User:Raghavb/Determinism and Randomness

Determinism is the proposition that every event, including human cognition and action, is causally determined by an unbroken chain of prior occurrences. No mysterious miracles or wholly random events occur.

Before we come to the issue of determinism let us first analyze randomness.

Randomness

We see random behaviour all around us, weather for example seems completely random, human behaviour is another example. But is this behaviour truly random? The answer is a big NO. Every physical phenomenon around us is at best unpredictable ie. human beings are unable to predict it (due to a large no. of factors,accuracy,etc.). However, just because we are unable to predict an event does not mean that it would not follow a predefined path. All events are a direct consequence of a another event or a set of events.Thus no event is truly random or spontaneous,ie. it could be influenced by a multitude of other events or maybe all other events in the universe but it didn't just happen without any cause. Also see articles on Causality (physics), Deterministic system (philosophy)

Misinterpretation of Heisenberg uncertainty principle

Heisenberg uncertainity principle is often misinterpreted as being the origin of random behaviour. However, the priciple only refers to observation and prediction of a particle's position and momentum.In the measurement of these, there would always be an uncertainty thus giving rise to an unpredictable universe but not a random one, as described above.An electron or another atomic/sub-atomic particle in reality is following a fixed path. However, its exact position and momentum at any given time is impossible to measure.

Determinism- a direct consequence of a non-random world

As seen above there are no truly random events in the universe. Thus every event can be traced back to another event (or a set of events). Each of the older events are themselves a consequence of prior events.Thus every event can be traced back to the state of the universe at its beginning ie. the Big Bang. Thus, we can conclude that all events after the big bang are simply following a predetermined path.

The Human Link

Now a very confusing and controversial aspect of determinism is its relation to human behaviour. The question is "Is Human behaviour also predetermined ?" Well, many philosophers and scientists believe that the answer is shockingly,yes. If we look at human behaviour from a purely scientific view (ignoring religious beliefs in the soul,etc.) humans like everything else show a deterministic behaviour.

To understand it let us take the example of artificial intelligence, a machine continuously learning ,influenced by external stimuli in its decision making process and continuously reprogramming itself to more effectively deal with situations. Now humans can be simply imagined as artificial intelligence where the nuts, bolts, screws, metal, and complex microchips have been replaced with organic tissue. see also I, Robot (film)).

Human beings at the base level are simply atoms and molecules like everything around us,atoms and molecules organised and reorganised over millions of years of evolution to result in the complex creatures we are today. In our daily decision making process we are influenced by a huge variety of factors,the air we breath,the food we eat, our surroundings, sound, light, touch stimuli, etc. These inturn are processed by approximately 1 billion neurons to make complex day to day decisions through a series of chemical reactions. All of these events of interaction with our surroundings including the many processes within our bodies that govern our action and thought are indeed just physical phenomenon in the end. As described above none of these events are truly random and are hence predetermined.

Thus, we come to the definition of determinism

Determinism is the proposition that every event, including human cognition and action, is causally determined by an unbroken chain of prior occurrences. No mysterious miracles or wholly random events occur.

Conflict with Free Will

Many philosophers believe that determinism is in direct conflict with the idea of free will. However others believe that they are indeed compatible and it simply depend on the perception of free will. For example determinism doesn't mean that everything will happen exactly as it is to happen no matter what action you take. (This is known as Fatalism). Instead,it is to be interpreted as your thought and action makes a difference, however the thought and action itself was predetermined. For example, even though I wrote this article, and it may be read by many people and influence their lives, the thought process and initiative behind it were predetermined or bound to happen. (see also Libertarianism and Compatibilism)

