Do you have Free will?

[pieno]

This is addressed in the second video link.

how can you call something freewill when your action will depend on quantum randomness that you aren't aware of, and beyond your control? this is assuming that quantum events/rendomness affect neurons or synapses, which it doesn't. How is this different from the quantum effects on the neurons of a chicken?

Generally humans are acclaimed to have free will but it is usually constrained by conditioned beliefs programmed within their consciousness. Most people are restricted from practicing free will because they have been psychologically programmed from birth to constantly live in fear of going against the will of their superiors, leaders and masters therefore demonstrating that they have no free will.

[SweetMagda]

Free will is overrated.

[paregoric]

sam lowry - are you my idol master artist leinil?

[Frank_Macky]

Even without viewing the video and just thinking about it philosophically, the whole notion of "Free Will" is an iffy one and is essentially an arbitrary invention of Catholic philosophers.

As mojowatcher has nicely outlined in his writings (if you can slash through the ultra-repetitive and paranoiac stuff), philosophers(*) in the service of religion have foisted upon us several foundational ideas which up to now infect our daily thinking as nearly unquestioned assumptions (e.g. metaphysical dogmas/axioms) - even those of scientists. One of these ideas that mojowatcher talks about is the unquestioned assumption of the "Universe" having a "beginning". It is a concept that is seductively easy to accept, but upon deeper philosophical reflection, one realizes that it is but an arbitrary assumption (like that of newtonian time).



(*) We have to at least concede that (some) Medieval Catholic philosophers were adroit enough to weave together philosophical ideas which have influenced serious thinkers, something you can't say for the pitifully shallow ideas that born-again and other protestant-derived xtian cult-cum-religions try to foist upon the world at large.

[PgUp]

Christians are given insight by Jesus that FREEDOM is earned. Ignorance keeps you captive because logically the choices you got is very limited already since you fail to know better.

In contrast, FREEDOM permits a host of other options absent to the ignorant.

This is what freedom is to democracies. Democracy can survive only if men are not ignorant. Otherwise, in the absence of options and lacking in good choices, the whole system would collapse.

I suggest that we all earn our freedom. Enough of the nincompoop socialist sentimentalities that are void of rationality and filled with emotional outbursts borrowed from some written ideas designed to subvert societies towards an imagined superior.

Christianity is about inward change. It is about limitless progress and development, of dying in your old self for the greater community rather than cementing cultural divisions and strengthening of tribal pride that environmentalists commit to.

[PgUp]

You got to realize that medieval Catholicism or the original "Reich" or Holy Roman Empire, is a misrepresentation of Christianity. The two world wars that purposely attempted to regain a lost empire display barbarianism rather than fulfillment of Christianity.

Even without viewing the video and just thinking about it philosophically, the whole notion of "Free Will" is an iffy one and is essentially an arbitrary invention of Catholic philosophers.

As mojowatcher has nicely outlined in his writings (if you can slash through the ultra-repetitive and paranoiac stuff), philosophers(*) in the service of religion have foisted upon us several foundational ideas which up to now infect our daily thinking as nearly unquestioned assumptions (e.g. metaphysical dogmas/axioms) - even those of scientists. One of these ideas that mojowatcher talks about is the unquestioned assumption of the "Universe" having a "beginning". It is a concept that is seductively easy to accept, but upon deeper philosophical reflection, one realizes that it is but an arbitrary assumption (like that of newtonian time).



(*) We have to at least concede that (some) Medieval Catholic philosophers were adroit enough to weave together philosophical ideas which have influenced serious thinkers, something you can't say for the pitifully shallow ideas that born-again and other protestant-derived xtian cult-cum-religions try to foist upon the world at large.

[sakiman]

Even without viewing the video and just thinking about it philosophically, the whole notion of "Free Will" is an iffy one and is essentially an arbitrary invention of Catholic philosophers.

As mojowatcher has nicely outlined in his writings (if you can slash through the ultra-repetitive and paranoiac stuff), philosophers(*) in the service of religion have foisted upon us several foundational ideas which up to now infect our daily thinking as nearly unquestioned assumptions (e.g. metaphysical dogmas/axioms) - even those of scientists. One of these ideas that mojowatcher talks about is the unquestioned assumption of the "Universe" having a "beginning". It is a concept that is seductively easy to accept, but upon deeper philosophical reflection, one realizes that it is but an arbitrary assumption (like that of newtonian time).



(*) We have to at least concede that (some) Medieval Catholic philosophers were adroit enough to weave together philosophical ideas which have influenced serious thinkers, something you can't say for the pitifully shallow ideas that born-again and other protestant-derived xtian cult-cum-religions try to foist upon the world at large.

yes...but with this reasoning we effectively have to knock down all verbal philosophies and verbal logic but then again we almost always have to if not forced to come up with another kind of the same thing anyway. so in relation to the topic, it's not so much that you can even determine whether there is or there is no free will, you cannot even think about it at all or anything for that matter.

i cannot disagree with what you said and to some extent or in fact, as far as i can understand, religious literature hints what you say but we have to study it a little more so that we can place our arguments in a perspective.

[caporegime]

One alternative to this free will puzzle is there's probably free will but actually, NO You. That is, the notion of the individual self (amongst many) is just an illusion --thus, it is the 'collective self' which actually decides.

[pilotmarker]

I was pondering about this last night.

Our universe is governed by physical laws. Although, we might see randomness occurring in the universe, every thing follows the physical laws. It doesn't deviate, modify, and alter these laws to "randomize" its movements. It cannot change this nor can it ever will. Even the dice you throw follows these laws and it is possible to compute what number the dice will show, however complex it is. Nothing happens by accident. For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction, f=ma, v=d/t, e=mc2, p=f/a, Fg = G (m1*m2)/(d^2), and etc. If you jump from a 300 storey building, your body obeys the law of gravity (F=Gm1m2/**), even if you change your mind, your death is inevitable. You cannot change it however how hard you try. Your path to destruction is already determined - plop!

In the animal kingdom, we see how the birds build nest. It is interesting to watch this because how on earth are they able to do this without someone teaching them? Even the beaver cut down trees to build dams and lodges. When you look at the bees, how are they able to build structurally sound hexagonal bee hives? How did they engineer this when no one ever taught them? They look like preprogrammed robots managing and supporting life on earth. Animal waste provide nutrients for the plant and the plant provides food for them and omnivours provide meat for other animals. The plants provide oxygen for the environment as the animals provide carbon dioxide for the plants. Everything orchestrated to support life on Earth. Every thing giving and receiving. Its like a working life engine working together in balanced unison.

The universe have physical laws and animal have instincts. In the scheme of things, the way I see it, nothing has freewill. If you put freewill into the equation, everything will fail. Freewill denotes circumventing the fixed laws and instinct of animals. Freewill denotes reasoning. When laws have freewill, what goes up doesn't necessarily goes down, it goes side ways or in circles. When animals have freewill, the birds can reason that it doesn't need to build nest. With freewill, everything will be random and everything will have a mind of its own. It can reason and it can already think. But, reality is, it doesn't happen like this. Everything has to follow a certain law in order for harmony to exist and for life to exist.

Now, what about us? Do we have freewill? I believe we also have animal instincts. When a guy sees a sexy girl, he will react sexually. He cannot help it. When someone is in the tight corner, he will naturally lie to save his butt. When someone cuts your lane, you will naturally flare up and curse. When someone parks in your parking space, you will naturally get angry. We are also territorial like the animals. When you see a huge sum of money, you want to steal it. When you hate someone, you will naturally want to kill him. We naturally feel envious of someone better than us and you feel like destroying him. This is what I call "natural" behaviors also evident in animals. We feel it and we sometimes can't help feeling it because it comes out naturally in us. We don't know why, but it just "is". It feels so natural. This is what we call "temptations" which is nothing more but mere animal instincts. We should react to it like animals, without feeling guilty or have any inhibitions. We take what we want. We steal and cheat. We kill what we hate. We lie to save ourselves and lie to get what we want. We go violent whoever takes what is ours. We are naturally liars. We are naturally greedy. These instincts are in us. It feels so natural. We see it daily in people.

