Free will or not?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
13-02-2015, 07:44 AM (This post was last modified: 13-02-2015 08:35 AM by H4ym4n.)
RE: Free will or not?
(12-02-2015 06:57 AM)H4ym4n Wrote:  
(12-02-2015 05:38 AM)Typho2k Wrote:  
To me, not-true free will would be if God steered me in one direction and I couldn't do otherwise.

Did yahweh give you undeniable proof it exists?

Or are you believing in it just in case?


If it gave you undeniable proof of its existence then why is it choosing to harden my heart? Something documented that it has done on numerous occasions in the past?





Where'd ya go Typho2k?




Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-02-2015, 08:32 AM (This post was last modified: 13-02-2015 08:36 AM by Free.)
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.

But you just made my point.

Without free will- which is the ability to chose whether or not we perform certain actions- then we are compelled to perform any and all actions without any ability to control them.

It will not matter what laws or social norms are in place; a criminal is still predestined to commit a crime, and without free will he would have no choice in the matter.

That is why that- if free will does not exist- then no one can not be held responsible for their actions. If we cannot control our own destiny, then something else is controlling it. And if something else is controlling our destiny, then we cannot be held responsible for what that "something else" compels us to do.

Without free will we become puppets of "something else."

Sure we have laws in place for criminals, but those current laws dictate that a criminal commits crimes by his own free will, and if free will doesn't exist, all the laws are wrong.

Having free will has absolutely nothing to do with any god. It's the result of a random, infinite, and eternal universe, as opposed to a "first cause" effect such as a god, Big Bang, etc.

Having problems with your computer? Visit our Free Tech Support thread for help!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-02-2015, 08:34 AM
RE: Free will or not?
.....
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-02-2015, 08:36 AM
RE: Free will or not?
(13-02-2015 08:32 AM)Free Wrote:  if free will doesn't exist, all the laws are wrong.

How do you figure that? We still have to deal with people who have deviated in a way that harms society, whether they did so on the basis of free will or not.

It's about preservation of the species, not good or evil or revenge or punishment or anything like that.

[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, 08:37 AM
RE: Free will or not?
Robbie, you got me thinking on this again and whether or not omniscience can exist if omnipotence does.

Omnipotence means all power, without limits; but, does this include all knowledge?

Do you have all knowledge all the time if you're all powerful? I'm going to say "no".

All knowledge consists of everything that can and has happened for all infinity... this includes all infinite routes of any minute change in anything (Middle Knowledge).

You have access to infinite knowledge if you're omnipotent, but it's not part of your being. If you're omniscient, it's part of your being, and you know everything all the time.

As paradoxical as it may be, I would say the only limits to omnipotence is the free will that is activated by that infinite power. If he wanted to know the answer, he would have the choice to know; however, it's not forced upon him like infinite knowledge is.

[Image: dog-shaking.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-02-2015, 08:41 AM
RE: Free will or not?
(13-02-2015 08:37 AM)kingschosen Wrote:  Robbie, you got me thinking on this again and whether or not omniscience can exist if omnipotence does.

Omnipotence means all power, without limits; but, does this include all knowledge?

Do you have all knowledge all the time if you're all powerful? I'm going to say "no".

All knowledge consists of everything that can and has happened for all infinity... this includes all infinite routes of any minute change in anything (Middle Knowledge).

You have access to infinite knowledge if you're omnipotent, but it's not part of your being. If you're omniscient, it's part of your being, and you know everything all the time.

As paradoxical as it may be, I would say the only limits to omnipotence is the free will that is activated by that infinite power. If he wanted to know the answer, he would have the choice to know; however, it's not forced upon him like infinite knowledge is.

So, now he has an encyclopedia type thing and hence he doesn't have to know shit but can find out?

[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
13-02-2015, 08:42 AM
RE: Free will or not?
(13-02-2015 08:36 AM)Dom Wrote:  
(13-02-2015 08:32 AM)Free Wrote:  if free will doesn't exist, all the laws are wrong.

How do you figure that? We still have to deal with people who have deviated in a way that harms society, whether they did so on the basis of free will or not.

It's about preservation of the species, not good or evil or revenge or punishment or anything like that.

The laws are wrong because they are based upon a criminal having the "free will" to commit the crime. They would need to be changed to make the criminal "not responsible" if he doesn't have free will.

It doesn't mean we do not do something with the criminal, such as put him away from society. What it means is that we could not "punish" a criminal for something he has no control over. Instead, we may consider the criminal as being "defective," and therefore a threat to society.

But we could not hold anyone who commits a crime as being responsible.

Having problems with your computer? Visit our Free Tech Support thread for help!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-02-2015, 08:45 AM
RE: Free will or not?
(13-02-2015 08:42 AM)Free Wrote:  
(13-02-2015 08:36 AM)Dom Wrote:  How do you figure that? We still have to deal with people who have deviated in a way that harms society, whether they did so on the basis of free will or not.

It's about preservation of the species, not good or evil or revenge or punishment or anything like that.

The laws are wrong because they are based upon a criminal having the "free will" to commit the crime. They would need to be changed to make the criminal "not responsible" if he doesn't have free will.

It doesn't mean we do not do something with the criminal, such as put him away from society. What it means is that we could not "punish" a criminal for something he has no control over. Instead, we may consider the criminal as being "defective," and therefore a threat to society.

But we could not hold anyone who commits a crime as being responsible.

That's exactly right. But it's just a thought exercise. The reality is that we have to separate criminals from the opportunity to act out criminal inclinations. The reality doesn't change.

[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
13-02-2015, 08:48 AM
RE: Free will or not?
(13-02-2015 08:45 AM)Dom Wrote:  
(13-02-2015 08:42 AM)Free Wrote:  The laws are wrong because they are based upon a criminal having the "free will" to commit the crime. They would need to be changed to make the criminal "not responsible" if he doesn't have free will.

It doesn't mean we do not do something with the criminal, such as put him away from society. What it means is that we could not "punish" a criminal for something he has no control over. Instead, we may consider the criminal as being "defective," and therefore a threat to society.

But we could not hold anyone who commits a crime as being responsible.

That's exactly right. But it's just a thought exercise. The reality is that we have to separate criminals from the opportunity to act out criminal inclinations. The reality doesn't change.

That is true; the reality of the threat of a criminal does not change. But the current system of "justice" would be obliterated.

Having problems with your computer? Visit our Free Tech Support thread for help!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-02-2015, 08:55 AM
RE: Free will or not?
(13-02-2015 08:48 AM)Free Wrote:  
(13-02-2015 08:45 AM)Dom Wrote:  That's exactly right. But it's just a thought exercise. The reality is that we have to separate criminals from the opportunity to act out criminal inclinations. The reality doesn't change.

That is true; the reality of the threat of a criminal does not change. But the current system of "justice" would be obliterated.

No, just how we think about it would change. The reality and results would not be affected at all. We can trash a lot of the negative emotions - retribution, revenge, punishment, blame etc etc. The need to apprehend the criminal and remove him from society continues, and the severity of the danger the person poses will still need to dictate the type of action we need to take. The system works ok, although of course we all have suggestions of how to do it better.

[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
[+] 2 users Like Dom's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: