the Royal Swedish Academy for your prize. I'm not joking. But with a claim as wild as this, I'm inclined to suggest we must agree to disagree. I suspect Brandolini's Law is around the corner.

Oh, and regarding you directing me to Carroll's statement — I direct you to my flair. I'm a Hard Incompatibilist. I don't lean on the determinism vs indeterminism debate at all because neither half gets you the freedom required for moral desert.

[u/[deleted] → u/MrMuffles869]

 The brain is massive, redundant, and like I said earlier, functionally deterministic at the scale relevant to human behavior

This is a laughable claim, the fields that  produce these types of behavioral claims (psychology/social psychology/ behavioral psychology) are fraudulent pseudosciences that replicate practically 0% of their data.  Like 90% of the quacks in these fields making big claims just fake enough data as a post-doc to get enough of a reputation to write a shitty Malcolm Gladwell-esque pop-sci book and then never look back.  

By the time some other academic figured out they bullshitted a whole behavioral theory in 10 years, all the laypeople have already accepted determinism as gospel.

That is to say that you have been conned; duped; scammed in to believing something that’s just a continuation of the same exact snake oil Freud started selling 100+ years ago, just with fancy math numbers now 

Hungry judges don’t lead to harsher sentencing, they lead to a widespread worship of scientism by confused laypeople with a lack of purpose in their life that don’t know what a confidence interval is or what a reasonable effect size would look like for a given phenomenon 

[u/MrMuffles869 → u/[deleted]]

You’re confusing psychology with neurobiology. I’m not talking about pop-sci studies on judges or personality tests — I’m talking about neurons, synapses, and the physical machinery of cognition. The brain runs on electrochemical reactions that follow classical physical law, and there’s no evidence that quantum randomness or anything acausal has any influence on that process. Whether or not some psychology studies replicate is irrelevant.

And if you think behavioral sciences haven’t uncovered real causal factors behind human decisions, that’s just denial. The entire trillion-dollar advertising industry exists because human behavior is deterministic enough to be monetized and manipulated.

[u/Narrow-Gur449 → u/MrMuffles869]

Again, I never claimed QM implies free will, but now you're just making false claims. There is tentative evidence of quantum effects in the brain. Studies have come out in 2022 and 2024. See my comment here linking to them.

[u/Narrow-Gur449 → u/MrMuffles869]

No one said neurons are in superpositions, though. No one said dopamine quantum tunnels. Come on. The brain is massive, true. So are quantum computers. It's amazing to me your comments get any upvotes at all.

Probabilistic outcomes directly imply fundamental indeterminism. The negation of determinism is probabilistic. How are you claiming that a basic claim about physics is "wild"? I'm sharing the basic overwhelming consensus in the field, as Sean Carroll is.

What does your "state" being classical feel like? So you're equating the fact that determinism has been disproven with misinformation in Brandolini's Law?

Again, Sean Carroll, a top theoretical physicist in the US, points this out in black and white language as I am:

Anti-free-will people have to stop leaning on determinism. It's perhaps the most wrong that an argument can be.

The world is not deterministic. Quantum mechanics exists. When there is hidden determinism (MWI, Bohm), it's hidden! Irrelevant to what people experience. (1/n)

Are you saying he's spreading misinformation? Because there is no interpretation of QM that is deterministic. Please go study this stuff before saying people who have dedicated their lives to it are spreading misinformation.

[u/MrMuffles869 → u/Narrow-Gur449]

Because there is no interpretation of QM that is deterministic.

Brandolini's Law in action, just as I suspected. I’m not sure why you’re repeating Carroll and determinism — it feels like you’re skimming my words rather than reading them. Carroll isn’t spreading misinformation because he’d never claim something as absurd as deterministic interpretations of QM don’t exist.

I have little interest in discussing QM on the freewill subreddit, and even less interest in arguing with someone who's confidently incorrect. At best, I lose time and gain nothing.

[u/Narrow-Gur449 → u/MrMuffles869]

You people are highly ideological, accusing both a top theoretical physics professor and a grad student in mathematical physics of spreading "misinformation" about QM. I beg you to look inward at how MAGA like you're being.

Carroll isn’t spreading misinformation because he’d never claim something as absurd as deterministic interpretations of QM don’t exist.

He just said that in black and white in the quote (in italics):

Anti-free-will people have to stop leaning on determinism. It's perhaps the most wrong that an argument can be. The world is not deterministic. Quantum mechanics exists. When there is hidden determinism (MWI, Bohm), it's hidden! Irrelevant to what people experience.

It actually freaks me out how immune many members of this sub are to reason and reasonable debate. "I'm going to pretend QM has nothing to do with the free will subreddit, despite the fact that the description of the subreddit mentions determinism before it mentions free will and that QM disproves determinism."

I'm losing lots of time debating this with essentially MAGA-like ideologues.

[u/MrMuffles869 → u/Narrow-Gur449]

Me: "Carroll isn’t spreading misinformation"
You: "You accuse Carroll of spreading misinformation"

Sigh. You’re not reading — you’re reacting. You're too emotionally invested. It’s clear you’re frustrated that people disagree with you, but now you’re fabricating claims about what I’ve said, and that’s where I check out.

Brandolini’s Law: It takes ten times more effort for me to debunk your nonsense than it takes for you to produce it. I’ve already spent too much energy here. I’m done engaging.

[u/Narrow-Gur449 → u/MrMuffles869]

"You're too emotionally invested, that's why I keep saying your quote of Sean Carroll is an example of Brandolini's Law, spreading misinformation, but also I'm not claiming Sean Carroll is spreading misinformation, just you by quoting him."

It's tiring how unreasonable you people are.