Can Symmetry Solve the Dilemma of Buridan's Ass?

  • Thread starter Thread starter PFanalog57
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Choice
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the philosophical paradox known as "Buridan's ass," which explores decision-making in a perfectly symmetrical scenario where an ass is equidistant from two identical piles of food. Participants examine the implications of symmetry, spontaneity in decision-making, and the nature of choice in both animals and humans.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that the ass's inability to choose is a result of its rational behavior, leading to starvation.
  • Others argue that if the ass can choose spontaneously or arbitrarily, it can escape the dilemma without compromising rationality.
  • A later reply questions whether the ass itself is perfectly symmetrical and suggests that external factors, like the universe's conditions, could influence decision-making.
  • One participant introduces the idea that decision-making might be influenced by sensory factors, such as being downwind from one pile.
  • Another participant draws a parallel between the dilemma and human behavior, questioning if organisms develop preferences in arbitrary decisions over time, such as handedness.
  • There is a discussion about whether decision-making is influenced by random particle movements in the brain or if it stems from free will.
  • Some participants express uncertainty about the implications of randomness and free will in the context of moral responsibility.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express multiple competing views regarding the nature of decision-making, the role of symmetry, and the implications of randomness versus free will. The discussion remains unresolved with no consensus on these points.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the ambiguity surrounding the definitions of spontaneity and rationality, as well as the unresolved nature of how external factors might influence decision-making in both animals and humans.

  • #31
Russell E. Rierson said:
Yes but how would the donkey choose which pile represented heads? and which pile represented tails? :wink:
He wouldn't - he'd make the coin from scratch with a left and a right side. :-p
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
selfAdjoint said:
See the discussion of handedness above. It needn't involve free will, it could just be "programmed" by evolution.
Right, that's what I said.
me said:
And if handedness is genetic, the "choice" is predetermined. But nevermind, it's rather weak and not very relevant to the question.
And humans aren't the only primates that display handedness. I posted a link to articles concerning handedness in chimps.

I didn't think it was relevant because the question seemed like a philosophical question stated as a physical example (i.e. it doesn't matter that the animal is a donkey, it could be a frog, etc.).
But if we are going to talk about physical animals, the situation is predetermined if the animal's choice is phenotypical (term?). Agree? Are some animal behaviors not phenotypical? Is it possible that decision-making is an emergent property of animals? Is it possible that the genotype's environment includes nonphysical things? (that last question introduces the weakness IMO.)
 

Similar threads

Arrow's Theorem and Buridan's Ass
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Free Will vs. Fate: Examining Choice and Determinism
  • · Replies 88 ·
3
Replies
88
Views
11K
Graduate BRS: Random Comments on Some Recent PF Threads
  • · Replies 94 ·
4
Replies
94
Views
13K