Free Will

[elman]

How so? It confirms nothing but that you did it. You could e.g. have been programmed to vote that way. Mere action makes no case for free will.

It may not confirm it for you but I did not consult any preprogamming. Are you saying God preprogramed me or who if not God?

 

[quatona]

It may not confirm it for you but I did not consult any preprogamming. Are you saying God preprogramed me or who if not God?

You already know what I really think determines your actions and thoughts. We have talked about it often enough.
But if it helps, let´s assume godditit. Or, you are a robot preprogrammed by extraterrestials.

 

[Red530]

"Yes I believe in free will, because I believe in the supernatural."

I only chose this because I believe in both free will and the supernatural, but there's no way in which they intertwine.

There is no denying free will, since it simply means that we have the ability to make our own choices; anyone who's denying that it exists is quite blind.

 

[quatona]

There is no denying free will, since it simply means that we have the ability to make our own choices; anyone who's denying that it exists is quite blind.

Now, that´s a great argument.

 

[Red530]

Thank you; it's great to know that someone has sense.

 

[quatona]

Thank you; it's great to know that someone has sense.

Yeah, convincing me is very easy. Just call me blind, and I believe you everything you say. I guess I am hardwired that way. Few have tried this strategy, but those who did were gratified with great success.

 

[Opethian]

No, in context, free will is having some inpact on what is happening around you. I does not mean you are free from all outside influences. You have the free will to not believe in free will if you wish.

The free will we are discussing in this thread was defined in my OP. If you want to debate this free will you need to stick with that definition, as "having some impact on what is happening around you" is definitely not a workable definition for free will, since all matter, and even energy would have free will in that case (for example a rock has an impact on other rocks if it rolls down a hill, this would mean it has free will according to your definition). I think we can all agree that the free will we are talking about is limited to organisms with a certain form of consciousness, and if taken very narrowly, only humans.

Also, the main point I'm arguing is that without belief in the supernatural, belief in free will as defined in the OP, is irrational. Since you believe in the supernatural, this forms no problem for you, unless you want to assert that even without the supernatural, free will is unquestionable.

"Yes I believe in free will, because I believe in the supernatural."

I only chose this because I believe in both free will and the supernatural, but there's no way in which they intertwine.

There is no denying free will, since it simply means that we have the ability to make our own choices; anyone who's denying that it exists is quite blind.

Again, I defined free will in my OP. You seem to be talking about a differently defined free will here, "the ability to make 'our own' choices". In that case, does a rock that falls down a specific path down a hill, make a choice? The rock could have fallen down different paths, it could have even 'fallen up', when we look at all possibilities. The laws of the universe we live in and the circumstances the rock was in determined how it would fall. From our point of perception, before the rock fell, we couldn't know what was going to happen. So the rock had a choice, free will, as you defined it. This was simply a lack of data on our behalf. Because gravity is an attractive force, the rock could not 'fall up'. Because of the characteristics of the force that caused it to start its fall, characteristics of the surface of the hill and of the rock, and a myriad of other conditions, the rock fell the way it did. In the same way, we perceive choices in our minds. But if we do not believe in the supernatural, we cannot deny the fact that we are made of matter, and our thoughts are the result of processes in this matter. Therefore, in the same way the rock fell down a specific path, our thoughts arose because of material and energetical processes, and underwent an evolution, because of change of this matter and energy, that could be predicted if we knew enough about the characteristics of our brain, the environment, etc... The choice is perceived, but the end product is determined (at a certain schale), if unlimited information is known.
If you assert that there is no denying this free will (even for those that do not believe in the supernatural), and that there is no way in which the supernatural intertwines with free will, you will need to back that up, or counter the arguments I made before, during my discussion with Apollonian. Because no matter how self-evident it seems to you, it is far from a rational standpoint to assume free will to exist as I defined it, without belief in the supernatural, which is in itself irrational.

 

[Red530]

I'm applying this to humans, if you want me to be more specific.

 

[RealSorceror]

Other.

I believe in limited free-will and in the supernatural, but I do not believe these things are related in any way. I say limited free-will, because I know our decisions are heavily influenced by our circumstances.

