not necessarily.
consider two degenerate quantum states that a particle could be in. A transition of one to the other can happen spontaneously since both states are at the same potential, but whichever state the particle occupies is nevertheless a piece of information. This is the basis of a great many thought experiments, such as the infamous Schrodinger's Cat example, and is also the principle behind quantum teleportation. According to the usual interpretation of Bell's Inequality, the information content of any measurement of a quantum event did not exist in the Universe before the point of observation. Information is therefore not conserved in the physical universe, even though energy and momentum are.
( Moon Girl Technologies horrendous beanbag, Sat 16 May 2009, 15:52, archived)

are you 12 or gay or autism?

( Gilgamesh gazed in wonder as Frampton came alive, Sat 16 May 2009, 15:54, archived)

do I have to pick one?

( Moon Girl Technologies horrendous beanbag, Sat 16 May 2009, 15:54, archived)

aha!
there's your answer, comma. the universe has a cop-out clause
( spacefish bong!, Sat 16 May 2009, 15:54, archived)

Dualism is nonsense anyway,
but that's not the question, although I'm particularly intrigued by the idea of dualism without free will, because without that, surely the whole idea is redundant.

It's redundant anyway, but in this case, it's doubly redundant.
( Moon Girl Technologies horrendous beanbag, Sat 16 May 2009, 16:09, archived)

Why is dualism without free will redundant?

( Comma, Sat 16 May 2009, 16:12, archived)

Well, what is it for, in that case?

( Moon Girl Technologies horrendous beanbag, Sat 16 May 2009, 16:12, archived)

Oh, I see.
I thought you meant "how could there possibly be mind" rather than "why should mind exist".
( Comma, Sat 16 May 2009, 16:18, archived)

Clarification.
If there were no free will, the mind would be incapable of making any kind of decision, because a decision is an instance of free will. And the definition of a mind is the seat of intelligence - i.e. the decision making process. Without free will, the mind would be bound only to observe the world and never act upon it, so as a means to explain human behaviour and abilities it accounts for nothing.
( Moon Girl Technologies horrendous beanbag, Sat 16 May 2009, 16:23, archived)

I don't think that's the definition of the mind at all.
Decision-making is only one part of the mind, along with consciousness, memory, imagination etc.
It's possible that we should have the perception of decision-making without actually making any decisions.
( Comma, Sat 16 May 2009, 16:28, archived)

Decision making is the ultimate result of all those things,
memory, imagination and consciousness.

I don't think it goes along side them like you suggest.

"Perception of decision making" is a nonsense. You are still making a decision, even if you don't act on that decision.
( Master Of Turnips. Only gays and morons believe in ghosts., Sat 16 May 2009, 16:31, archived)

What I mean is that it's possible
that all of my actions and experiences, including my perception of decision-making, are causally determined by something other than me, so even if I think I could have chosen to act differently, I actually couldn't.
( Comma, Sat 16 May 2009, 16:34, archived)

I disagree.
Although it's correct that all of your decisions are influenced by outside sources, they are not governed by those. The deciding factor is always your own mind, no matter how you choose to define your own mind.

I think there is only one way you will act at any point. You can think "what if I did this differently", but the point is you can never have acted differently. However, this is a result how your own mind interprets outside influences, the decisions are all your own mind's.

I'm not making sense.

*hums*
( Master Of Turnips. Only gays and morons believe in ghosts., Sat 16 May 2009, 16:38, archived)

It's an exercise in the redefinition of "I",
which is fair enough as I've never seen a really good definition of it yet.
( Moon Girl Technologies horrendous beanbag, Sat 16 May 2009, 16:43, archived)

Imagination is a set of decisions,
but I'll give you the other two. Whether we have the perception of free will or not, the point is that without it the mind would have no influence on the world at all, even if the world could still have an influence on the mind. If that were the case, I am bound to merely spectate as my body argues about dualism. And if it is capable of that without me, what am I for?
( Moon Girl Technologies horrendous beanbag, Sat 16 May 2009, 16:33, archived)

Yes. Totally.
I'm not claiming that it's not bizarre on this view that there should be mind as well as matter, just that it's not illogical.
( Comma, Sat 16 May 2009, 16:37, archived)

That's why I said redundant, rather than self-contradictory.
It is necessarily impossible to disprove anything that's redundant, like invisible unicorns and teapots in space. Yes, I even used those analogies.
( Moon Girl Technologies horrendous beanbag, Sat 16 May 2009, 16:41, archived)

k.

( Comma, Sat 16 May 2009, 16:42, archived)

this is how a video recorder must feel while taping a tom stoppard play

( spacefish bong!, Sat 16 May 2009, 16:39, archived)

I wonder if that's what Tom Stoppard feels
when he's writing them.
( Moon Girl Technologies horrendous beanbag, Sat 16 May 2009, 16:44, archived)

Apathy,
at least that's what I feel when I watch one.
( Master Of Turnips. Only gays and morons believe in ghosts., Sat 16 May 2009, 16:46, archived)

You're more of an engineer than a philosopher,
I can tell.
( Moon Girl Technologies horrendous beanbag, Sat 16 May 2009, 16:47, archived)

In general, yes.
But my feelings on Tom Stoppard are due to A Level English Literature.

being forced to analyse Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead for weeks on end leads to a general feeling of "shut up, I don't care anymore".
( Master Of Turnips. Only gays and morons believe in ghosts., Sat 16 May 2009, 16:49, archived)

ah.
that sort of thing can ruin anything.
( Moon Girl Technologies horrendous beanbag, Sat 16 May 2009, 16:50, archived)