• 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

Neogaia777

Old Soul
Site Supporter
Oct 10, 2011
24,688
5,556
46
Oregon
✟1,098,527.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Celibate
Do we really have free will? Or do we really have free choice?

Free will is defined as having the ability to make choices, on our own, without any outside influences, including divine. Free choice is the ability to choose a choice that has been presented to you. Such as "I call heaven and earth to record this day against you this day I have set before you life and death, choose life, that both you and your seed may live. (Duet. 30:19)
Either God in the OT was still seeing things from the perspective of choice, or some people were lying about what He actually thought and said.

God Bless.
 
Upvote 0

Bradskii

Old age should burn and rave at close of day;
Aug 19, 2018
23,053
15,664
72
Bondi
✟370,070.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Do we really have free will? Or do we really have free choice?

Free will is defined as having the ability to make choices, on our own, without any outside influences, including divine. Free choice is the ability to choose a choice that has been presented to you. Such as "I call heaven and earth to record this day against you this day I have set before you life and death, choose life, that both you and your seed may live. (Duet. 30:19)
We all make choices. For reasons that are pre determined.
 
Upvote 0

childeye 2

Well-Known Member
Aug 18, 2018
5,869
3,304
67
Denver CO
✟239,560.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Do we really have free will? Or do we really have free choice?

Free will is defined as having the ability to make choices, on our own, without any outside influences, including divine. Free choice is the ability to choose a choice that has been presented to you. Such as "I call heaven and earth to record this day against you this day I have set before you life and death, choose life, that both you and your seed may live. (Duet. 30:19)
I don't think the law is going to be a good example for showing a free will. If God told you to do these laws or die wouldn't that qualify as an outside or divine influence?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Bradskii

Old age should burn and rave at close of day;
Aug 19, 2018
23,053
15,664
72
Bondi
✟370,070.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
You couldn't respond line by line to my response because in doing so, you would have been proven faulty in conclusion within the constraints of the rational responses that I provided from a simple stance of "Culpability".
I've time to address this at last. I'm not a fan of posts with multiple points and I try to keep my responses to 2 or 3 points at most. I may break my self imposed rule here. If you respond, I'll try to keep my reply to your main points.
Instead of acknowledging the elementary incontrovertible truth that I expressed through words written from a culpable stance, your only form of rebuttal available was to attempt to reassert the lack of culpability through "Blame". This doesn't rebut my stance but further backs my stance.
It's my position that you truly can't be personally held to blame, or that you can be held culpable for an action because the type of person you are. Your desires, your characteristics, your choices are determined by events out of your control. And that if someone breaks into my house and steals my goods, if I had the exact dna, the exact upbringing, the exact education, the exact peer pressure etc etc then I wouldn't be me - I'd be him. And I'd make the same choices as he does. There's no 'I' outside of everything that is me that can say 'Hang on, I shouldn't be doing this'. That's dualism and it's a position that has long been discounted. One that I discounted a long time before I rejected free will, but is a position that ultimately leads to that rejection.
Your response employs blame in a way that is tantamount of a person sticking their fingers in their ears and repeating the words "La La La La La" at the top of their lungs.
I'm not sure what you mean by this. I'm not ignoring blame. I'm saying that it isn't applicable.

What if some mad scientist could insert something into Joe's frontal cortex that he could turn on and cause Joe to act in an unacceptable manner. We couldn't blame Joe for acting that way. What if he inserted something that at some arbitrary time caused Joe to act in that way. Again, we couldn't blame him. What if there was a medical condition that did exactly the same? Again, no blame. But your frontal cortex (if you're a male) doesn't fully form until you're about 25. And there is a lot that can go wrong in that time - even going back to what your mother did while she was carrying you in the womb. So if there was something in your frontal cortex that developed that governed how you acted later in life, why should we blame Joe for it?
This is a self contradicting statement of your own stance. You are saying that if you aren't Free, you can then appreciate right from wrong, which are concepts that only hold validity under the stance of culpability.
Everyone, unless they have a serious psychological condition, knows the difference between right and wrong. People don't rob banks or assault people or cheat on their wives without doing their best to get away with it. Because...they know it's wrong. But they do it anyway. The guy that broke into my house knew very well it was wrong. But he decided to do it anyway. The potential benefits outweighed the possible negatives.
The irony of this statement, is that you would have to have rational Culpability to be able to be "Persuaded". By your own admission, you are perpetually in a state of being Persuaded by an imaginary force of universal totality that you blame for being in this state of perpetual response to imaginary persuasion. One would have to be in a rational state of personal Culpability to be shifted into a state of becoming persuaded into a different stance of personal Culpability. Within your own reasoning, you have again, invalidated the validity of your stance.
You are either the type of person who can be persuaded by reasoned argument. Or you are not. If you are one, then you can't decide to be the other. If we caught the guy who broke into my home then we could ask him if he could change. It would be explained to him the impact the crime had. Could he be persuaded? It depends on him. If he can't then we lock him up as a deterrent. 'Do this again and you will lose your freedom. If anyone else does this then they will lose their freedom'.

I'm very tempted to say that people who can't change should be kept out of society. We need to be protected from them even though they are not, in my view, culpable. Just as if your car has faulty brakes - you can't 'blame' the car, but you keep it in the garage so people are safe. Can you fix it? Then it can be used on the roads again.
I don't know what world you live in, but this characterizes the status quo of the entire globe. The way of the world is Quid Pro Quo. This is established on the utter commonality of blame and personal need.
Yeah, we want to blame people. It's a natural reaction. I don't think it's valid for the reasons given.
This is self contradicting and obfuscating dialogue. In summation, it is non sequitur.
What part of the explanation is self contradictory? It certainly was obfuscating. I was quite specific.
Culpable or not Culpable?
As I said...not culpable.
 
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 realize that you took enormous time to respond to this. I also note that our dialogue reaches impasses when absolute truth is pointed out. I will keep my reply short, to reduce the size of scope, in respects to the words that the entire universe spoke through you, which you are not culpable for speaking, according to your position.
It's my position that you truly can't
Be held responsible for your own actions…. In my opinion, is the actual point, here. This undermines rational reality. If you create a delusion that you aren't responsible for how you choose to respond to this rational universe, you have denied the validity of every word you speak, in my opinion.

"I am responsible for me". 5 words that denote a person accepts that they are culpable for their choices. This denotes maturity in thinking.

In fact, according to the DSM V, Ant-Social Personality Disorder includes a very specific trait; "refuse to take responsibility".
And I'd make the same choices as he does.
DNA, Nature and Nurture. However, this is really just smoke and mirrors to the actual point. You are suggesting that the way environment shapes a person empowers the peoples free will choices that contribute to the individuals "being" in such a way as to "shape" said person. This merely denotes culpability to environment, circumstance and other people. If you continue to go backwards with this logic of throwing culpability off of each person for existing, it ultimately points to the existence of a "Watch Maker", Who set the entire watch in motion.

The underlying argument that, "I'm not responsible for any part of the choices that I make because I didn't choose to be born", denotes that someone else made the choice that resulted in your birth. Cosmically speaking, you are (Blurring the facts that choice is free will real), while simultaneously throwing existence itself into a state of being impossible without the inception of the universe by a sentient Being capable of setting such a mechanism in motion.

There's no 'I' outside of everything that is me that can say 'Hang on, I shouldn't be doing this'. That's dualism and it's a position that has long been discounted. One that I discounted a long time before I rejected free will,

How can you "Reject" a concept, when rejecting something requires culpable free will? You couldn't state that you "Rejected" something if you are not culpable for your thoughts. You are actually shirking personal responsibility through philosophical jargon, blended with circular reasoning.

As I said...not culpable.

As I stated initially, then the words you speak, the logic you use, the ideas that you have are not your own and have zero validity per your own chosen stance. In order to be "correct", you would have to be appealing to a higher stance of truth than myself, which would have the power to proof your stance. If you are not culpable, then you have zero personal power and thusly, no power over the ability to reason and speak truth from the core of your being. In direct relation to your stance, you have zero "being", but instead, just a mimic of cosmic transfer of culpability to other's, who also cannot behold culpability to a very distinct point which requires culpability.
 
Upvote 0

Neogaia777

Old Soul
Site Supporter
Oct 10, 2011
24,688
5,556
46
Oregon
✟1,098,527.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Celibate
I realize that you took enormous time to respond to this. I also note that our dialogue reaches impasses when absolute truth is pointed out. I will keep my reply short, to reduce the size of scope, in respects to the words that the entire universe spoke through you, which you are not culpable for speaking, according to your position.

Be held responsible for your own actions…. In my opinion, is the actual point, here. This undermines rational reality. If you create a delusion that you aren't responsible for how you choose to respond to this rational universe, you have denied the validity of every word you speak, in my opinion.

"I am responsible for me". 5 words that denote a person accepts that they are culpable for their choices. This denotes maturity in thinking.

In fact, according to the DSM V, Ant-Social Personality Disorder includes a very specific trait; "refuse to take responsibility".

DNA, Nature and Nurture. However, this is really just smoke and mirrors to the actual point. You are suggesting that the way environment shapes a person empowers the peoples free will choices that contribute to the individuals "being" in such a way as to "shape" said person. This merely denotes culpability to environment, circumstance and other people. If you continue to go backwards with this logic of throwing culpability off of each person for existing, it ultimately points to the existence of a "Watch Maker", Who set the entire watch in motion.

The underlying argument that, "I'm not responsible for any part of the choices that I make because I didn't choose to be born", denotes that someone else made the choice that resulted in your birth. Cosmically speaking, you are (Blurring the facts that choice is free will real), while simultaneously throwing existence itself into a state of being impossible without the inception of the universe by a sentient Being capable of setting such a mechanism in motion.



How can you "Reject" a concept, when rejecting something requires culpable free will? You couldn't state that you "Rejected" something if you are not culpable for your thoughts. You are actually shirking personal responsibility through philosophical jargon, blended with circular reasoning.



As I stated initially, then the words you speak, the logic you use, the ideas that you have are not your own and have zero validity per your own chosen stance. In order to be "correct", you would have to be appealing to a higher stance of truth than myself, which would have the power to proof your stance. If you are not culpable, then you have zero personal power and thusly, no power over the ability to reason and speak truth from the core of your being. In direct relation to your stance, you have zero "being", but instead, just a mimic of cosmic transfer of culpability to other's, who also cannot behold culpability to a very distinct point which requires culpability.
We can only hope that God made us to be decent people in the end, etc, and chose us to be saved in or by the end, etc.

The rest of your guys mistake is in thinking we do this ourselves, etc. Which is the epitome of arrogance to me, etc.

It does not make you have to wholeheartedly rely upon God, or fall upon His mercy, etc.

God Bless.
 
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
We can only hope that God made us to be decent people in the end, etc, and chose us to be saved in or by the end, etc.

The rest of your guys mistake is in thinking we do this ourselves, etc. Which is the epitome of arrogance to me, etc.

It does not make you have to wholeheartedly rely upon God, or fall upon His mercy, etc.

God Bless.
My Brother in Jesus Christ, Neogaia772! Long time no direct speak! I know we see this differently.

I will simply say this. Because I know I'm culpable for every mistake that I make, I am in perpetual surrender to Jesus Christ, because He alone is Good.

I understand your perspective on this and appreciate your sharing it.

- Grip
 
Upvote 0

Neogaia777

Old Soul
Site Supporter
Oct 10, 2011
24,688
5,556
46
Oregon
✟1,098,527.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Celibate
My Brother in Jesus Christ, Neogaia772! Long time no direct speak! I know we see this differently.

I will simply say this. Because I know I'm culpable for every mistake that I make, I am in perpetual surrender to Jesus Christ, because He alone is Good.

I understand your perspective on this and appreciate your sharing it.

- Grip
You probably have to keep surrendering though, and I'm just hoping you won't have to continually always be doing that one day continually, but can maybe one day be truly free, etc.

And that can one day only really truly start by only finally realizing your not in control of everything, etc. And that, in fact, your not in control of anything, etc. That's when true surrender starts, and you do not have to keep doing it continually, etc.

But, yeah, good to see you again too my friend, etc.

I hope you are doing well in general generally, etc.

God Bless.
 
  • Friendly
Reactions: Grip Docility
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
You probably have to keep surrendering though, and I'm just hoping you won't have to continually always be doing that one day continually, but can maybe one day be truly free, etc.

And that can one day only really truly start by only finally realizing your not in control of everything, etc. And that, in fact, your not in control of anything, etc. That's when true surrender starts, and you do not have to keep doing it continually, etc.

But, yeah, good to see you again too my friend, etc.

I hope you are doing well in general generally, etc.

God Bless.
I find freedom in surrender to Jesus, my Loving Brother in Him.

God Bless.
 
  • Friendly
Reactions: Neogaia777
Upvote 0

Neogaia777

Old Soul
Site Supporter
Oct 10, 2011
24,688
5,556
46
Oregon
✟1,098,527.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Celibate
I find freedom in surrender to Jesus, my Loving Brother in Him.

God Bless.
Just try to not let it be false humility, ok.

The true gets honored by God, but the false does not, ok.

Truly take care, ok Grip.

God Bless.
 
  • Friendly
Reactions: Grip Docility
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
Just try to not let it be false humility, ok.

The true gets honored by God, but the false does not, ok.

Truly take care, ok Grip.

God Bless.
False Humility? I'm the most humble person, only bested by Moses and Jesus in Humility. How could that be false humility? What is false humility? :p

Tongue in cheek
 
  • Friendly
Reactions: Neogaia777
Upvote 0

Neogaia777

Old Soul
Site Supporter
Oct 10, 2011
24,688
5,556
46
Oregon
✟1,098,527.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Celibate
False Humility? I'm the most humble person, only bested by Moses and Jesus in Humility. How could that be false humility? What is false humility? :p

Tongue in cheek
God Bless You Grip.

