Free will or not?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
12-02-2015, 01:37 PM
RE: Free will or not?
Compatiblists see no problem with free will that has nothing to do with metaphysics.

I'm kind of in that area, generally. Today though, more than usual perhaps, I'm bent toward a deterministic mind frame.

Call me fickle. Shy

A new type of thinking is essential if mankind is to survive and move to higher levels. ~ Albert Einstein
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-02-2015, 02:09 PM
RE: Free will or not?
To clarify a point about free will in conjunction with omniscience and omnipotence:

1: Free will CAN coexist with an omniscient being. God can be all knowing and know what someone is going to do/choose to do, but that doesn't negate their free will. God knows what that person is going to do; thus, adjusts accordingly - ie - is subjected by free will because He has to bend to it.

2: Free will CAN coexist with an omnipotent being. God can be all powerful but not all knowing; therefore, does not know the choices you will make. However, being all powerful, your choices are of non-consequence to Him because of His all power and your free will does not affect His plan. You have your free will, but He has the power to override it.

3: Free will CANNOT coexist with both an omnipotent and an omniscient being. Being solely all powerful negates being solely all knowing's only impotence and vice versa. With both of them combined, free will is eliminated. God would know all and control all. For free will to exist, it would have to subjugate God - ie - God would have to give up His omnipotence to allow free will to exist. Even if God was to allow free will to exist, He would then be giving up His omnipotence.

The fact that Christians can believe in an O3 God and still claim free will exists is mind boggling. It's not, in any sense, logical... remotely or coherently logical.

[Image: dog-shaking.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like kingschosen's post
12-02-2015, 02:40 PM
RE: Free will or not?
How can something be omnipotent and not omniscient? It would seem that not being able to see the future would be an explicit limit to power. Unmarried bachelors and square circles aside, it would seem that omniscience would be an necessary subset in omnipotence. Saying otherwise would be akin to saying that something can be omnipotent but it can't create things.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes RobbyPants's post
12-02-2015, 03:57 PM
RE: Free will or not?
And best of all, without free will...
We can safely say that all the bad things are
god's plan <3
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-02-2015, 04:25 PM
RE: Free will or not?
(12-02-2015 03:57 PM)Typho2k Wrote:  And best of all, without free will...
We can safely say that all the bad things are
god's plan <3

It blatantly says this in the Bible.

[Image: dog-shaking.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-02-2015, 04:27 PM
RE: Free will or not?
(12-02-2015 02:40 PM)RobbyPants Wrote:  How can something be omnipotent and not omniscient? It would seem that not being able to see the future would be an explicit limit to power. Unmarried bachelors and square circles aside, it would seem that omniscience would be an necessary subset in omnipotence. Saying otherwise would be akin to saying that something can be omnipotent but it can't create things.

Infinite power doesn't mean infinite knowledge.

It's a stretch... I admit. But, it's plausible... it's certainly not a paradox like being O3 with free will.

[Image: dog-shaking.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-02-2015, 11:03 PM
RE: Free will or not?
(12-02-2015 11:49 AM)Free Wrote:  
(12-02-2015 11:31 AM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  I don't believe in free will, personally I'm convinced it's a myth.

god or the lack thereof, hasn't a thing to do with it.

If we don't have free will, then all convicts such as murderers, child molesters, etc are not guilty because they had no control over their actions.

And I have a big problem with that.

Why? It frees all of us from judjmentalism. We still condemn the action as harmful, and separate the dangerous by imprisoning them if necessary. But recognizing that people's actions are a product of their brains and environment allows us to be sympathetic and forgiving to all.

We have so much trouble escaping the notion of duality. When we judge someone, we are really judging their genes and nurture.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like freetoreason's post
12-02-2015, 11:53 PM
RE: Free will or not?
(12-02-2015 11:49 AM)Free Wrote:  
(12-02-2015 11:31 AM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  I don't believe in free will, personally I'm convinced it's a myth.

god or the lack thereof, hasn't a thing to do with it.

If we don't have free will, then all convicts such as murderers, child molesters, etc are not guilty because they had no control over their actions.

And I have a big problem with that.

Where do you get that?

We have thousands upon thousands years of evolution that honestly determine many of our actions. Taste preference, and mood dictate what we eat or don't eat. People have been hardwired to have certain reactions. Our ability to empathize has developed as we learned that there was safety in numbers. We began to care about those around us, also as diets improved people began to live longer.

Free will is the story people are sold so they can feel better about good or bad. A sociopath really can't control their actions. They are driven by compulsion to act. We are all driven by certain compulsions.

Even sexual urges are controlled by hormones. Lose those hormones and the urge is subdued.

We are motivated and often constrained by so many things, our gender, laws that are imposed on us -- even when we blow off a law. Your mind clicks through your options and decides. Social norms of what's acceptable.


But as if to knock me down, reality came around
And without so much as a mere touch, cut me into little pieces

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like Momsurroundedbyboys's post
13-02-2015, 05:33 AM (This post was last modified: 13-02-2015 05:40 AM by Dom.)
RE: Free will or not?
(12-02-2015 11:53 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  
(12-02-2015 11:49 AM)Free Wrote:  If we don't have free will, then all convicts such as murderers, child molesters, etc are not guilty because they had no control over their actions.

And I have a big problem with that.

Where do you get that?

We have thousands upon thousands years of evolution that honestly determine many of our actions. Taste preference, and mood dictate what we eat or don't eat. People have been hardwired to have certain reactions. Our ability to empathize has developed as we learned that there was safety in numbers. We began to care about those around us, also as diets improved people began to live longer.

Free will is the story people are sold so they can feel better about good or bad. A sociopath really can't control their actions. They are driven by compulsion to act. We are all driven by certain compulsions.

Even sexual urges are controlled by hormones. Lose those hormones and the urge is subdued.

We are motivated and often constrained by so many things, our gender, laws that are imposed on us -- even when we blow off a law. Your mind clicks through your options and decides. Social norms of what's acceptable.

I am totally with moms here. Absolutely correct. There is no free will and there is no evil, either. Some people's brains have deviations from the norm that allow for actions that society abhors. It's not their fault, it's evolution at work trying out options. We try to prevent such actions, making the deviation a failure. Otherwise humans would soon all be displaying these deviations and kill each other off even more than they do already. And there you have your religious explanation of good and evil.

For many, many things the sentence "I was born that way" applies. No one chooses to be an addict, gay, a murderer - they just find themselves driven to act that way. There are physical reasons (albeit we don't know shit yet in that area of knowledge), there is also the built-in software we are born with (the communal knowledge of our ancestors or "instincts"), and there is what our brains concluded during our life time. Between all of that, there is no free will. Just the computer that is our brain clicking away making decisions based on who we are.

While you may not have free will, you are still absolutely unique. And that uniqueness is used as proof of free will a lot. Uniqueness does not equal free will, and evolutionary brain deviations do not constitute "evil".

Who is god? What fits that concept? Evolution is god. Evolution determines and micro manages the characteristics of each individual animal. Each of us contributes to the future in that way, each of us contributes to the evolution of all living things.( And there is your purpose of life.) If we actually had free will, it would fuck with evolution. That's not gonna happen, evolution rules.

[Image: dobie.png]Science is the process we've designed to be responsible for generating our best guess as to what the fuck is going on. Girly Man
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Dom's post
13-02-2015, 06:59 AM
RE: Free will or not?
(12-02-2015 04:27 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  Infinite power doesn't mean infinite knowledge.

It's a stretch... I admit. But, it's plausible... it's certainly not a paradox like being O3 with free will.

I suppose without a definition of "power", we could end up just talking past each other.

I suppose you could also define it as "infinite power withing a particular framework". So, it could be unlimited power in the confines of
  • not seeing the future.
  • logic.
  • being bound to a lamp and able to give wishes to others with three exceptions.
It seems kind of arbitrary to me, but there'd be nothing stopping one from defining it that way. It would just be important to lay that out at the beginning of the discussion. I remember going back and forth with two people for a while before I realized that they meant "really really powerful with unstated, implicit limitations" when they said "omnipotent". So, I agreed that under their definition what they said was correct and under mine, what I said was correct. They refused to capitulate and said my definition of "can do anything" was stupid.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: