• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Free will and determinism

Bradskii

Old age should burn and rave at close of day;
Aug 19, 2018
23,047
15,656
72
Bondi
✟369,771.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Simply positing and defining a word doesn't explain a/the phenomenon that the word is being used to refer to and signify.

Take the word "theism" as a parallel example to that of "determinism." We can then analytically compare the semantic layout and use of the term, without getting deep into semantic theory, and see that determinism begins to run into similar counter roadblocks that theism does.

".... but, a god did it," they say.​
I can reply, "But how and where exactly? Please explain!"​
They further elaborate, "... we know and justify saying this based on basic deduction, knowing that all things must have a cause. So, we feel confident there must be a god who pushed the first lever."​
"Maybe," I say. "But which god, then, and how does that god exist"?​
See where I would go with this? As with 'theism,' so with 'determinism.' Not identically where the actual semantics are to be then analyzed out, but similarly. (And then I'd go on to casually point you to two of my recent threads dealing with the Limits of Deduction and the Problem of the Criterion).
In this case, I wouldn't merely be offering a "different" definition. Instead, I would be offering an entirely different praxis by which to assert the justification for my alternative conception and denotation. However, in analytic and skeptical style, I'd have to say that offering an alternative definition to yours is a moot point until all of the underlying operative semantics, not to mention the operative methods that should go into the proposed definition for the term "determinism," have been essentially identified and themselves, explained .....

... and like Pascal, I would hide behind what it is that I think makes the terms "theism" or "determinism" respectively viable. (Yes, as silly as it may be, I'm making a pun here, and I know I have to specifically say I'm referring to a pun or else no one will even begin to, or have a reason to, understand my little, itsy-bitsy semantic joke.)
I think you're putting a lot of work into this uneccessarily. It's a simple concept and there's no need to complicate it. Cause...and effect. That's it. If you make a decision there's always a reason for it. The reason is the cause. The decision is the effect.
 
Upvote 0

Fervent

Well-Known Member
Sep 22, 2020
6,695
2,877
45
San jacinto
✟204,254.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
So the reasons are what caused you to make the decision. Something of an obvious statement, but I just want to clarify that.
Sure, but as I said that's insufficient to capture my experience of my will in operation. The decision wasn't forced upon my will by prior reasons. What we're dealing with is we have good reasons to believe that there is a (seemingly) uniform law of cause and effect, real experience of some phenomenon of free will within ourselves, and a dilemma where if we assume the former is caused by an irrational law the problem is insoluble. So one of them has to give, you seem to have tossed free will and I've compromised the "law" of cause and effect by supplying a cosmic agent into the equation. Personally, I think we should always go with the better evidence and in this case its a matter of quality over a quantity of lower quality evidence.
 
Upvote 0

Bradskii

Old age should burn and rave at close of day;
Aug 19, 2018
23,047
15,656
72
Bondi
✟369,771.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Sure, but as I said that's insufficient to capture my experience of my will in operation. The decision wasn't forced upon my will by prior reasons.
No, but they were determined by them. And you have no control over the reasons. Even if it's a preference, you prefer something for a reason. Over which you have no control. I just had tea instead of coffee with my breakfast. For no other reason than I preferred it. You can then say my preference was the cause and deciding to have tea was the effect. What caused my preference at that moment? I don't really know to be honest.

But I do know I didn't decide to prefer it. I didn't choose to prefer it. I had no conscious control over my preference as I stood in the kitchen.
 
Upvote 0

Fervent

Well-Known Member
Sep 22, 2020
6,695
2,877
45
San jacinto
✟204,254.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
No, but they were determined by them.
Uh huh, if you say so.
And you have no control over the reasons.
If you say so.
Even if it's a preference, you prefer something for a reason.
Semantics need to be explored here.
Over which you have no control.
A claim which is entirely contrary to my fundamental experience of reality. I can change my preferences, if I choose to. Not immediately, but over time.
I just had tea instead of coffee with my breakfast.

