The free will fallacy
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
31-07-2017, 05:56 AM
RE: The free will fallacy
The Quran seems to point a lot more directly towards there being no free will at all in my estimation. But it also sometimes treats "disbelievers" as if they are choosing to be the way they are.

I have a website here which discusses the issues and terminology surrounding religion and atheism. It's hopefully user friendly to all.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Robvalue's post
31-07-2017, 06:05 AM (This post was last modified: 31-07-2017 06:09 AM by Thoreauvian.)
RE: The free will fallacy
(31-07-2017 05:56 AM)Robvalue Wrote:  The Quran seems to point a lot more directly towards there being no free will at all in my estimation. But it also sometimes treats "disbelievers" as if they are choosing to be the way they are.

Yeah, it's the "God is so obvious you must be blind" argument. Unfortunately for the argument, with science we learned that God was not so obvious after all.

Here are a few quotes from the Qur'an:

[002:007] Allah has sealed off their heart and their hearing. A blindfold blocks their sight. There is the gravest (most awful) torment for them!

[002:018] They are deaf, dumb and blind. They will not return.

[006:104] Proof has indeed come to you from your Lord. Now whoever cares to see shall do so for his own good, and whoever opts to stay blind does so to his own detriment.

[047:023] Such are the men whom God has cursed for He has made them deaf and blinded their sight.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Thoreauvian's post
31-07-2017, 09:06 AM
RE: The free will fallacy
Believers often feel they need both sides of the contradiction. They can't bear the idea that the thing they worship isn't maximally knowing; yet they need us to have some sort of genuine unpredictable choice to move the blame onto us for the horrible things we get done to us if we choose wrong.

Even then, it still isn't enough, because we end up with things like eternal punishment for finite crimes. Really, you give God enough rope and he will hang himself.

I have a website here which discusses the issues and terminology surrounding religion and atheism. It's hopefully user friendly to all.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Robvalue's post
31-07-2017, 10:02 AM (This post was last modified: 31-07-2017 10:09 AM by nosferatu323.)
RE: The free will fallacy
(31-07-2017 05:46 AM)Thoreauvian Wrote:  
(31-07-2017 01:35 AM)Cheerful Charlie Wrote:  Romans 11, why didn't the Jews believe Jesus was the messiah? Because God hardened their hearts not to believe.

The Qur'an is filled with that kind of thinking too, if I remember correctly.

The Qur'an also supports the idea of free will:

And when they commit an immorality, they say, "We found our fathers doing it, and Allah has ordered us to do it." Say, "Indeed, Allah does not order immorality. Do you say about Allah that which you do not know?" (7:28)

That is for what your hands have put forth [of evil] and because Allah is not ever unjust to His servants." (8:51)

"That is for what your hands have put forth and because Allah is not ever unjust to [His] servants." (22:10)

Whoever does righteousness - it is for his [own] soul; and whoever does evil [does so] against it. And your Lord is not ever unjust to [His] servants. (41:46)

So whoever does an atom's weight of good will see it, (99:7) And whoever does an atom's weight of evil will see it. (99:8)

And say, "The truth is from your Lord, so whoever wills - let him believe; and whoever wills - let him disbelieve." (18:29)

I think a pantheistic view is consistent with both views. Humans go astray by their own will and also the will of God, the two are not necessarily separate, the same goes for salvation.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes nosferatu323's post
31-07-2017, 10:20 AM (This post was last modified: 31-07-2017 11:48 AM by Thoreauvian.)
RE: The free will fallacy
(31-07-2017 10:02 AM)nosferatu323 Wrote:  I think a pantheistic view is consistent with both views. Humans go astray by their own will and also the will of God, the two are not necessarily separate, the same goes for salvation.

You (and Robvalue) are correct that the Qur'an has it both ways.

You are also correct that this is not such a problem for a pantheistic view of God. In fact, Sufi mystics interpret their Islamic heritage pretty much that way.

However, there are other problems with pantheism. If we are all parts of God, then why can't we perceive ourselves as such? Where is the knowledge and power to which we should have access? Where are the mystics who can demonstrate their correct perceptions of the world? In other words, pantheism makes a nice story but you must also demonstrate it is true in some fact-based manner.

Science strongly upholds the idea that we are, in fact, all separate, and that evolution works through life-and-death competition. We can't read other people's minds. We don't have access to extra-sensory knowledge. We are often powerless and fallible. And so on. Pantheism has a long way to go to explain the world we actually see.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Thoreauvian's post
31-07-2017, 11:22 AM (This post was last modified: 31-07-2017 11:27 AM by nosferatu323.)
RE: The free will fallacy
(31-07-2017 10:20 AM)Thoreauvian Wrote:  
(31-07-2017 10:02 AM)nosferatu323 Wrote:  I think a pantheistic view is consistent with both views. Humans go astray by their own will and also the will of God, the two are not necessarily separate, the same goes for salvation.

You (and Robvaule) are correct that the Qur'an has it both ways.

You are also correct that this is not such a problem for a pantheistic view of God. In fact, Sufi mystics interpret their Islamic heritage pretty much that way.

However, there are other problems with pantheism. If we are all parts of God, then why can't we perceive ourselves as such? Where is the knowledge and power to which we should have access? Where are the mystics who can demonstrate their correct perceptions of the world? In other words, pantheism makes a nice story but you must also demonstrate it is true in some fact-based manner.

Science strongly upholds the idea that we are, in fact, all separate, and that evolution works through life-and-death competition. We can't read other people's minds. We don't have access to extra-sensory knowledge. We are often powerless and fallible. And so on. Pantheism has a long way to go to explain the world we actually see.

Quote: If we are all parts of God, then why can't we perceive ourselves as such?
In this view, all are perceiving the truth. Ignorance prevents them to realize what they perceive.

Quote:Where is the knowledge and power to which we should have access?
In this view, all have which that is needed. There is nothing to access.

Quote:Where are the mystics who can demonstrate their correct perceptions of the world?
What do you mean where are they? There are many in India for example.

Quote:Science strongly upholds the idea that we are, in fact, all separate, and that evolution works through life-and-death competition.
I don't think so, more than anything else, science teaches us that everything is governed by laws of nature. The multiplicity in universe is merely an abstraction to help us model the universe. According to the law of mass-energy equivalence, the universe is just pure energy manifesting it self in infinitely many forms this is very similar to the pantheistic idea, a God which manifests itself in infinitely many forms.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-07-2017, 11:53 AM (This post was last modified: 31-07-2017 11:57 AM by Thoreauvian.)
RE: The free will fallacy
(31-07-2017 11:22 AM)nosferatu323 Wrote:  
(31-07-2017 10:20 AM)Thoreauvian Wrote:  Science strongly upholds the idea that we are, in fact, all separate, and that evolution works through life-and-death competition.
I don't think so, more than anything else, science teaches us that everything is governed by laws of nature. The multiplicity in universe is merely an abstraction to help us model the universe. According to the law of mass-energy equivalence, the universe is just pure energy manifesting it self in infinitely many forms this is very similar to the pantheistic idea, a God which manifests itself in infinitely many forms.

While it is certainly true that science shows us how everything is connected, that is far from saying everything is connected through an overarching consciousness. Consciousness is an essential attribute of a God. Unless you can demonstrate that connecting consciousness, you may as well be a materialist.

When consciousness fell out of my own God-concept is when I abandoned it. It was no longer recognizably a God-concept at all.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-07-2017, 12:02 PM
RE: The free will fallacy
(31-07-2017 11:53 AM)Thoreauvian Wrote:  When consciousness fell out of my own God-concept is when I abandoned it. It was no longer recognizably a God-concept at all.
What is consciousness? It seems we cannot define it yet, maybe when we can finally define it, we will figure out about the whole consciousness thing. But why would someone be so obsessed about something that he cannot define?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-07-2017, 02:07 PM
RE: The free will fallacy
Pantheism seems to me to be pointless tautologies at best and totally unsubstantiated woo at worst.

How can salvation apply? What are we being saved from, ourselves? Salvation already makes little sense in regular theology.

I have a website here which discusses the issues and terminology surrounding religion and atheism. It's hopefully user friendly to all.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Robvalue's post
31-07-2017, 03:02 PM (This post was last modified: 31-07-2017 03:13 PM by Thoreauvian.)
RE: The free will fallacy
(31-07-2017 12:02 PM)nosferatu323 Wrote:  What is consciousness? It seems we cannot define it yet, maybe when we can finally define it, we will figure out about the whole consciousness thing. But why would someone be so obsessed about something that he cannot define?

Wow, that's quite a dodge.

Consciousness is what makes me a being rather than a mere object. God has to be a being, as is implied by his attributes (seeing, hearing, knowing, acting willfully, etc.).

Is that a good-enough definition for you?

Okay, now you define "God."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: