How is free will possible?

[section9+1]

If there is no such thing as free will then every one who posted here only posted what they had to post since they had no choice to post anything to the contrary, so how can any of this mean anything at all. CF might as well shut down since we are all locked into everything we do or say and toss all significance to any of it out the window. Meaning and importance to anything done or said can only exist when there are choices available. When you could go different ways but chose one way only, then that choice has meaning. If it wasn't a choice at all then it has no significance. Don't waste my time.

 

[SPF]

But how? Name one thing you can choose truly freely - that is, without being influenced by anything at all to make that choice.

If you're setting the bar for "free will" this high, then nobody has free will. Personally, I reject your understanding of free will.

Jonathan Edwards said that we act at any given time according to our greatest inclination.

For example, if I was going for a stroll in the park one evening, my greatest inclination would not be to give my wallet away to a complete stranger sitting on the bench as I walk by. However, should that stranger stand up, walk over to me and pull out a gun and ask for my wallet; my greatest inclination is going to be to give the stranger my wallet.

The point is that outside experiences influence our greatest inclinations. The reason I eat lunch is because my body becomes hungry, and my greatest inclination becomes eating something. My greatest inclination can be influenced by a whole myriad of things - my internal bodily needs/desires, the weather, whether the traffic light is green or red, how much money is in my checking account, etc...

The notion that a person makes choices that are somehow not influenced "by anything at all" is demonstrably false. But that doesn't mean we don't make our own choices. We do, but they're always certainly influenced by a lot of things going on around us.

 

[bling]

I guess this belongs in the philosophy forum, but that's closed. But it's relevant to ethics because the idea of free will is a prerequisite for even talking about ethical and moral issues.

Anyway, I'm wondering how a truly free will can even be possible? The reason I doubt it is because absolutely everything, even the tiniest signal between two synapses in your brain, happens for a reason. The only way to alter the outcome of something is to alter the conditions. In other words, if you rewind time for, say, 10 minutes, without changing anything, the exact same thing would happen a million times in a row, whether it's a coin toss or a thought. At what point, and how, does this proposed free will enter the equation?

Note: don't confuse making choices with having free will. We obviously make choices all the time. The question is if the choice could in fact really have been different, given all the things that lead up to that choice. As far as I can tell, the only way for your brain to have made a different choice, is if your brain was different to begin with.

For the most part I agree with you, so for us to truly have free will it has to be the result of an all powerful God actually (miraculously from our perspective) providing us individually with a small amount of autonomous free will. This very limited amount of free will would allow us to obtain Godly type Love.

 

[holo]

It was only an example. I could use a coin with no heads and no tails and call it obverse and reverse. Reverse pitchforks, obverse tiny vials of cinnamon scent.

Sure, but still you didn't pull those words out of thin air. There are reasons those words came to mind, even if they seem totally random.

 

[holo]

Can you prove that - in regards to the "thought?"

If you roll a dice a million times, and hold your hand the exact same way every time, and roll it on exactly the same surface and the air pressure is the same etc etc etc, then obviously it would roll the same way every time. The only way for that not to happen would be to change one of the parameters. A dice doesn't land randomly, it lands the only way it can land, given the circumstances. It seems random to us because we're unable to predict the outcome. Thoughts are processes in the brain that are ultimately just as physical in nature as a rolling dice.

 

[holo]

What is a "choice" when there's only one possible outcome?

You choose even if the choice isn't truly free. Or at least you feel like you're choosing. It's probably more correct that you become aware of your choice.

 

[Dave-W]

Thoughts are processes in the brain that are ultimately just as physical in nature as a rolling dice.

There is where we disagree. If we consisted ONLY of a body, I might be inclined to agree; but we also have a spirit and a soul which are not subjected to physical parameters. Therein lies the ability to choose according to our own free will.

 

[holo]

It's funny that I should be a determinist, like you, yet have such a radically different opinion on that. If upbringing draws a person to a life of crime, then it should still change nothing that a life of crime leads to a punishment. One thing still leads to another. Knowing how you got the way you are has no bearing on whether what you did was right or wrong.

You can say that you have no choice but to follow the chain of effects, but this conversation, itself, is part of that chain of effects, and your thoughts on this conversation are part of that chain. It's easy to confuse the means with the ends. You don't have to understand all of the mechanics under the hood to drive a car. You only need to drive it. In many respects, it would be better to live as an indeterminist, even if holding the understanding of determinism.

There's also a spiritual element to it all, but it doesn't change much. In the end, you are what you are until God changes you.

I'm not saying we should do away with moral judgment or anything like that. I don't see how society could even work without concepts like morality, guilt, punishment, law etc. But when I don't believe in free will, I can't make moral judgments on people (including myself), meaning it doesn't make sense to call anyone evil, for example. In a way, seeing the world like this accomplishes the same thing as God's grace in the Christian view: it makes you see that everybody is as guilty as anyone else and that you truly have no grounds to judge anybody.

 

[Ken-1122]

Only for the reason God incorporated into your path.

I incorporated it in my path when I bought them at the store. I am not God.

 

[holo]

Note: Historically Augustine, Anselm, Aquinas, Dun Scotus, and most Christian philosophers were libertarians with regard to free will. It seems implicit in every page of the Bible.

I think it seems implicit because we assume that guilt, sin, grace etc don't make sense if we don't have free will. But when I read the bible, I see determinism all over the place. Like when Paul rhetorically accuses God for judging sinners when it was he who made them sinners, and when he says that sinners can't not sin. Also, the many examples of God deciding what people, even the evil ones, do. As far as I can tell, Paul says that it is indeed God who runs the show, but he is still justified in judging evil. I can't get my head around it.

In any case, I think a good argument against free will is the fact that people do sin. If we have free will, why would we ever do something we know is bad?

 

[Ken-1122]

Why did you choose corn flakes?

Because I prefer their taste over the other choices I had.

 

[holo]

I don't think it is accurate to express libertarian free will as, "Without being influenced by anything at all to make that choice."

Libertarians are influenced by:

1. a lifetime of experiences forming a view on how the external world works
2. environmental limits such as streets (one cannot choice to drive through a lake instead of a bridge.
3. one's list of options will be a function of their world view which is a combination of environment and genetics.
4. no one is claiming emotional desires and psychological conditions don't influence our instantiation of choices
5. Christians would believe that the concept of original sin limits their innate ability to freely choose not to sin for example.

The question then, I guess, is: if the will isn't truly free, does it make any sense to say it's free at all? Hypothetically speaking, if you knew everything (or had a sufficiently powerful computer), you would be able to predict everything that will ever happen, simply because things don't happen for no reason.

I make a choice because I have this or that inclination, say. But since I don't choose my inclinations, can the choice be called free?

 

[holo]

If there is no such thing as free will then every one who posted here only posted what they had to post since they had no choice to post anything to the contrary, so how can any of this mean anything at all. CF might as well shut down since we are all locked into everything we do or say and toss all significance to any of it out the window. Meaning and importance to anything done or said can only exist when there are choices available. When you could go different ways but chose one way only, then that choice has meaning. If it wasn't a choice at all then it has no significance. Don't waste my time.

We can't help but assign meaning to things

Just try it and see if you can stop.

 

[holo]

Because I prefer their taste over the other choices I had.

Did you choose to prefer their taste?

 

[Dave L]

I incorporated it in my path when I bought them at the store. I am not God.

You chose for a reason beyond your control.

 

[Strathos]

Anyway, I'm wondering how a truly free will can even be possible? The reason I doubt it is because absolutely everything, even the tiniest signal between two synapses in your brain, happens for a reason. The only way to alter the outcome of something is to alter the conditions. In other words, if you rewind time for, say, 10 minutes, without changing anything, the exact same thing would happen a million times in a row, whether it's a coin toss or a thought.

Quantum physics disagrees.

 

[holo]

Quantum physics disagrees.

Maybe, but that only makes the case for free will harder.

 

[Strathos]

Maybe, but that only makes the case for free will harder.

Or maybe, what appears random according to our understanding of physics, is actually a perfect system to enable free will devised by a higher intelligence.

 

[com7fy8]

I'm wondering how a truly free will can even be possible?

100% Free will is only possible if you are all-knowing (omniscient) and free to decide based on the fact.

Well, the One who is most able to make a free choice, then, is God who is omniscient. But can God choose to do evil? No. Why not? Because God's nature is to do only good.

So, one's will is limited to one's character; possibly I should say more or less limited. But your character can have a lot to do with what you are capable of choosing, I would say . . . and why you are choosing it.

And then there are consequences, which you might not consciously be deciding and controlling.

So-o-o > if this is philosophically correct, what does this have to do with morals and ethics? I would say that since our character can have much to do with choices we are capable of making, we need to seek God to correct and cure us to become truly unselfish in His love in our nature.

Hebrews 12:4-11, 1 John 4:17-18

But we will need God in us to maintain us in this state, and this will mean constantly being in union with Him and how He leads and guides us. So, then our wills will be free to obey God and do what He has us choosing to do in His love > Philippians 2:13, Colossians 1:28-29.

And in union with God, we are joined into His all-knowing guidance, so our wills have an omniscient resource so we can do what is the most loving thing with every person, and know who to trust and how each person benefits the most by being trusted by us. So, to do this is the most moral and ethical thing to do, I would say

And, by the way, the knowing does not merely involve knowledge of material circumstances, but our Father guiding us in His peace with His light knows people's hearts . . . and His own heart, about all He really would please to do and share with us.

Therefore, we will keep discovering how we are able to love, while others are stuck in their worldly sort of free-willing with its confusion and frustration and being dominated by drives for pleasure, and being ravaged by unforgiveness and bitterness and hate and nasty angry reacting and arguing and complaining while blaming somebody else. This is what is happening with worldly free will which can be religious.

But people in their own egotistical wills can be very stubborn not to submit to God for real freedom. So, just forcing them to reform their activity does not really deeply help them. So, ethically and morally, I would say, we need to treat worldly people like they are free to choose, but pray for them and be their best friend by being a good example of how to be with God and how to relate in His gentle and humble and kind and caring love. And God is able to use our example to win them to loving.

 

[Ken-1122]

Did you choose to prefer their taste?

I don't have to, it's just a part of who I am.