 

[elman]

You already know what I really think determines your actions and thoughts. We have talked about it often enough.
But if it helps, let´s assume godditit. Or, you are a robot preprogrammed by extraterrestials.

I don't think God or extraterrestials preprogramed us nor do I thind we are preprogamed. I see no reason to believe that, but as you say we have been all around that turkey before.

 

[elman]

The free will we are discussing in this thread was defined in my OP. If you want to debate this free will you need to stick with that definition, as "having some impact on what is happening around you" is definitely not a workable definition for free will, since all matter, and even energy would have free will in that case (for example a rock has an impact on other rocks if it rolls down a hill, this would mean it has free will according to your definition). I think we can all agree that the free will we are talking about is limited to organisms with a certain form of consciousness, and if taken very narrowly, only humans.

Yes I am talking about a thinking person with a brain having some impact on what is happening around us by the use of that brain and through making decisions.

Also, the main point I'm arguing is that without belief in the supernatural, belief in free will as defined in the OP, is irrational. Since you believe in the supernatural, this forms no problem for you, unless you want to assert that even without the supernatural, free will is unquestionable.

I would not say unquestionable but certainly the more rational approach would be to assume that my observations of cause and effect from my decisions would be the way things are weather or not God exists. I see no rational reason to believe I am unable to make my own choices and could have made them different if I had chosen to do so.

 

[quatona]

I don't think God or extraterrestials preprogramed us nor do I thind we are preprogamed. I see no reason to believe that, but as you say we have been all around that turkey before.

Except that apparently you still do not understand that I do not think we are preprogrammed by some entity or force.

 

[bob135]

D) No I don't believe in free will, and I don't believe in the supernatural.

I don't believe in the supernatural because supernatural claims aren't testable. As soon as they become testable, they become natural. Human perception is limited to the natural world.

With free will, it seems you can pick from a fairly large set of assumptions and still negate free will. If human actions are strictly caused, two identical people perform the same actions, so you don't have free will as defined in the OP. However, the alternative is no better. If you actions are to some extent uncaused, they are to some extent random. Random will isn't free will either.

 

[elman]

Except that apparently you still do not understand that I do not think we are preprogrammed by some entity or force.

No just preprogramed by nature or genetics or environment?

 

[elman]

D) No I don't believe in free will, and I don't believe in the supernatural.

I don't believe in the supernatural because supernatural claims aren't testable. As soon as they become testable, they become natural. Human perception is limited to the natural world.

With free will, it seems you can pick from a fairly large set of assumptions and still negate free will. If human actions are strictly caused, two identical people perform the same actions, so you don't have free will as defined in the OP. However, the alternative is no better. If you actions are to some extent uncaused, they are to some extent random. Random will isn't free will either.

The question is what are the causes? If one of the causes is me, I have free will. It is not about being random.

 

[quatona]

No just preprogramed by nature or genetics or environment?

Determined by the sum of all these things and more.

 

[elman]

Determined by the sum of all these things and more.

Am I one of the more and if not what is the more?

 

[quatona]

Am I one of the more and if not what is the more?

The "more" is a countless number of influences. "You" is too unspecific a term for being such a determining factor. Your post, for examples, in conjunction with a lot of other element is likely to co-determine some of my actions, and vice versa.

 

[elman]

The "more" is a countless number of influences. "You" is too unspecific a term for being such a determining factor. Your post, for examples, in conjunction with a lot of other element is likely to co-determine some of my actions, and vice versa.

Interesting. My choices may be forcing your actions, but not my own. I don't disagree that I am having an influence on your actions, but I don't think mine are totally controled by anyone other than me and I am not saying I totally control my actions, but I am saying I have an effect on them. Influences yes, totally controled no. "Me" is fairly specific and I see no reason why it is not specific enought to be a determining factor in my decisions.

 

[The-Doctor]

There are various schools of thought on this. I have heard of something called "The illusion of free will" The suggestion is that there really is no free will as everything you do is predetermined however the illusion is that you think that every decision you make is your own howver in reality you are simply following the path already determined for you, you just don't know it!

I'm not saying I agree with this its just an alternative point of view.