Does Free Will Exist?

[Exiledoomsayer]

If God is the one in charge, unless He just put a blindfold over His eyes and let things happen on their own, He is the one responsible. But as someone already pointed out, even if it was random, free will is still impossible.

Free will cannot exist. The only option then is to determine what is responsible for destiny. Either is was random chance, or it was God.

If you want to debate what this makes of God, that's a different discussion. Personally, I think of God as being like an author. All good stories need heroes and villains, and a struggle between the two sides. And isn't it God's right to choose what to do with His own creation?

It's not that God WANTS people to go to Hell, but it's the best option. When people God chooses go to Heaven, they will live forever in perfect paradise, all the more grateful for it because we have seen what suffering is like.

But Hell exists as a place for people to spend eternity away from God. It exists to bring right to the wrong, and to keep the ungodly from corrupting Heaven.

This is at the same time to most sick and honest thing ive seen in a while.

You basically accepted that everything is the work of god that you have no choice whatsoever in anything you do and that everything that you do and happens to and because of you is all because god is moving you around like a puppet in a theatre and will arbitrarily decide weither you get to play the part of the good puppet and be kept in a velvet closet with a new coat of wax or he decides to make you play the villian puppet and will throw you into the fire after the show is over.

Even if you where to get up right now and shoot up a school its not your fault, its just what god made you do, and he will make you suffer for what he made you do.

And your okay with that, because we're his puppets he made the puppets and its his choice what he does with them.

Interesting and horrifying.

 

[GrayAngel]

I suppose at this point we would have to prove whether god exists or not, and whether he is actually omniscient.

This is an impossible task. It cannot be done. All I can say is what the Bible says is true. No one can prove whether what is says is true or not.

This is at the same time to most sick and honest thing ive seen in a while.

You basically accepted that everything is the work of god that you have no choice whatsoever in anything you do and that everything that you do and happens to and because of you is all because god is moving you around like a puppet in a theatre and will arbitrarily decide weither you get to play the part of the good puppet and be kept in a velvet closet with a new coat of wax or he decides to make you play the villian puppet and will throw you into the fire after the show is over.

Even if you where to get up right now and shoot up a school its not your fault, its just what god made you do, and he will make you suffer for what he made you do.

And your okay with that, because we're his puppets he made the puppets and its his choice what he does with them.

Interesting and horrifying.

Nice. The most efficient way to turn off your opponents is to resort to name calling and insults. Fortunately, I'm already plenty teed off, so there's not much you can do to affect me.

We are what we are. What is it that makes me different from a mass murderer? Is it because I have some magical ability to manipulate the world around me to my all powerful will? Is it possible for a vase to mold itself?

It's not that we were all created equal, and God at some point selected us randomly for certain tasks. We and our tasks are one and the same. When God created me, He also molded my destiny. Evil men are evil because they are evil. The fact that they didn't have a choice doesn't make them any less evil.

The only other option is random selection, which would result in complete chaos. The fact that God is in charge means that there is a plan. If God's not in charge, then we're all in trouble, and there is no reason to find hope or comfort in a God who cares too little to step in and bring order.

 

[3sigma]

All I can say is what the Bible says is true. No one can prove whether what is says is true or not.

If, as you say, no one can prove the Bible is true then your assertion that it is true is completely groundless.

We are what we are. What is it that makes me different from a mass murderer? Is it because I have some magical ability to manipulate the world around me to my all powerful will? Is it possible for a vase to mold itself?

It's not that we were all created equal, and God at some point selected us randomly for certain tasks. When God created me, He also molded my destiny. Evil men are evil because they are evil. The fact that they didn't have a choice doesn't make them any less evil.

So you are saying God could have molded your destiny to become a mass murderer at some point in the future? Are you saying you would have no choice in the matter? Are you saying there is nothing within you to prevent you murdering people? If so then I hope I live a good distance from you.

 

[GrayAngel]

If, as you say, no one can prove the Bible is true then your assertion that it is true is completely groundless.


