Free Will Can't Be Proved
Moderator: Moderators
Free Will Can't Be Proved
Post #1What is the point in discussing free will within the confines of religious debate? Neither free will nor determinism can be demonstrated as accurate viewpoints, so why bring either up as if it is a point in favor of your position? Doesn't it just become a separate debate that detracts from the discussion?
Re: Free Will Can't Be Proved
Post #141It is nonsensical to say that X cannot be proven, if you cannot even explain what you mean by X. That is a textbook example of a nonsensical claim.Hatuey wrote: [Replying to post 137 by instantc]
I'm not going to waste my time discussing a claim with you that you have judged "nonsensical." I do not judge the claim nonsensical and you have not convinced me that it is.
Last edited by instantc on Mon Jul 13, 2015 1:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Post #142
[Replying to post 138 by Danmark]
Thank you. Indeed, that was the point of the OP and the mission of this thread.
Thank you. Indeed, that was the point of the OP and the mission of this thread.
Post #144
[Replying to post 139 by instantc]
And the reason that courts decide these instances with much lawyering back and forth with experts on both sides while not one person shows up with a Free Will Detektor 9000 is how we know we cannot be certain of the existenc of free will. We don't debat over whether someone did or did not have a tumor in their brain. We do debate over whether it caused them to act contrary to their typical inclinations.
And the reason that courts decide these instances with much lawyering back and forth with experts on both sides while not one person shows up with a Free Will Detektor 9000 is how we know we cannot be certain of the existenc of free will. We don't debat over whether someone did or did not have a tumor in their brain. We do debate over whether it caused them to act contrary to their typical inclinations.
Post #145
Actually, the legal definition of free will is another example that proves you wrong, for "free act" in legal theory simply means that one consciously decides to act, as opposed to reflexes and sleep walking. Not all legal theorists refer to a free act in this context though, most prefer the term willed act, thus avoiding to make statements with philosophical connotations.Hatuey wrote: [Replying to post 139 by instantc]
And the reason that courts decide these instances with much lawyering back and forth with experts on both sides while not one person shows up with a Free Will Detektor 9000 is how we know we cannot be certain of the existenc of free will. We don't debat over whether someone did or did not have a tumor in their brain. We do debate over whether it caused them to act contrary to their typical inclinations.
So certainly free will exists at least by some definitions.
Post #146
[Replying to post 145 by instantc]
Yes, people are good at defining ideas that may or may not be true. A definition does not make belief valid.
Thanks for ignoring the point of the post, though, as you often do.
Yes, people are good at defining ideas that may or may not be true. A definition does not make belief valid.
Thanks for ignoring the point of the post, though, as you often do.
Post #147
[Replying to post 144 by Hatuey]
Stan: I don't much care for peas.
Irene: What kind of peas?
Stan: All kinds. Just don't like 'em.
Irene: Well, what kind, specifically?
Stan: Umm. All kinds of peas....
Irene: You mean field peas or green peas?
Stan: Umm. Peas. Don't like 'em. Peas, woman.
Irene: Why won't you say what kind?
Stan: 'Cause I mean every kind of peas!!
Irene: You're stupid and I hate you!! You won't say what kind of peas you don't like!
Stan: Umm. Ok. Maybe go stand over there by Leroy for a while??? I just don't like peas. It ain't a national crisis.
Irene: You're a dumb dodo head!! You won't tell me what exactly you mean by the word "peas!"
Stan: Well, I reckon you can take it or leave it that I don't like peas and to pester Cornelious for a bit if you like? Not sure what else to tell ya.
Irene: Define peas!!! Define the word "pea!!" Tell me what you mean by "pea!!!"
Stan: Good lord, woman, what does anybody mean by the word "peas?" All types. Any pea you can think of. Anything called a pea by anybody with a sense of the word "pea."
Irene: You're a definite ignoramus whose a silly willy pee pee pooper because you won't say what sort of peas you don't like.
Stan: I tried telling you I don't like any peas. Why don't you go pester Clyde Rutherford about the plowing technique he uses on the back nine acres? He's sure to appreciate your insight.
Stan: I don't much care for peas.
Irene: What kind of peas?
