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.
If you want to me to tell you what determined a decision you made then you'll have to tell me why you made it. Unless you want me to make a reason up?You claim there's an infinite chain of cause-and-effect actions, so why aren't you able to look at the current state and prognosticate based on current conditions?
Indeed it is. 'I preferred to choose that' is a clumsy phrase. Please try to avoid using it.If it were a truism, the word is rendered meaningless and saying it is your preference is superfluous.
You're confusing something that you prefer with something that you want. Yet again. I won't be explaining it. Yet again.Especially when it is clear that we often are motivated to do things we would prefer not to do for love and money...
The cat is a homicidal muffin. It is the nature of the beast.So then the Spirit moves when men decide to gouge out young Zaza's eyes and violate her until she is dead? The spirit moves men to sin and act in ways that God does not approve?
Your claim is that it is all physically determined...so why do you require me to tell you what you should be able to predict?If you want to me to tell you what determined a decision you made then you'll have to tell me why you made it. Unless you want me to make a reason up?
I prefer to stay home and play video games, but since I need money to eat I go to work. So it's clear that prefer has a meaning besides an after-the-fact recognition of what was chosen.Indeed it is. 'I preferred to choose that' is a clumsy phrase. Please try to avoid using it.
You re-defining terms willy nilly doesn't make that the definition of the term. It just shows you're playing semantic games, which wouldn't be necessary if your position weren't irrational.You're confusing something that you prefer with something that you want. Yet again. I won't be explaining it. Yet again.
Why do I need to supply you with a reason? Why can't you simply predict the reason based on the choice?Are you going to give me that reason, or do you want me to make one up?
And how did the cat come by that nature? Isn't it your position that everything is an act of God's providential actions? Why now is it a matter of nature?The cat is a homicidal muffin. It is the nature of the beast.
If the cat could change its nature, then the lion would lay down with the lamb.
That would take an act of God
Not nature as we know it, no. I think the nature we know is fallen and not how God would have it. Though it is a temporary handing over for a purpose.Do you believe that God did not create nature according to His will?
It doesn't invalidate my point that what you call free will and what is called determinism is mostly whim without rhyme or reason or cause and effect.Not nature as we know it, no. I think the nature we know is fallen and not how God would have it. Though it is a temporary handing over for a purpose.
Because (and do I really have to explain this to you?) there'd be an enormous number of reasons why you choose not to have icecream. How can we discuss what determined your choice if you don't give me the reason why you made the choice?Why do I need to supply you with a reason? Why can't you simply predict the reason based on the choice?
Pick something that you really don't enjoy and then decide to enjoy it.
I have no idea what you're trying to say here.It doesn't invalidate my point that what you call free will and what is called determinism is mostly whim without rhyme or reason or cause or effect.
You can call it the spirit, small letter or capital.
It is still merely a reaction to totality of the circumstances.
The totality of circumstances doesn't indicate the direction of the motion. It merely prompts motion.
You can't provide me with the reason but somehow you believe in an unbroken chain of physical relationships? This is your thread and your claim, so why do you expect those who challenge you to do your dirty work?Because (and do I really have to explain this to you?) there'd be an enormous number of reasons why you choose not to have icecream. How can we discuss what determined your choice if you don't give me the reason why you made the choice?
Free will doesn't mean "not determiend by anything", so you're just attacking a straw man no proponant of free will believes in, and given you refuse to defend your position of physical determinism it is unsurprising that you must engage in such fallacious arguments.OK..I'll make one up. You had oysters for lunch and one of them was off. You have been violently sick all day. Your wife says 'Would you like some peppermint or chocolate icecream?' and as you rush again to the toilet you manage a grunted 'No'.
Now, let me see...what could it be that determined your choice? You go first. And if you say 'It was a free will decision, it wasn't determined by anything' or any variation of that then there won't be a response.
There you have it. The cat is insaneSo your idea of free will means that a person must act for no apparent reason other than... what? Complete randomness? Sorry, but that's not the definition of free will, that's the definition of insanity.
No, you have no choice in what you prefer. It will determine your choice. You aren't coerced, but it's you that makes the decision. It's just not a free will decision.You're asserting that free will isn't simply the ability to make choices based upon what one prefers, but one must also be able to choose what one prefers.
No, what you want to do is not necessarily what you you prefer to do. And this has been explained many times.But wait a minute...that means that I must be able to prefer something other than what I actually prefer, and to not prefer what I actually do prefer.
I don't have an idea of free will. It doesn't exist. What we choose is determined by antecedent conditions. Your idea of free will is that you can make a decision where it isn't determined by any antecedent conditions. If you do that then it's an arbitrary decision and no free will is involved.So your idea of free will means that a person must act for no apparent reason other than... what?
Then go start a thread on free will using whatever definition you like and stop wasting my time.Free will doesn't mean "not determiend by anything"...
That's quite the assertion, but not a demonstration.No, you have no choice in what you prefer. It will determine your choice. You aren't coerced, but it's you that makes the decision. It's just not a free will decision.
Playing semantic games doesn't change the facts. And given that your claim is that preferences can only be known after the choice has been made is nothing but putting your conclusion into the definitions. It's not an argument, it's just begging the question.No, what you want to do is not necessarily what you you prefer to do. And this has been explained many times.
Then how can you claim that it is an illusion? If you don't have an idea of it, how can you then go on to deny it is in operation? This is patently intellectual dishonest, which is unsurprising given the irrationality of your position.I don't have an idea of free will. It doesn't exist. What we choose is determined by antecedent conditions. Your idea of free will is that you can make a decision where it isn't determined by any antecedent conditions. If you do that then it's an arbitrary decision and no free will is involved.
It's your claim of determinism that I am interacting with, not your straw version of free will which you claim to have no idea what you mean by it.Then go start a thread on free will using whatever definition you like and stop wasting my time.
Ok, free will, in the case of the murderers of ZaZa, you would say they made a free will choice.I have no idea what you're trying to say here.
It's certainly not as simple as making whatever choice we want at any given time, as if choices are made in a vacuum. But that misses the point of the debate, which is a question of whether or not our decisions are perfectly predictable based on past conditions making any choice we make an illusion. Someone arguing determinism must deny themselves any semblance of agency, or else they are being inconsistent in their claim of determinism. It seems to me that it is impossible to genuinely believe in determinism, and so it is an irrational position to hold and requires linguistic games to maintain.Ok, free will, in the case of the murderers of ZaZa, you would say they made a free will choice.
Either/Or they were determined by all the factors in a chain of cause and effect
So either they had a choice or they didn't.
That is simple.
However, all the choices they made led to the end result
which means all the free will decisions became the determining factor, the cause and effect
So you have no free will because by the time that chain of decisions
joining the gang
learning to kill
getting prepped up
and getting in those truck all loaded up
That is the chain of events, case and effect
So they did not have Free Will even though at any point they had a choice.
It is not free will Or determinism
All those decisions create circumstances wherein the choices are limted to the conditions within those circumstances.
So, there is neither free will or cause and effect.
There is some other factor involved.
No, you have no choice in what you prefer. It will determine your choice. You aren't coerced, but it's you that makes the decision.
It's just not a free will decision.
From now on in, when you see the little rainbow on your post it'll me be saying, yeah - I read it but it's not worth my time responding to it. For all sorts of reasons which I don't want to regurgitate yet again. So it'll be 'optimistic' in that I'm optimistic that your next post will be worth responding to. Feel free to use it yourself in that manner. It'll save us so much time...It's your claim of determinism that I am interacting with, not your straw version of free will which you claim to have no idea what you mean by it.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?