Bibliography

• Batterman, R. B., 1993, “Defining Chaos,” Philosophy of Science, 60: 43-66.
• Bishop, R. C., 2002, “Deterministic and Indeterministic Descriptions,” in Between Chance and Choice, H. Atmanspacher and R. Bishop (eds.), Imprint Academic, 5–31.
• Butterfield, J., 1998, “Determinism and Indeterminism,” in Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Craig, E.(ed), London: Routledge.
• Callender, C., 2000, “Shedding Light on Time,” Philosophy of Science, 67 (proceedings of PSA 1998), S587 - S599.
• Callender, C., and Hoefer, C., 2001, “Philosophy of Space-time Physics,” in The Blackwell Guide to the Philosophy of Science, P. Machamer and M. Silberstein (eds), Oxford: Blackwell, XXXppp-ppp.
• Cartwright, N., 1999, The Dappled World, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Dupré, J., 2001, Human Nature and the Limits of Science, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Dürr, D., Goldstein, S., and Zanghì, N., 1992, “Quantum Chaos, Classical Randomness, and Bohmian Mechanics,” Journal of Statistical Physics 68: 259-270. [1] Preprint available online in gzip'ed Postscript
• Earman, J. 1984: “Laws of Nature: The Empiricist Challenge,”
• Earman, J., 1986, A Primer on Determinism, Dordrecht: Reidel.
• Earman, J., and J. Norton, 1987, “What Price Spacetime Substantivalism: the Hole Story,” British Journal for the Philosophy of Science , 38: 515-525.
• Earman, J., 1995,Bangs, Crunches, Whimpers, and Shrieks: Singularities and Acausalities in Relativistic Spacetimes, New York: Oxford University Press.
• J. Earman and J. D. Norton, 1998, “Comments on Laraudogoitia's ‘Classical Particle Dynamics, Indeterminism and a Supertask’,” British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 49: 123-133.
• Ford, J., 1989, “What is chaos, the we should be mindful of it?” in The New Physics, P. Davies (ed.), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 348-372.
• Gisin, N., 1991, “Propensities in a Non-Deterministic Physics”, Synthese, 89: 287-297.
• Gutzwiller (1990) XXX
• Hitchcock, C., 1999, “Contrastive Explanation and the Demons of Determinism,” British Journal of the Philosophy of Science, 50: 585-612.
• Hoefer, C., 1996, “The Metaphysics of Spacetime Substantivalism,” The Journal of Philosophy, 93: 5-27.
• Hoefer, C., 2002, “Freedom From the Inside Out,” in Time, Reality and Experience, C. Callender (ed.), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Hoefer, C., 2002b, “For Fundamentalism,” to appear in Philosophy of Science (proceedings of PSA 2002).
  
• Hutchison, K. 1993, “Is Classical Mechanics Really Time-reversible and Deterministic?” British Journal of the Philosophy of Science, 44: 307-323.
• Laplace, P., 1820, Essai Philosophique sur les Probabilités forming the introduction to his Théorie Analytique des Probabilités, Paris: V Courcier; repr. F.W. Truscott and F.L. Emory (trans.), A Philosophical Essay on Probabilities, New York: Dover, 1951 .
• Leiber, T., 1998, “On the Actual Impact of Deterministic Chaos,” Synthese, 113: 357-379.
• Lewis, D., 1973,Counterfactuals, Oxford: Blackwell.
• Lewis, D., 1994, “Chance and Credence: Humean Supervenience Debugged,” Mind, 103: 473-490.
• Melia, J. 1999, “Holes, Haecceitism and Two Conceptions od Determinism,” British Journal of the Philosophy of Science, 50: 639-664.
• Mellor, D. H. 1995, The Facts of Causation, London: Routledge.
• Ornstein, D. S., 1974, Ergodic Theory, Randomness, and Dynamical Systems, New Haven: Yale University Press.
• Ruelle, D., 1991, Chance and Chaos, London: Penguin.
• Russell, B., 1912, “On the Notion of Cause,” Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 13: 1-26.
• Shanks, N., 1991, “Probabilistic physics and the metaphysics of time,” South African Journal of Philosophy, 10: 37-44.
• Sinai, Ya.G., 1970, “Dynamical systems with elastic reflections,” Russ. Math. Surveys 25: 137-189.
• Suppes, P., 1993, “The Transcendental Character of Determinism,” Midwest Studies in Philosophy, 18: 242-257.
• Suppes, P. and M. Zanotti, 1996, Foundations of Probability with Applications. New York: Cambridge University Press.
• Suppes, P., 1999, “The Noninvariance of Deterministic Causal Models,” Synthese, 121: 181-198.
• van Fraassen, B., 1989, Laws and Symmetry, Oxford: Clarendon Press.
• Van Kampen, N. G., 1991, “Determinism and Predictability,” Synthese, 89: 273-281.
• Winnie, J. A., 1996, “Deterministic Chaos and the Nature of Chance,” in The Cosmos of Science -- Essays of Exploration, Earman, J. and Norton, J. (eds), Pittsburgh: University of Pitsburgh Press, pp. 299-324.
• Xia, Z., 1992, “The existence of noncollision singularities in newtonian systems,” Annals of Mathematics, 135: 411-468.

Other Internet Resources

• [2] Bibliography on Free Will and Determinism (David Chalmers, U. Arizona)
• [3] Determinism/Indeterminism at the PhilSci Archive/University of Pittsburgh.
• [4]Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
Scientific Determinism