For no other reason than I preferred it. You can then say my preference was the cause and deciding to have tea was the effect.
As I said, we're not talking about "cause" in the same fashion since you're talking about an entirely different form of cause than efficient causes.
What caused my preference at that moment? I don't really know to be honest.
Fair enough, though largely irrelevant.
But I do know I didn't decide to prefer it. I didn't choose to prefer it. I had no conscious control over my preference as I stood in the kitchen.
Except you don't really believe this, because you seem to think that there is some merit in arriving at a superior conclusion. Which if you had no control over it, you receive no merit for it. Anymore than a arrow deserves merit for hitting the target. Because ultimately, everything comes down to irrational causes proceeding towards irrational ends.
 
Upvote 0

Grip Docility

Well-Known Member
Nov 27, 2017
7,019
2,784
North America
✟19,296.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
No, but they were determined by them. And you have no control over the reasons. Even if it's a preference, you prefer something for a reason. Over which you have no control. I just had tea instead of coffee with my breakfast. For no other reason than I preferred it. You can then say my preference was the cause and deciding to have tea was the effect. What caused my preference at that moment? I don't really know to be honest.

But I do know I didn't decide to prefer it. I didn't choose to prefer it. I had no conscious control over my preference as I stood in the kitchen.
In your opinion, Do individual human beings have personal libertarian volition that makes them culpable for their personally chosen actions and reactions to the rational universe, in respects to rational laws of the universe, (no conflating this question with the illogical metaphysically philosophical, theosophical, atheosphical or deistically reasoned system of anarchy and such ignorant gibberish) as presented with reality defined by these terms?
 
Upvote 0

Bradskii

Old age should burn and rave at close of day;
Aug 19, 2018
23,047
15,656
72
Bondi
✟369,771.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
A claim which is entirely contrary to my fundamental experience of reality. I can change my preferences, if I choose to. Not immediately, but over time.
There'll be a reason for you changing your mind.
Except you don't really believe this, because you seem to think that there is some merit in arriving at a superior conclusion. Which if you had no control over it, you receive no merit for it. Anymore than a arrow deserves merit for hitting the target. Because ultimately, everything comes down to irrational causes proceeding towards irrational ends.
That's right. This has been discussed at length. I can't blame the guy for cutting me off in traffic. And I can't accept praise for helping the little old lady across the road. That we do both is irrelevant as to whether free will actually exists. The illusion comes in handy.
 
Upvote 0

Bradskii

Old age should burn and rave at close of day;
Aug 19, 2018
23,047
15,656
72
Bondi
✟369,771.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
In your opinion, Do individual human beings have personal libertarian volition that makes them culpable for their personally chosen actions and reactions to the rational universe, in respects to rational laws of the universe, (no conflating this question with the illogical metaphysically philosophical, theosophical, atheosphical or deistically reasoned system of anarchy and such ignorant gibberish) as presented with reality defined by these terms?
No.
 
Upvote 0

Fervent

Well-Known Member
Sep 22, 2020
6,695
2,877
45
San jacinto
✟204,254.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
There'll be a reason for you changing your mind.
And that reason is internal to my will, not a prior constraint on it.
That's right. This has been discussed at length. I can't blame the guy for cutting me off in traffic.
There's also no reason to trust the reasoning that made you arrive at the conclusion. Afterall, it's just the result of particles colliding into other particles on the basis of fixed irrational laws.
And I can't accept praise for helping the little old lady across the road.
A claim I seriously doubt you truly believe.
That we do both is irrelevant as to whether free will actually exists.
It's funny how quickly "skeptics" chuck parsimony when it doesn't suit there worldview. There should be basically no doubt as to the ontological status of free will, since the simplest explanation for our experience of the associated phenomena is that it is a genuine faculty. The question isn't whether it actually exists, but how it functions.
The illusion comes in handy.
Just like the illusion of the physical world, I suppose.
 
