Free Will?

[prkrruns]

I have come across this argument throughout my daily life several times and each time it has been very thought provocing I am excited to see what ideas ensue. I have an opinion but I would perfer to hear others and keep my voice fairly neutral.

[Filthy Tugboat]

But if free will is not using your own experiences to make choices , in other words using who you are to dtermine which path you take, then what exactly is free will. By your standards the only free will would be if we were put in life with one choice and no prior knowledge of anything at all. However I would argue that at that point it is not free will, but pure cahnce which determines your decision.

I never said with one choice, I'm saying that at no point do we have the option to choose. We think we do but if you logically analyze every choice you made, you can link everything you did back to a personality trait, your mood or whatever. But either way, it was something already present in you. We have no choices to make, they are already predetermined by who we are as individuals. What is free will by your standards? The ability to make unrestricted choices? Is not your personality, your morals and whatever else a restriction on your choices? Who you are restricts your options from infinity to 1 everytime. If we only ever have one option and that is previously defined or predetermined, how can you call it free will?

If the decisions we make are predetermined and unchangable, how is that free will? If we only ever follow a set path in life an d can not diverge from it, how is that freewill? We think we have free will because we don't know the future and we don't know our set paths, so as far as we're concerned we have the freedom to choose how our life will end up. But in reality every decision we make is based off of who we are which is based off of previous events in our history.

This is the problem I mentioned earlier about the different types of possible Gods. An all-knowing God knows the future, therefore by your logic, taking away free will. However and all-knowing omnipresent God, does not actually know the future, but knows the past. Becasue an omnipresent God would exist in every location, at every possible time. That includes what from our perspective is the future. However if a God knows the PAST then we still have free will. I have used this analogy many times and I will use it again. Say you ate cheerios for breakfast this morning. You cannot go back and change that choice, yet it was still free will.

To such a God it seems that we have already made all the choices. But from our point of view we can still change them. Therefore if such a God existed we would have free will.

I was not actually refering to God but surprisigngly enough, God does not make a difference in reality because any God you propose is one that people have tried to make fit reality. Your example is meaningless. All you've done is assert that free will exists and that God knowing the past means we have free will, you've then used a faulty example to provide reason to back up the assertion. And wait what? "However and all-knowing omnipresent God, does not actually know the future, but knows the past. Becasue an omnipresent God would exist in every location, at every possible time. That includes what from our perspective is the future." That is ridiculous, if a God was present at every possible location and every possible time simultaneously then yes he does know the future. Also if he is all knowing then he does know the future. Why did you say that he doesn't know the future? Why did you say that because God knows the past we have free will? I do not have a clue as to how you linked these random concepts together.

However you also bring up the idea that a God has a pan. We will call this plan fate for a moment. If fate exists does it take away free will? I am not really sure about this one. My best answer is that fate cheats, making each choice free, just unfair. What I mean by this is that you can make any choice you want, and perhapse some small difference might occur, but overall it will always lead back to fates design for you. However you were still free to make the choice and to chose either direction. You also did not know what the consequences would be.

In this example Fate controls the consequences of a choice. However, since we never have control of the consequences anyway, this hardly takes away our free will.

So hang on? You have no logic or reason to back this up, you are just guessing? Or with the logic I have presented we don't have free will. That makes sense and is supported with reason. That's the problem when people start with a conclusion and then try to fill in the blanks in order to reach it, it doesn't make sense. If the conclusion is correct then the reasons and evidence will show that.

You say that our decisions are based off of who we are. If that isn't free will then what is. My personal definition of free will is the ability to make your own decisions for whatever reasons that you choose. If the only way to have free will is to make a choice with no background information, and withought having any prior experience in anything at all, then I would perfer to be withought free will. But if free will is only the aility to choose for yourself what influences you, then I will embrace it gladly. I am surre there is a true definition out there somewhere and if anyone cares to post it I would be grateful.

The definition of free will is to make unrestricted choice. I propose that we as people restrict our own options to just 1 effectively giving us no choice at all. When I say that freewill is an illusion, I meant it. We appear to have free will because the results are not known to us, in reality our choices were made for us and we simply follow along.

[prkrruns]

I still don't understand how we don't have free will.