Take Care.
 
  • Love
Reactions: Grip Docility
Upvote 0

childeye 2

Well-Known Member
Aug 18, 2018
5,869
3,304
67
Denver CO
✟239,560.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I will simply say this. Because I know I'm culpable for every mistake that I make, I am in perpetual surrender to Jesus Christ, because He alone is Good.
Mark 10:18
18 And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God.
 
  • Love
Reactions: Grip Docility
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
Mark 10:18
18 And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God.
AMEN! Those are truly the words of the GOOD Shepherd!
 
Upvote 0

childeye 2

Well-Known Member
Aug 18, 2018
5,869
3,304
67
Denver CO
✟239,560.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
AMEN! Those are truly the words of the GOOD Shepherd!
I felt I should point out this could be seen as a mistake--> Grip Docility said: I will simply say this. Because I know I'm culpable for every mistake that I make, I am in perpetual surrender to Jesus Christ, because He alone is Good.

It could be taken to mean you're referring to Jesus, not God.
 
Last edited:
  • Agree
Reactions: Grip Docility
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 felt I should point out this could be seen as a mistake--> Grip Docility said: I will simply say this. Because I know I'm culpable for every mistake that I make, I am in perpetual surrender to Jesus Christ, because He alone is Good.

It could be taken to mean you're referring to Jesus, not God.
Because I know that you and I both know Who He is, I am at peace.
 
  • Like
Reactions: childeye 2
Upvote 0

FrumiousBandersnatch

Well-Known Member
Mar 20, 2009
15,405
8,143
✟349,282.00
Faith
Atheist
We all make choices. For reasons that are pre determined.
If our choices were not pre-determined in some way, there would be no causal reason for them, so they'd be truly random. Would they still count as choices? Not IMO, but it doesn't really matter.
 
Upvote 0

FrumiousBandersnatch

Well-Known Member
Mar 20, 2009
15,405
8,143
✟349,282.00
Faith
Atheist
It's my position that you truly can't be personally held to blame, or that you can be held culpable for an action because the type of person you are. Your desires, your characteristics, your choices are determined by events out of your control. And that if someone breaks into my house and steals my goods, if I had the exact dna, the exact upbringing, the exact education, the exact peer pressure etc etc then I wouldn't be me - I'd be him. And I'd make the same choices as he does. There's no 'I' outside of everything that is me that can say 'Hang on, I shouldn't be doing this'. That's dualism and it's a position that has long been discounted. One that I discounted a long time before I rejected free will, but is a position that ultimately leads to that rejection.

I'm not sure what you mean by this. I'm not ignoring blame. I'm saying that it isn't applicable.
Yes, I agree. Blame follows from culpability which follows from free will. They are mistaken concepts that arise out of our ignorance of the determinants of our behaviour. They've stuck around because they're part of an intuitively and emotionally satisfying, and somewhat effective framework of societal control. We can be held responsible as physical agents, but whether we are morally responsible agents is determined by influences we ultimately have no control over.

The idea of moral responsibility is semantically ambiguous - if you do not act in a morally responsible way, you are, strictly speaking, not a morally responsible person, but you are considered to be morally responsible for your actions - unless you are judged not be morally responsible for your actions... ;-)

I'm very tempted to say that people who can't change should be kept out of society. We need to be protected from them even though they are not, in my view, culpable. Just as if your car has faulty brakes - you can't 'blame' the car, but you keep it in the garage so people are safe. Can you fix it? Then it can be used on the roads again.
Yes, although there's no simple way to tell who can be changed and who cannot (it's a behavioural analogy to the Halting Problem!). I would suggest that only a small percentage of people cannot be humanely changed to an acceptable level of conformity with basic moral norms, given sufficient resources and time. The difficulty is in assessing the necessary resources & time and judging when success has been achieved.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Bradskii
Upvote 0

FrumiousBandersnatch

Well-Known Member
Mar 20, 2009
15,405
8,143
✟349,282.00
Faith
Atheist
How can you "Reject" a concept, when rejecting something requires culpable free will? You couldn't state that you "Rejected" something if you are not culpable for your thoughts. You are actually shirking personal responsibility through philosophical jargon, blended with circular reasoning.
Rejecting a concept only requires that you have reasoned that it is false, or that you dislike it (feel or intuit that it is false), or some mixture of the two. Neither reason nor feeling requires free will, culpable or otherwise.
 
Upvote 0