Upvote 0

Bradskii

Old age should burn and rave at close of day;
Aug 19, 2018
23,047
15,656
72
Bondi
✟369,771.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Then you are not a true atheist because your rational statements have zero validity as they are not yours.
They aren't mine? Then whose are they?
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Grip Docility
Upvote 0

Bradskii

Old age should burn and rave at close of day;
Aug 19, 2018
23,047
15,656
72
Bondi
✟369,771.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
And that reason is internal to my will, not a prior constraint on it.
So there was nothing external to a decision you have made? Again, I must ask for an example so I know exactly what you mean.
There's also no reason to trust the reasoning that made you arrive at the conclusion. Afterall, it's just the result of particles colliding into other particles on the basis of fixed irrational laws.
Irrational laws? What do you mean by irrational laws. We describe things as laws because they are rational. I don't know what you mean by this.
A claim I seriously doubt you truly believe.
Emotionally I welcome the praise. Rationally I cannot. And what I say I believe and what I say I don't I'm afraid you are going to have to take as a given. You are not in a position to doubt it.
Just like the illusion of the physical world, I suppose.
The basis of my position is materialism. That hardly comports with a belief that the physical world is an illusion. I thought you would have understood that.
 
Upvote 0

2PhiloVoid

Copernican Political Pundit!
Site Supporter
Oct 28, 2006
24,585
11,476
Space Mountain!
✟1,355,975.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I think you're putting a lot of work into this uneccessarily. It's a simple concept and there's no need to complicate it. Cause...and effect. That's it. If you make a decision there's always a reason for it. The reason is the cause. The decision is the effect.

Lol! .......... it's been said too many times but it's true, "If I had dime for every time someone on CF has given me this line..................."

....Here's the thing, friend Bradski. I'm not trying to win. There's always the possibility that you're right. And that's ok. But I'm simply giving you 'my' reasons for 'why' I can't fully subscribe to Hard Determinism or to Free Will as I think they are all too blithely and easily----and simply----defined and thrown around. As a more analytically minded person, I'm often (but not always) suspicious of what passes as "the more simple answer." And being that I think Occam's Razor isn't always as keen and sharp as is proverbially claimed, I also really do believe that Reality is complex and seldom simple.

Now you know why I "resist." And, what's more. Notice, too, I don't even have to cite the Bible in order to resist. Just good ol' Critical Thinking being put forward.

Anyway, I'll leave you be to your project here. I've got a Gettier Problem to mull over. See ya!
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Fervent
Upvote 0

Grip Docility

Well-Known Member
Nov 27, 2017
7,019
2,784
North America
✟19,296.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
In your opinion, Do individual human beings have personal libertarian volition that makes them culpable for their personally chosen actions and reactions to the rational universe, in respects to rational laws of the universe, (no conflating this question with the illogical metaphysically philosophical, theosophical, atheosphical or deistically reasoned system of anarchy and such ignorant gibberish) as presented with reality defined by these terms?
Then you are not a true atheist because your rational statements have zero validity as they are not yours.

/ Thread
They aren't mine? Then whose are they?
What does it matter? You have identified that you have no individual personality, being, moral center, intellect, rational experience, relational experience to even yourself… let alone, others… you don’t even exist as far as "you" (whatever that word or any word means) are concerned.

Me? I have Self Sovereignty. I know that my words come from within my person. When my words aren’t mine, I know Who’s they are.​

I have been Given Dominion Over myself by the Author of Existence, itself. I am free and my will is even more so free! I joyfully know that my personal responsibility is the result of Brilliance beyond compare and the forgiveness that I walk within flows from Benevolence beyond comprehension. I can do as I please, whatever I please, whenever I please, as much as I please with a soul that is as light as a feather and only constrained by Love.​

You? You’re a self-identifying Jelly Fish, tossed about by the ocean, never having any sway over a single wave or grain of sand.

Me? I’m an oak tree, planted deep with roots that are filled with water that flows to invulnerable branches that dine on the nutrition of the delicious Sun, Daily. Birds can dwell within my architectural majesty and animals can play safely in my shade. God Himself, the maker of "this tree" is the very Heartbeat of my Being, Who dwells within my "HeartWood".​

You? You dance with words that have no meaning by your very own non ability to construct rational reality from the substance of the universe… because you are a mere echo of nothing that lives and dies without a single experience that you can claim to be yours.