If free will is not makeing choices using YOUR experiences and YOUR mood and YOUR opinion then what is it? How is using your senses and logic to make a choice take away your free will?

On the matter of an omnipresent God...

Just because a God knows the future does not mean it takes away free will. Please explain how knowing the future takes away our free will.

[Filthy Tugboat]

I still don't understand how we don't have free will.

If free will is not makeing choices using YOUR experiences and YOUR mood and YOUR opinion then what is it? How is using your senses and logic to make a choice take away your free will?

On the matter of an omnipresent God...

Just because a God knows the future does not mean it takes away free will. Please explain how knowing the future takes away our free will.

Although in my post I did not suggest that simply knowing the future removes free will for humans I can demonstrate that with omniscience and being the original source of everything, free will is impossible within said creation. If this being created absolutely everything and this being is completely alone, there is no force outside of this beings creation or control then everything he created performs the actions and acts out the processes that this being set in place. If you combine this attribute with omniscience then you have a being who had unlimited options of how everything could have been but this being chose it to turn out this way. Every event is predetermined by it's causes. If you create a single source of all things and then suggest that this source could have made the creation differently(not only differently but every other way imaginable) then you have to submit that this being chose the creation to perform the way it did end up performing. Could this being have remained without creating anything? You would think so. Yet this being instead chose to create something and then he chose exactly what to create while maintaining limitless options. Everything that happens happened not only because this source created it to happen but this source also directly influenced the specific actions by choosing the creation to follow the path it did.

Regarding human free will on it's own. Free will is defined by:

•The question of free will is the philosophical question whether, and in what sense, rational agents exercise control over their actions, decisions, or choices.

What measure of control does any rational agent have over their actions if they simply follow what is effectively their programming? How are we any different to a robot in the sense that we have no control over what we do. Granted we are more complex but in all honesty, we don't make choices, our choices are predetermined by who we are and the universe around us. Our personality, our morality, our genetics are all apart of our 'programming', we follow exactly what is dictated by these attributes. Because we don't know the future and the thing controling us is apart of ourselves we appear to have free will but after any intellectual analysis it is quite obvuious that we don't have free will.

Does this change anything in life? It shouldn't. Does this make life any less enjoyable? It shouldn't. Why do you think we have free will? Do you think free will is neccesary for life? Is there any reasoning to suggest that our choices are not predetermined?

[prkrruns]

First off, you are missing a key component to an omnipresent God.

That God would have a consiousness, i would asume. Therefore while he has the power to do anyhting, he also has the power to not do anything. He could influence our decisions, but that does not mean he will. Of course at that point it comes down to wether you believe a particular god would or would not influence your decisions.

I am taking a neutral stance and pretty much just arguing with you for the sake of seeing what ideas come out of it. These are not my personal beliefs. However one argument i might make is the fact that free will relys completely upon which religion you are talking about. However, as to life in general, I have no proof either way. Many people choose to do good things, making it more liekly that a god could possibly be taking away their free will. However terrorists bombed the twin towers, making it more likely that certain Gods are giving us free will. However these situations could be reversed depending on which Gods we are disscussing.

If we are talking about our feelings and social pressures impacting our free will, then finding an answer would be tricky. A "rational agent" could be influenced bynay number of hormones, pressures, fears, ect. Yet if these influences were removed then the "aional agent" might change his mind. Therefore, I may dispute the definition of free will found in the dictionary. I believe that this kind of free will exists: The freedom to make any decisions you wish, with no spiritual interference, and no wordly interference(hormones, social pressures, fears, ect.) However you also have teh free will to accept these pressures into your decision making process.

This free will clearly exists. That is why lawyers put their personal feelings aside when deeling with a hard case, because they have the ability and freedom to do so. That is why people have the freedom to get themselves drunk before making the decision to drive home or not. That is why some murders choose to have no empathy towards their victims(of course some have no choice regarding empathy so this example is a bit flawed).

[Filthy Tugboat]

First off, you are missing a key component to an omnipresent God.

That God would have a consiousness, i would asume. Therefore while he has the power to do anyhting, he also has the power to not do anything. He could influence our decisions, but that does not mean he will. Of course at that point it comes down to wether you believe a particular god would or would not influence your decisions.