Stan: All kinds. Just don't like 'em.
Irene: Well, what kind, specifically?
Stan: Umm. All kinds of peas....
Irene: You mean field peas or green peas?
Stan: Umm. Peas. Don't like 'em. Peas, woman.
Irene: Why won't you say what kind?
Stan: 'Cause I mean every kind of peas!!
Irene: You're stupid and I hate you!! You won't say what kind of peas you don't like!
Stan: Umm. Ok. Maybe go stand over there by Leroy for a while??? I just don't like peas. It ain't a national crisis.
Irene: You're a dumb dodo head!! You won't tell me what exactly you mean by the word "peas!"
Stan: Well, I reckon you can take it or leave it that I don't like peas and to pester Cornelious for a bit if you like? Not sure what else to tell ya.
Irene: Define peas!!! Define the word "pea!!" Tell me what you mean by "pea!!!"
Stan: Good lord, woman, what does anybody mean by the word "peas?" All types. Any pea you can think of. Anything called a pea by anybody with a sense of the word "pea."
Irene: You're a definite ignoramus whose a silly willy pee pee pooper because you won't say what sort of peas you don't like.
Stan: I tried telling you I don't like any peas. Why don't you go pester Clyde Rutherford about the plowing technique he uses on the back nine acres? He's sure to appreciate your insight.
Post #148
The point being that "free will" cannot be proven, although you refuse to tell me what you mean by free will.Hatuey wrote: [Replying to post 145 by instantc]
Yes, people are good at defining ideas that may or may not be true. A definition does not make belief valid.
Thanks for ignoring the point of the post, though, as you often do.
A will that is free of strawberries?
A will that is free of telekinetic coercion by mad scientists?
A will that is free of external stimuli?
A will that is free of something else?
What on earth are you talking about when you say free will? All the above and more?
-
cnorman19
- Apprentice
- Posts: 173
- Joined: Sat Jun 06, 2015 8:56 pm
- Location: Fort Worth, Texas
- Contact:
Post #149
I'm saying not only that it's reasonable, but it's taken for granted by virtually every human that breathes in virtually every situation that humans experience. When you ask me to pass you the salt, you are assuming that I have free will; and you are demonstrating your own.Hatuey wrote: [Replying to post 133 by cnorman19]
Are you saying that it's reasonable to assume free will exists for the purpose of debate on other topics...perhaps even a "deciding" point?
That's what I mean by "PRACTICAL APPLICATION." Show me the difference between a world where there is ACTUAL free will, as opposed to one where free will is only an ILLUSION. Both would look and sound and smell and feel just like this one; ergo, the question is -- in PRACTICAL terms -- entirely without meaning and pointless.
Let me know when I can stop deciding what I want for breakfast.
"The Torah is true, and some of it may even have happened." -- Rabbi William Gershon
"Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry; but why on Earth should that mean that it is not real?" -- Albus Dumbledore in Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows; J. K. Rowling
"It may be that our role on this planet is not to worship God -- but to create him." -- Arthur C. Clarke
"Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry; but why on Earth should that mean that it is not real?" -- Albus Dumbledore in Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows; J. K. Rowling
"It may be that our role on this planet is not to worship God -- but to create him." -- Arthur C. Clarke
Post #150
[Replying to post 148 by instantc]
As I have said many times before: ANY STANDARD, USED DEFINITION. Just like with Stan and his peas, any standard definition of "free will."
However, you have already judged my ideas as unworthy, so I really don't care about your ideas anymore. I merely care about the main two points put forth in the OP.
You're certainly welcome to prove that free will exists, if you like, though. Just be sure that it is not the same reasoning that a lunatic can use for his relationship with an alien or the ghost of Elvis Presley.
As I have said many times before: ANY STANDARD, USED DEFINITION. Just like with Stan and his peas, any standard definition of "free will."
However, you have already judged my ideas as unworthy, so I really don't care about your ideas anymore. I merely care about the main two points put forth in the OP.
You're certainly welcome to prove that free will exists, if you like, though. Just be sure that it is not the same reasoning that a lunatic can use for his relationship with an alien or the ghost of Elvis Presley.
