Just because something is computational doesn't mean it's deterministic. There are quantum effects and ghosts in the machine.

Also, maybe the goal of the computation isn't to generate a deterministic output. Maybe it's just to compress a lot of very random input, in a way that smooths out the noise. In this way life could be essentially random on purpose, because all the varieties of randomness are better at modeling the data (the observable universe) than a classical deterministic function would be.

▲

selcuka 3 days ago | parent [-]

> Just because something is computational doesn't mean it's deterministic. There are quantum effects and ghosts in the machine.

Maybe? It is correct according to the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics, but there are other interpretations that are deterministic.

▲

popalchemist 2 days ago | parent [-]

Yes, agreed to both points; but generally speaking the consensus is that physics, dealing with immutable laws, pertains to and operates within an assumed context of determinism until proven otherwise.

I happen not to believe in this, personally. It seems to me that the non-dual metaphysical teachings of the East show us that determinism happens within a sphere that is subject to free-will. The realm of phenomenology is a subset of something greater, where nothing is bound by conditions. This is the way things necessarily must be for free will to exist, by the way.

	▲	selcuka 20 hours ago \| parent [-]
		For the record, I agree with you. I was just pointing out that "quantum effects being non-deterministic" is not a universally agreed fact. Ironically, the Copehhagen interpretation is the relatively easier one to grasp. Other interpretations, such as Many Worlds, make it much more complicated. Can we really speak of free will if we actually make every decision that we possibly could?