Here, you are simply missing the point of creation. Creation entails everything. If you knew everything then you would completely understand every single possible outcome of the infinite amount of possible outcomes. Every single action taken within each possible reasult would be entirely understood and anticipated by such a being. Then you have to take into account the universe that did happen. Clearly out of an infinite amount of possibilities this "God" decided this one unverse should be the one we want. Therefore everything that happened was chosen by God, he could have chosen a universe different to this, but he didn't. You seem to relate free will to Gods consistent interaction rather than realising the power of creation and omniscience alone.

I am taking a neutral stance and pretty much just arguing with you for the sake of seeing what ideas come out of it. These are not my personal beliefs. However one argument i might make is the fact that free will relys completely upon which religion you are talking about. However, as to life in general, I have no proof either way. Many people choose to do good things, making it more liekly that a god could possibly be taking away their free will. However terrorists bombed the twin towers, making it more likely that certain Gods are giving us free will. However these situations could be reversed depending on which Gods we are disscussing.

This paragraph makes almost no sense. No matter what humans do none of it eis evidence for or against free will or for or against a Gods existence or intentions.

If we are talking about our feelings and social pressures impacting our free will, then finding an answer would be tricky. A "rational agent" could be influenced bynay number of hormones, pressures, fears, ect. Yet if these influences were removed then the "aional agent" might change his mind. Therefore, I may dispute the definition of free will found in the dictionary. I believe that this kind of free will exists: The freedom to make any decisions you wish, with no spiritual interference, and no wordly interference(hormones, social pressures, fears, ect.) However you also have teh free will to accept these pressures into your decision making process.

How is it a decision as to whether certain things affect your judgement? Pressures developed by social circumstances or morality are not decided upon, they exist outside of choice and they define who you are and what decisions you make. This is technically only an opinion but unless you have some evidence to suggest that you can chooce whether or not you suffer social or spiritual interfernce then I have no reason to believe otherwise. Given your definition of free will, I still argue that it is not a reality. "Any decision you wish", The decisons made are not neccesarily your wish, they are simply the best decisions available. This would neccesitate that the decisions you make are not dependent on you or what you want, they are dependent on outide factors that you do not decide which in turn informs you that your decisions are setermined by something other than yourself. therefore negating free will. Add in the fact that your personality predetermines your actions and boom, not only is free will limited but it is in fact obsolete. Free will is not required for enjoyment of life or even surprise. It is an illusion. You know more make your decisions than a single celled organism with no consciousness does.

This free will clearly exists. That is why lawyers put their personal feelings aside when deeling with a hard case, because they have the ability and freedom to do so. That is why people have the freedom to get themselves drunk before making the decision to drive home or not. That is why some murders choose to have no empathy towards their victims(of course some have no choice regarding empathy so this example is a bit flawed).

Yes, I agree that your final example is flawed. Regarding all of the others, you are ignoring the illusion of free will and presuming the illusion to be a representation of reality. Opinion does not factor in to the logic that your decisions rest on who you are which rests on various other previous events in your life. If every decisions you make is derived from something that has already occured and those events can also be rooted into the past then one can easily determine that the future is defined by the past. If the future is predetermined then freewill is nothing more than an illusion simply because everything we do was always going to happen, we didn't have a choice in the matter, we follow our set paths and unknowingly guarantee the predetermination of the future.

[ChaosBorders]

Here, you are simply missing the point of creation. Creation entails everything. If you knew everything then you would completely understand every single possible outcome of the infinite amount of possible outcomes. Every single action taken within each possible reasult would be entirely understood and anticipated by such a being. Then you have to take into account the universe that did happen. Clearly out of an infinite amount of possibilities this "God" decided this one unverse should be the one we want. Therefore everything that happened was chosen by God, he could have chosen a universe different to this, but he didn't. You seem to relate free will to Gods consistent interaction rather than realising the power of creation and omniscience alone.

Yes. It is hypothetically possible for an omniscient being and free will to coexist, but only if the omniscient being has no interaction with existence whatsoever. Thus if God is truly omniscient, and also the creator of everything, there is no free will. Period. There are watered down versions of omniscience where God and free will could still coexist, to some extent, but I honestly find those 'versions' of God to be rather diminished and pathetic.