So you are saying God could have molded your destiny to become a mass murderer at some point in the future? Are you saying you would have no choice in the matter? Are you saying there is nothing within you to prevent you murdering people? If so then I hope I live a good distance from you.

If that is the case, then you are no more safe where you are now than if you were locked in a cell with me.

I don't know my future, but I can make an educated guess based on my past. I don't have any aggressive tendencies. I've always been gentle, kind, and considerate, with few exceptions.

Based on this, I can reasonably assume that I will probably not be going on a murderous rampage anytime soon.

Of course I have a "choice," but that decision has already been made, and it's already known. My decisions are not free; they are predetermined based on previous events. And the Bible seems to strongly imply that God will sometimes step in and make things happen if they wouldn't have happened on their own (such as when God hardened the heart of pharaoh so He could destroy him and his army).

 

[jonmichael818]

This is an impossible task. It cannot be done. All I can say is what the Bible says is true. No one can prove whether what is says is true or not.

While I can agree that it may be impossible to prove if a god exists, and that he is omniscient, I think the Bible may be able to be proven true or false. Or at least portions of it.

The fact that God is in charge means that there is a plan. If God's not in charge, then we're all in trouble, and there is no reason to find hope or comfort in a God who cares too little to step in and bring order.

Why would god need to step in and bring order, unless he made a mistake? By him making a mistake means that something did not go according to his plan, and would seem to suggest that a will other than his was at work.

 

[Resha Caner]

I'm curious how you would respond to this verse:

Exodus 9:12 - But the LORD hardened Pharaoh’s heart and he would not listen to Moses and Aaron, just as the LORD had said to Moses.

The will can be bound. It is the same as a master and a slave. The master can force the slave to work the field, but that does not mean the slave's will does not exist.

Just because I can prevent a ball from falling to the earth does not mean I have made gravity cease to exist. I have simply applied an opposing force. Given God's unlimited power, his force can always overpower the human will. But that doesn't mean the will does not exist. God could always trump our will if He chose, but He does not choose to do that. In other words, we have free will because God chooses to let us have free will.

But will is not something born fully developed. Like any other human trait: intelligence, athleticism, etc., it must be exercised to improve it. This is how those in the contemplative religions (Buddhism, etc.) are deceived. They misunderstand the expansion of the mind as an end rather than a means.

It puts God through much heartache to see His people deny Him, but He is not powerless to stop it.

This verse says that God LONGED to gather them up, it doesn't say that He was trying. Rather, God was patiently waiting for the right time.

The WILLING part simply means that the people didn't want to come to God. Why not? Is it because their wills trumped over God's power and their physical limitations to CHOOSE to resist God? No.

It is interesting that you can't answer me without using choice-laden words (want, etc.). It sounds like you're saying the same thing as me, but for some reason denying the will. So, are you denying existence of the will or the ability of the will to trump God's power?

Everything we do is determined by something apart from ourselves. Even when we seem to do something that seems "out of character," it's because a given set of circumstances led to that action.

I disagree. Reason brings to the mind the realization of choices. One can then make a choice contrary to one's experience. I did not say experience has no influence, but choice allows one to refute experience. A thing without will can only conform to the past.

 

[GrayAngel]

While I can agree that it may be impossible to prove if a god exists, and that he is omniscient, I think the Bible may be able to be proven true or false. Or at least portions of it.

Let's just agree to disagree on that one. I find it incredibly annoying to debate with unbelievers concerning a text they don't believe in or understand. I'm always learning something new, and I don't you know much that I haven't already heard.

Why would god need to step in and bring order, unless he made a mistake? By him making a mistake means that something did not go according to his plan, and would seem to suggest that a will other than his was at work.

How could God make a mistake if He didn't have anything to do with it? Either God is involved, or He isn't. If He was involved, everything was intentional. If it was just chance, then we can't hold God responsible. There's no in-between.

The chaos would be if we all relied on pure chance. A world based on chance would be unpredictable. There's no assurance of a better future in a random world. But with God, we have a promise that everything works together for the benefit of the one's who love God.

The will can be bound. It is the same as a master and a slave. The master can force the slave to work the field, but that does not mean the slave's will does not exist.

Just because I can prevent a ball from falling to the earth does not mean I have made gravity cease to exist. I have simply applied an opposing force. Given God's unlimited power, his force can always overpower the human will. But that doesn't mean the will does not exist. God could always trump our will if He chose, but He does not choose to do that. In other words, we have free will because God chooses to let us have free will.

But will is not something born fully developed. Like any other human trait: intelligence, athleticism, etc., it must be exercised to improve it. This is how those in the contemplative religions (Buddhism, etc.) are deceived. They misunderstand the expansion of the mind as an end rather than a means.

Interesting... I don't believe I've ever kind of argument before, from anyone other than myself.

I understand your point of view. I even thought that way once before, but I've changed my mind since then.

It is interesting that you can't answer me without using choice-laden words (want, etc.). It sounds like you're saying the same thing as me, but for some reason denying the will. So, are you denying existence of the will or the ability of the will to trump God's power?

In my view, we can't do anything that hasn't already been predetermined. In other words, all our actions have been decided for us, either directly through God's interference, or indirectly by having designed us.

I guess I'd say our will is the way we feel. It's the motivation (which also has been given to us), which drives the way we live. We want things, but those wants were given to us. Therefor, we only have the illusion of a freedom of choice.

I disagree. Reason brings to the mind the realization of choices. One can then make a choice contrary to one's experience. I did not say experience has no influence, but choice allows one to refute experience. A thing without will can only conform to the past.

I don't think so. I think our decisions are based either on our physical conditions, which are the products of the past, or on God's involvement. I don't see any room for free will in our lives, considering our minds are even dependent on physical chemical processes. If these physical processes are ever contradicted, it's only because they were influenced by spirits (God, angels or demons), and it has nothing to do with us.

 

[Lord Emsworth]

Same question, I am a bit confused about the specifics of compatibilism, could you expand on the idea a bit?

I already posted a little something. In post #11:

If yes, how does it exist if cause and effect determines everything?

In compatibilist free will, IMO it matters whether *you*, and especially the mental parts of *you* such as your desires, have a significant impact on what eventually happens. If you can act in accordance with your desires, then that is a free will choice. If you can't then it is not, in fact you might have to act against your will.

A good litmus test is the consideration if a (counterfactual) different desire, would have lead to different actions: "I could have acted differently, had I only wanted to."​

And in post #21:

The problem is, your will and desires come from your genetics and environmental experiences, no free will involved.

There are two options. Either your will and desires come from somewhere, or they don't come from somewhere. The latter just leads to randomness, or arbitraryness if you wish, though. After all, there is no cause, there is no reason, there is no because for why your will and desires are what they are. They just are. Likewise with the decisions themselves.


And as a second response:

The problem is, your will and desires come from your genetics and environmental experiences, no free will involved.

That is not a problem, at least not in the case of environmental experiences. You will and desires could have been different, given different environmental experiences.


And always keep in mind, compatibilist free will != libertarian free will.

Compatibilsim is about counterfactual alternate possibilities, whereas libertarian free will chases after (the phantom of) actual alternate possibilities.​

 

[Lord Emsworth]

I still think compatibilism is just complex determinism. It ultimately does not explain how we can have free will as I defined it earlier in the thread.

FREE WILL-freedom of humans to make choices that are not determined by prior causes or by divine intervention.]-Merriam-Webster/Freewill[/u]

Compatibilism is what is, and what is defensible. Libertarian Will, as in the definition that you provide, is a contadiction in terms, is incoherent, a phantom.

 

[Lord Emsworth]

But two things regarding the random:
[...]
2)How does this randomness relate to free will?

It is what you are left with, once you have ascertained that there are no causes for something.

 

[jonmichael818]

Let's just agree to disagree on that one. I find it incredibly annoying to debate with unbelievers concerning a text they don't believe in or understand. I'm always learning something new, and I don't you know much that I haven't already heard.

Ok, if you wish. But I think it is important to take into consideration that certain aspects of the text can be shown to be erroneous.

How could God make a mistake if He didn't have anything to do with it? Either God is involved, or He isn't. If He was involved, everything was intentional. If it was just chance, then we can't hold God responsible. There's no in-between.

In a deterministic universe where god is the author of said determinism, nothing can happen that is not apart of what he had determined. So, if something took place where he needed to step in and bring about order means that something did not happen as he determined it to happen. If something took place that he did not determine, than either another will other than his own was involved, or randomness took place(which means he does not have control).
You could say that god stepping in to bring about order was part of what was determined. Then why not just create a universe where there was no need for him to step in and restore order? Unless he is just creating the illusion that there is no order so he could come in and save the day. If this is the case, is he just trying to amuse himself?

 

[jonmichael818]

That is not a problem, at least not in the case of environmental experiences. You will and desires could have been different, given different environmental experiences.

But different environmental experiences did not take place because your environment was determined partly by genetics and by a series of causal events, no free will.

Again, compatibilism is just complex determinism. Everything within the compatibilists idea of free will can ultimately be reduced to determinism.

 

[jonmichael818]

It is what you are left with, once you have ascertained that there are no causes for something.

Randomness does not equate to free will. Not only would a god not have control, but we would not either. Randomness is simply what it means, random.

 

[jonmichael818]

The will can be bound. It is the same as a master and a slave. The master can force the slave to work the field, but that does not mean the slave's will does not exist.

Just because I can prevent a ball from falling to the earth does not mean I have made gravity cease to exist. I have simply applied an opposing force. Given God's unlimited power, his force can always overpower the human will. But that doesn't mean the will does not exist. God could always trump our will if He chose, but He does not choose to do that. In other words, we have free will because God chooses to let us have free will.

There are different ways in which an individuals "will" can be manipulated or determined. As in the example you gave regarding the master and the slave, the slaves will did not cease to exist(as you rightly said), it was simply not allowed to express it self.

However, in the case of how an individual got "his will" is a different story. An individual may have a will, but he did not choose how his will was formed, or where it came from. He received his will based on genetics and environmental conditions, no free will involved.

I disagree. Reason brings to the mind the realization of choices. One can then make a choice contrary to one's experience. I did not say experience has no influence, but choice allows one to refute experience. A thing without will can only conform to the past.

Reason may bring the mind a realization of choices, but an individual cannot make a choice contrary to genetics and environment. A choice is made based on prior causes (i.e. thoughts,dreams,experience,things he has learned,genetics etc.)
A thing with a will may become better at avoiding other things, but that will is still the result of causality. No free will.

 

[quatona]

I am a compatibilist. I define free will as conscious, voluntary choice. What we do is not caused directly by our genetics or environment, but rather by our own thoughts, feelings, desires, etc, though of course these factors have causes of their own. We can't choose otherwise when making a voluntary choice because we wouldn't want to.

I´m not sure I understand the difference between "our will" and "what we want to".

 

[nathanlandon1]

Do you think free will exists?
If yes, how does it exist if cause and effect determines everything?
If you do not think cause and effect determines everything, then give an example.

I think free will is paradoxical.

I think you have free will to align yourself on a side of the spiritual line, but physically things are out of your control. So, I would say man's free will is highly limited.

The movement of star systems can be measured with extremely high precision - measured. The movement of the cosmos is periodic. One can go as far as to say the nature of humans is periodic.

Peace. Love. War. Death. Peace. Love. War. Death.

Of course, that is a very imprecise, yet marginally accurate review of human nature. Still, this implies that our will/nature is not free if it follows a set and measurable pattern. Now, I say our only free will is our spiritual allignment (the substance of your soul.) Take Hitler, for example. If Hitler was on a non-violent spiritual line, and was not an evil dictator, it doesn't mean that someone else would not have taken his place and carried out the Holocaust.

So, physically I believe there is NO FREE WILL. Spiritually, we have free will - which is why paradoxically we have some margin of physical free will.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

How so?

Free will means the ability to choose. Determinism means you can predict what will be chosen (and, in principle, anything else about the future). That I can predict you will move your hand away from a hot hob, doesn't mean you don't have free will.

Ok, you got me.
But two things regarding the random:
1)This may be due to our current lack of understanding. I know it is pure speculation, but it is worth the thought.

True, but so might anything else. Our best understanding is that it's truly random (the rather vocal minority notwithstanding ).

2)How does this randomness relate to free will?

It doesn't, not in any direct or obvious way (I could go into the quantum mechanics of neurology, but that might be slightly tangential). Free will is often juxtaposed with determinism and/or indeterminism, so it's just worth mentioned that, as far as we can tell, the universe can and does exhibit true spontaneity and randomness.

 

[Resha Caner]

Interesting... I don't believe I've ever kind of argument before, from anyone other than myself.

You need to read more, then. I'm not sure where to start you, though. Anselm, Augustine, etc. have all written on free will, and all concluded we have it. Then there is "On the Bondage of the Will" by Martin Luther.

In my view, we can't do anything that hasn't already been predetermined. In other words, all our actions have been decided for us, either directly through God's interference, or indirectly by having designed us.

It is not necessary to conclude that. The "design" argument is often raised: if God is omniscent and if he created us, then he knew what he was designing us for. If he didn't want us to do a specific thing, he would have designed us differently.

But that is not a necessary conclusion of omniscence. Omni properties are concepts people struggle with, and I understand that. But people seem to think omni properties require the absurd. One should, rather, realize that absurd conclusions occur because of errors.

The beauty of the will is that it transforms finite creation into infinite possibility. It all goes back to the question: Why did God create? In short, thinkers like Augustine concluded that this universe is the only universe God created. He didn't make one before this, and He won't make one after this. But this creates a problem. Why would an infinite God be interested in a finite universe? That problem is solved by free will. When God created, he created the possibility of all worlds, thereby creating something infinite that is worthy of his interest. That possibility exists through the agency of free will.

I could go on at length, but the point is that God created all the possible choices we might make. Among those is the choice that pleases God, but we rarely make that choice (hence sin). Anyway, God knows all the choices we could make, but he has chosen not to determine the choice we do make. IMO it makes God even more miraculous and more infinite that he knows the possible state of every quanta for all time, and yet amongst all those possibilities he can still determine what he wills (i.e. the incarnation of Christ) without determining all quanta.

That still leaves a question of "how?" for the human will, and that is a lengthy conversation which requires grasping what I've already said in depth.

I guess I'd say our will is the way we feel. It's the motivation (which also has been given to us), which drives the way we live. We want things, but those wants were given to us. Therefor, we only have the illusion of a freedom of choice.

Nope. You still have to explain Matthew to me. If God knows we have no will, why would he ascribe that word to us?

You also have to explain the contradiction (and I don't think you can) of how God does not do evil, yet by your view He does evil.

Further, you have to explain the contradiction of refuation. In philsophical terms, refuation without free will is like a body that accelerates in the opposite direction of the forces applied to it.

 

[Resha Caner]

I still think compatibilism is just complex determinism.

I agree.

 

[Resha Caner]

However, in the case of how an individual got "his will" is a different story. An individual may have a will, but he did not choose how his will was formed, or where it came from. He received his will based on genetics and environmental conditions, no free will involved.

I think you're arguing semantic differences with me. If you insist that a "free" will means free of all influence, I would agree such does not exist. But I take "free will" to mean freedom to make a choice - even if that choice requires conscious organization of energy to escape a potential that a body without will would not escape.

For example, I can desire to fly, but my body is incapable of it. So, to make the choice, I build an airplane. For all I know, dogs might even desire to fly, but their will has been permanently bound. Dogs do not have the ability to build airplanes. But, dogs can will to do things that rocks cannot. In other words, I see will as a continuum rather than an either/or (though there may be some minimum "quanta" of will).

Anyway, IMO, God has given us a will commensurate with the responsibilities we have been given. He does not expect the impossible of us. God does not expect us to save ourselves, therefore we have not been given the ability to will our salvation. Rather, he provides the means in Himself.