Me? I understand every word of this song.​


You? What is music? It has no soul by your own non sensical musings which again are nothing at all, by nobody's definition, that really doesn't have sway over a single formulated word from their very own mouth.

Me?​

“Out of the night that covers me,
Black as the pit from pole to pole,
I thank whatever
gods may be
For my unconquerable soul.

In the fell clutch of circumstance
I have not winced nor cried aloud.
Under the
bludgeonings of chance
My head is bloody, but unbowed.

Beyond this place of wrath and tears
Looms but the Horror of the
shade,
And yet the menace of the years
Finds and shall find me unafraid.

It matters not how strait the gate,
How charged with punishments the scroll,
I am the master of my fate,
I am the captain of my soul”

By your own definition of reality… there is no reality.

Me?

“Our deepest fear is not that we are inadequate.

Our deepest fear is that we are powerful beyond measure.

It is our light, not our darkness that most frightens us.

We ask ourselves, 'Who am I to be brilliant, gorgeous, talented, fabulous?'

Actually, who are you not to be?

You are a child of God.

Your playing small does not serve the world.

There is nothing enlightened about shrinking so that other people won't feel insecure around you.

We are all meant to shine, as children do. We were born to make manifest the glory of God that is within us.

It's not just in some of us; it's in everyone. And as we let our own light shine, we unconsciously give other people permission to do the same.

As we are liberated from our own fear, our presence automatically liberates others.”​

You? You don’t even have a mind of your own! That stinks! I would show pity, empathy, compassion or love to you, but what does it matter? Nothing is anything to whoever or whatever the vapor that is you, the dust in the wind that is ephemeral, and has no origin, being, rational reality, words of their own or even feelings of their own. What does one say to nothing, a mere cosmic anomaly that has no self awareness and flies like a love bug for 92 hours, then disappears forever?

You? How is it that a fool like myself who believes in the Flying Spaghetti Monster can sum up your brilliant philosophical rhetoric in one carefully worded question that places you in an uncomfortable position of visible ideological failure?

John 8:32 John 18:38

How do you define who you are, or know who you are, if you believe that you have no freedom of will to do so? Now, that seems like an awful rut! I wonder who's words you unknowingly speak?

PS. What a beautiful beach!
1717968100917.png
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Fervent

Well-Known Member
Sep 22, 2020
6,695
2,877
45
San jacinto
✟204,254.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
So there was nothing external to a decision you have made?
Didn't say that, but you're trying to argue that because I have preferences those preferences dictate my decisions. Which is contrary to my phenomenal experience.
Again, I must ask for an example so I know exactly what you mean.
The other day I would have prefered to put sugar in my coffee, but I chose to put stevia.
Irrational laws? What do you mean by irrational laws.
I mean laws that do not act according to a mind.
We describe things as laws because they are rational.
Oh? What mind is behind the laws? Our description of those laws may be the product of our minds, but the laws themselves are irrational unless they are underwritten by a rational agent.
I don't know what you mean by this.
Simply that the laws are not the result of conscious thought, which has to be the case if we do not assume the existence of a cosmic agent.
Emotionally I welcome the praise.
As you should
Rationally I cannot.
Oh? Seems that it is entirely rational to me, unlike believing that free will is an illusion.
And what I say I believe and what I say I don't I'm afraid you are going to have to take as a given.
We will know them by their fruits. People behave in accordance to their true beliefs, even if they claim their beliefs are otherwise.
You are not in a position to doubt it.
I am, because I can see that your actions aren't in keeping with what you claim to believe.
The basis of my position is materialism.
Of course, a metaphysical position which must deny the reality of free will. Since we don't share the metaphysical commitments, your arguments are entirely unconvincing.
That hardly comports with a belief that the physical world is an illusion.
No, but it does render our internal experiences illusion cast by a material world. Which is a more ridiculous idea, since the only reason I am certain that I exist is that I have internal experiences.
I thought you would have understood that.
I do, my statement was meant to be illustrative not argumentative.
 