If every decisions you make is derived from something that has already occured and those events can also be rooted into the past then one can easily determine that the future is defined by the past. If the future is predetermined then freewill is nothing more than an illusion simply because everything we do was always going to happen, we didn't have a choice in the matter, we follow our set paths and unknowingly guarantee the predetermination of the future.

The other possibility is arbitrary randomness having an impact. So things are not necessarily predetermined. However, determined or not, there is no room for free will by any meaningful definition of the word free.

[jbl1031]

The main point that seems to be running through most of the posts is one of Naturalistic determination, prior actions influence present actions enough to rule out free will. This was B.F. Skinner's whole field of study, all human actions are the results of genetics and enviroment, so you're in good company. It makes people part of the machinery of the world with every action dependant on a previous action. We make choices but those choices are not free.
As a believer in Open Theism I have to say that's a lot of non-sense.
It is fact that heredity and environment influence behavior but these are not factors that cause behavior. A rock is not able to change in any way unless it is acted upon by an outside cause, but that is because it is a rock with no ability to reason. People can reason and therefore use their will to direct their circumstance. This is self determination this libertarian free will, see Thomas Aquinas.

As to the influence of God or a god, that is self determination with permission, but that's really an other argument.

[ChaosBorders]

The main point that seems to be running through most of the posts is one of Naturalistic determination, prior actions influence present actions enough to rule out free will. This was B.F. Skinner's whole field of study, all human actions are the results of genetics and enviroment, so you're in good company. It makes people part of the machinery of the world with every action dependant on a previous action. We make choices but those choices are not free.
As a believer in Open Theism I have to say that's a lot of non-sense.
It is fact that heredity and environment influence behavior but these are not factors that cause behavior. A rock is not able to change in any way unless it is acted upon by an outside cause, but that is because it is a rock with no ability to reason. People can reason and therefore use their will to direct their circumstance. This is self determination this libertarian free will, see Thomas Aquinas.

As to the influence of God or a god, that is self determination with permission, but that's really an other argument.

Reason is the result of nuerochemistry, which is the result of interactions caused by physics. There is nothing freely self-determined about the results of our 'reasoning.'

[jbl1031]

Reason is the result of nuerochemistry, which is the result of interactions caused by physics. There is nothing freely self-determined about the results of our 'reasoning.'

So we have no ability to control our thoughts, order our thinking in such a way that we can draw a conclusion from facts we have been exposed to? Are you saying our brains just run through routines that are predetermined by...what? Or do you think neuron firing is totally random? Because if our thinking process is random then how do we arrive at the point we are at now... sitting at separate computers in different places and times and yet communicating.
Of course if anything a physics explanation would involve a degree of indeterminacy because while overall quantum effects are too small to influence the majority of the brains neurons, a neuron close to firing can make a difference in individual quantum events whether it fires or not. And these effects will grow exponentially.
But complex systems, with the brain the most complex, have solutions not corresponding to deterministic thinking. In other words we are more than just biological computing machines or non-reasoning random number generators. Reason alone tells us this, we can't operate as nothing more than random chance if we are able to even comprehend there are things we do not yet understand.

[ChaosBorders]

So we have no ability to control our thoughts, order our thinking in such a way that we can draw a conclusion from facts we have been exposed to?

That we order our thoughts and draw conclusions from environmental does not in any manner imply 'freedom.'

Are you saying our brains just run through routines that are predetermined by...what?

Genetic adaptations.

Or do you think neuron firing is totally random? Because if our thinking process is random then how do we arrive at the point we are at now... sitting at separate computers in different places and times and yet communicating.

Some of it may be, depending on which theory of quantum mechanics is true. But most of it is a response to environmental input.

Of course if anything a physics explanation would involve a degree of indeterminacy because while overall quantum effects are too small to influence the majority of the brains neurons, a neuron close to firing can make a difference in individual quantum events whether it fires or not. And these effects will grow exponentially.

Whether they are determined or random, there is no room for free will by any meaningful definition of the word free.

But complex systems, with the brain the most complex, have solutions not corresponding to deterministic thinking. In other words we are more than just biological computing machines or non-reasoning random number generators.

If quantum mechanics follows a model that is random, then we're a combination of both. If quantum mechanics is actually deterministic, then we are indeed little different than biological computing machines.