However, humans are an anomaly in the universe. They are the weirdos. Instead of acting on their natural instincts, they create their "own" laws to circumvent this. Humans are the only animals on earth who are aware of the concept of "morality", the concept of what is right and wrong. It shouldn't be this way. But, it is. We are animals right? We should act like preprogrammed robots. We are part of the environment. We are part of nature's cycle. Animals are already doing very well in the wild, with the fittest and strongest ones who leads and flourish successfully.

What evolutionary process that made humans to be aware of "morality" is bewildering. It's like a dog suddenly becoming aware of morality, the concept of what is right or wrong. He freely writes his own laws that he shouldn't bark indiscriminately because its irritating and wrong. It's like the law of gravity being altered on its natural state. It shouldn't be this way. Nothing should circumvent or alter the natural laws. No one should re-write or have the power and capability to alter it.

Which leads me to conclude that humans have no freewill and at the same time have freewill. These two concepts are constantly in conflict in us. We are aware of our natural instincts that are morally wrong. We know it can destroy others and us as well. We set laws to prevent us from acting freely on our natural "pregrogrammed" instincts. We war with ourselves daily for we can see that our physical self is warring with our "moral" mind.

I see that human beings are slowly "evolving" away from a deterministic universe to become masters of the universe.

[gotta lick it]

everybody has a free will ...






but the true question is .... "does everybody have a conscience?"

[superlucky20]

Free will in the context of Christianity is different from the psychological viewpoint. Believers always say that people are free to choose if they will follow God or not. But how can people choose to follow something that their minds says as not true? Which is what the psychological viewpoint states that transcends free will?

[PgUp]

Free will in the context of Christianity is different from the psychological viewpoint. Believers always say that people are free to choose if they will follow God or not. But how can people choose to follow something that their minds says as not true? Which is what the psychological viewpoint states that transcends free will?

Okay, I'll help collect your thoughts based on the Christian faith.

Jesus wants us to know God, Our Father in heaven; He showed us the Way to the Father. Jesus reminds us that God alone is good, and this is the basis of Christian faith since Christ means "God inside Man" or God in you.

Now the choices we got become the source of worry and failure because it is man-made or imperfect. These imperfections make our choices fail. Jesus assures us that what we need is Truth. The real sciences are all verifiable Truths. If it works, then it is the Truth and anything that explains the system in view of knowledge is Science.

In the ways of the Spirit, Truth got other meanings. It can be prophetic when there is a time element involved. Or it can also be miraculous, since the natural laws that we call science seem to be overcome or suspended. After all, the idea of God or divinity has always been supernatural.

Anyway what is not taught in school because this world is materially grounded, is that Truth is a Spirit. It is when we get to merge with the thoughts of the Heavenly Father that we find this Truth, and this Truth sets men FREE. Thus if someone asks what is Truth, then Christ is the ANSWER.

[tonton]

The bible doesn't support free will.

That which hath been is that which shall be; and that which hath been done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun.

Ecclesiastes 1:9

[PgUp]

The bible doesn't support free will.

That which hath been is that which shall be; and that which hath been done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun.

Ecclesiastes 1:9

The Bible or Scriptures are stories that record God's respect for human decisions or their Free Will. Paradise had been lost, leading to human willfulness or disobedience, which is the inevitable outcome of free will.

In Paradise, the tree of Life was guarded by the flaming sword of Truth. Jesus did not come to bring peace, but a sword called TRUTH. It is the Way to Life that this sword would pierce the hearts of many and lead to the rise and fall of many in Israel.

Thus, Jesus is savior because he leads us to Life. Didn't Jesus declare that he is the Way, the Truth and the Life?