Upvote 0

Grip Docility

Well-Known Member
Nov 27, 2017
7,019
2,784
North America
✟19,296.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
Yes, it is. Just came back from a walk along it.
Lucky! I'm Jelly! I was born near beaches! I'm not close to them, now. But, seriously! Super gorgeous! I've always been interested in Australia! Pretty amazing scenery and landscape!!!

PS, I disclosed much about my personal self to you within the links that I posted to you, buried as hyper links within key words. You are free to count lyrics and verses as material quotes on my part. My reply may seem rugged, but it is a work of Love to you. I know you don't like the things I like. But, I came in with a tight debate stance... so I followed up in physical word with the same vigor, but I buried unexpected content that you are welcome to use against me in debate. Let the record show that I opened up my stance to you, to make discussion and debate with me a bit easier!
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Bradskii

Old age should burn and rave at close of day;
Aug 19, 2018
23,047
15,656
72
Bondi
✟369,771.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
The other day I would have prefered to put sugar in my coffee, but I chose to put stevia.
I wanted to go to the pub. I didn't want to spend an hour working out. But my preference was the gym. It's first order versus second order. My first order desire is sugar in my coffee. My second order preference is to leave it out because I've got another kilo to lose.

You always, and I mean always do what you prefer. Even if you don't like it doing it. It determines your decision.
 
Upvote 0

Fervent

Well-Known Member
Sep 22, 2020
6,695
2,877
45
San jacinto
✟204,254.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I wanted to go to the pub. I didn't want to spend an hour working out. But my preference was the gym. It's first order versus second order. My first order desire is sugar in my coffee. My second order preference is to leave it out because I've got another kilo to lose.
Except that doesn't work if our preferences are causally determinitive..because we wouldn't be able to rank them and choose a stronger preference based on a rational priority, it would be decided purely on the strength of emotional/physical desires. If I didn't have free will, I would have gone for the sugar because I am physically addicted to sugar.
You always, and I mean always do what you prefer. Even if you don't like it doing it.
If that were the case it would be impossible to overcome physical addictions, rather than simply really difficult. It is only if there is some indeterminism to our decisions that our experience of making choices can be properly accounted for and not hand-waived as an illusion.
 
Upvote 0

Grip Docility

Well-Known Member
Nov 27, 2017
7,019
2,784
North America
✟19,296.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
I wanted to go to the pub.
Freud calls that the IT or ID.... for either social or delicious beverage desires... maybe both, you wanted to go to the Pub.

I didn't want to spend an hour working out.
Also, the "IT"
But my preference was the gym.
Appearance or Health?
It's first order versus second order.
Sounds like you are saying that you have Desires, yet only one body to act upon them, constrained by daily time.
My first order desire is sugar in my coffee.
A desire that is good for the heart.
My second order preference is to leave it out because I've got another kilo to lose.
Another desire that is good for the heart.
You always, and I mean always do what you prefer.
Right... That's known as "eating when you are hungry", which is applicable to not only food.
Even if you don't like it doing it.
Yet, your will is free to choose. It's you that is culpable for the extra kilo. You can say that "you" didn't gain it, but if you eat a bit too much, or go too large in volume on the carbs... it is you that earned that kilo. Likewise, you have the will to "Lose that kilo". That's up to you.
It determines your decision.
Honestly, it sounds like you are a "divine" determinist and believe yourself to be... divine. Think about it. You speak as if your desires are cosmic matters... and your will to do what you do is decided by the UNIVERSE... which by reading your words... revolves around you.
 
Upvote 0

Bradskii

Old age should burn and rave at close of day;
Aug 19, 2018
23,047
15,656
72
Bondi
✟369,771.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
If that were the case it would be impossible to overcome physical addictions, rather than simply really difficult.
Whether you can overcome an addiction, or just a simple desire (go to the pub instead of the gym) requires a second order level of decision making. Now if you are the type of person who gives in easily to temptation then you'll have the sugar (or the heroin). You'll go to the pub and not the gym. The first order craving will win out. You can't decide to not be that person. It's who you are. And you had no control over that.

So for some people it really is impossible to overcome addiction. So they need help. It's literally impossible for them to stop on their own.
 
Upvote 0