This age is about to end. It is an age dominated and ruined by the wrong side of knowledge. There can be no wrong knowledge if people understand Truth, thus the age would end when mankind is finally redeemed from the predicament of false knowledge and embrace Life. Jesus came to let his flock have life and live it to the fullest.

Thy Will be done on Earth as in Heaven?

[stifbend]

I don't really think free will is a neat offering to the masses served by the clergy (or theologians). But that aside, I'm more willing to adopt a position of compatibilism rather than hard determinism. Dennett, Harris' colleague and fellow horseman, says that even though determinism, the thesis that there can only be one possible future at any given moment, we do have free will. Consider this scenario:
If physics can precisely determine that an object will hit a person, then there is nothing else for that person to do but to get hit. But if this person was able to avoid getting hit even though physics has determined that it should have hit that person, then that person was able to do otherwise. In this case, we have shown that we have free will under determinism.

But enough about me butchering Dennett's work and determinism.

[stifbend]

One alternative to this free will puzzle is there's probably free will but actually, NO You. That is, the notion of the individual self (amongst many) is just an illusion --thus, it is the 'collective self' which actually decides.

But doesn't this (among many of the posts here) present a problem to responsibility? If there is no you, then you ipso facto cannot be held responsible for any action at all.

[caporegime]

But doesn't this (among many of the posts here) present a problem to responsibility? If there is no you, then you ipso facto cannot be held responsible for any action at all.

Either that or you're responsible for everything that happens (the 'collective self' bit), akin to how you're also responsible for the actions of a goon who whacks "you" in your dream no matter how bad it felt. I mean, who do you blame for it?

[superlucky20]

Okay, I'll help collect your thoughts based on the Christian faith.

Jesus wants us to know God, Our Father in heaven; He showed us the Way to the Father. Jesus reminds us that God alone is good, and this is the basis of Christian faith since Christ means "God inside Man" or God in you.

Now the choices we got become the source of worry and failure because it is man-made or imperfect. These imperfections make our choices fail. Jesus assures us that what we need is Truth. The real sciences are all verifiable Truths. If it works, then it is the Truth and anything that explains the system in view of knowledge is Science.

In the ways of the Spirit, Truth got other meanings. It can be prophetic when there is a time element involved. Or it can also be miraculous, since the natural laws that we call science seem to be overcome or suspended. After all, the idea of God or divinity has always been supernatural.

Anyway what is not taught in school because this world is materially grounded, is that Truth is a Spirit. It is when we get to merge with the thoughts of the Heavenly Father that we find this Truth, and this Truth sets men FREE. Thus if someone asks what is Truth, then Christ is the ANSWER.

Wouldn't it be easier for God to just make his Truth to be as scientifically verifiable as anything else? Why not? Either he deliberately makes it UNNECESSARILY harder for everyone or he doesn't actually exist. The latter is more plausible. All these mumbo-jumbo explanations going around in circles about things YOU AREN'T EVEN SURE ABOUT (that it is "prophetic," that we get to "merge with the thoughts of the Heavenly Father," etc) proves my point.

Now isn't this free will in action? My brain just can't help itself!

[stifbend]

Either that or you're responsible for everything that happens (the 'collective self' bit), akin to how you're also responsible for the actions of a goon who whacks "you" in your dream no matter how bad it felt. I mean, who do you blame for it?

I dunno, the tiny bits of you, I guess. But I've got some problems with how you defined you or the self from your earlier post. Isn't the self a special relationship of cells or to go deeper atoms? So if that does hold true, aren't you actually referring to the same individual but through another convention that is by "collective self"? But I suspect there's more weight into waht you actually mean as "collective self"; that is that the self is composed of autonomous or maybe codependent but free and thinking stuff. Tiny agents I'd call it. These tiny beings have free will, granting the collective self free will.

[sakiman]

if a=b
b=dh/a
c= proton/speed of light multiplied by objectivism
but d cannot be the past
given there are infinite futures
then x must be a dog

omg, we found the solution!