Free Will vs. Freedom From Suffering

[Paul of Tarsus]

Many apologists argue that we must suffer in order to have free will. It's a trade off that even God must bow to--we can either be morally free or free of suffering, but we cannot have both. We are told, for example:

...God can create people who are not morally free. Such a person would never harm anyone else, never fail to do good in any setting, and always be a beacon of right behavior. However, that would be more a machine than a person. A machine is neither good nor bad; it just does as it is programed to do. For people to be capable of genuine good deeds they must also be capable of evil deeds.

The implication here is that free will is the greatest good for us; to have free will is better than to be free of suffering. Or to put it another way, free will is so wonderful that it's worth the cost of sadness, fear, hatred, pain, sickness, dying and death, of course.

I'm not so sure, but what is your preference and why? Which would you choose if you could?

A. Free Will Along with the Attendant Suffering
or
B. A Happy and Peaceful World Full of Robotic Beacons of Light
or
C. A Combination of A and B

[JehovahsWitness]

The implication here is that free will is the greatest good for us...

Good/ bad/ better are all subjective and based on our own personal worldview and value system, but yes I do believe that free will* is the greatest good for us; it is part of what makes us humans, made, I believe, in Gods image. It is, I believe one of God's greatest gift to us because without it we would be incapable of love.

* When I speak of free will I am speaking of the ability to make choices

.

I don't know if free will would be worth unending and unrelenting suffering but biblically, temporary suffering has proved to be the collective price humanity has had to pay for the original abuse of the gift of free will by Adam and Eve. If, the only way to avoid these present hardhips would be to surrender our humanity then that price would, in my opinion, be too high.


JW

[Paul of Tarsus]

I don't have to choose because moral free will vs freedom from suffering is a false dilemma. I accept the premise that for people to be capable of genuine good deeds they must also be capable of evil deeds, but that does not come with the implication that capability for evil deeds must be actuated. Without actuated evil deeds, we have both free will and freedom from suffering.

You've made some very good observations here. Yes, willing to do something is not the same as actually doing the deed. So if people freely will to rape, murder, and wee wee in public, then God can stop them from committing their dirty deeds without violating their free wills. As you say, then, we can have free will and freedom from suffering, and the apologetic that free will necessarily results in suffering is exposed as fallacious.

I'm not sure if we need to be capable of evil to be capable of good, though. The capacity to do good is independent of the capacity to do evil. I can easily conceive of a person who can save lives yet be incapable of murder. That person's heroic deeds are still good even if she cannot kill the innocent.

My preference is C. As I've just argued, we can have the will to do good without the will to do evil. I have no desire to want to engage in wickedness anyway, and I wouldn't miss it one bit.

Having said that, I prefer B. A Happy and Peaceful World Full of Robotic Beacons of Light. As a life long atheist, I think of myself as a meat robot already, I don't see any practical difference between can't murder, and can murder but won't.

I suppose a robot can be good. B9 is but one example.

[Paul of Tarsus]

The implication here is that free will is the greatest good for us...

Good/ bad/ better are all subjective and based on our own personal worldview and value system, but yes I do believe that free will* is the greatest good for us; it is part of what makes us humans, made, I believe, in Gods image. It is, I believe one of God's greatest gift to us because without it we would be incapable of love.

I prefer to be free of suffering, and I'd gladly give up my will to do evil to be free of suffering. In fact, I have no will to do wickedness, and contrary to what you claim I have no trouble at all willing to do good and doing good. Moreover, I'm as human as anybody even though I lack what you call free will.

There's nothing like real-world evidence to disprove hypotheses based in religious beliefs.

I don't know if free will would be worth unending and unrelenting suffering but biblically, temporary suffering has proved to be the collective price humanity has had to pay for the original abuse of the gift of free will by Adam and Eve. If, the only way to avoid these present hardhips would be to surrender our humanity then that price would, in my opinion, be too high.

It sounds like that "gift" to Eve and Adam did them no good. Without that gift, I suppose we'd all be naked robots lounging in paradise. What's so bad about that?

[JehovahsWitness]

I'm as human as anybody even though I lack what you call free will.

I suppose we are not talking about the same thing since when I say "free will" I am talking about the ability to make decisions which, I dont believe you lack.

...contrary to what you claim I have no trouble at all willing to do good and doing good.

I have never claimed you have trouble "willing to do good and doing good". Are you perhaps confusing something someone else said with me?

[JehovahsWitness]

It sounds like that "gift" to Eve and Adam did them no good.

That would depend on what you mean by "good"; good is a subjective assessment on ones personal worldview and values. What one person calls "good" another might call "bad".

Being able to make decisions did them Adam and Eve "good"as long as they made the right decisons. It is a good thing to be able to decide what do do for yourself, it is the difference between being free and being a "slave". Yes, with such an ability come responsibility, but responsibility is not bad if one is capable of shouldering it. But, as you say, ...." what's so bad about that"

Without that gift, I suppose we'd all be naked robots lounging in paradise. What's so bad about that?

I don't want to be a robot (naked of otherwise) I want to be able to make decisions for myself, not just be programmed to do what someone else wants. I want to be capable of genuine goodness, creativity and love. Not having that would be bad.

[JehovahsWitness]

... if people freely will to rape, murder, and wee wee in public, then God can stop them from committing their dirty deeds without violating their free wills.

Yes, that is what laws are for. Laws do not exist only to punish the violator they hopefully deter the violation. To premptively punish or control someone however would violate their rights as free moral agents.

[brunumb]

I don't want to be a robot (naked of otherwise) I want to be able to make decisions for myself, not just be programmed to do what someone else wants.

Being limited in one aspect does not make one programed or a robot. I don't have the desire to molest or hurt other people. How can I know if that is because it is being prevented by the will of some deity? In the end, I don't care. I don't feel like a robot or that I have been programed and the end result would still be a positive one as far as I'm concerned. Robot and programed are emotive and loaded terms which don't really reflect the reality of having some limits to total free will.

[JehovahsWitness]

I don't want to be a robot (naked of otherwise) I want to be able to make decisions for myself, not just be programmed to do what someone else wants.

Being limited in one aspect does not make one programed or a robot.

I agree. I dont want to live without any limits at all, but I do want to be capable of making personal decisions.




JW

[brunumb]

I don't want to be a robot (naked of otherwise) I want to be able to make decisions for myself, not just be programmed to do what someone else wants.

Being limited in one aspect does not make one programed or a robot.

I agree. I dont want to live without any limits at all, but I do want to be capable of making personal decisions.
JW

You can. But why would you want to make the decision to harm someone?

[Bust Nak]

I don't want to be a robot (naked of otherwise) I want to be able to make decisions for myself, not just be programmed to do what someone else wants.

There is still plenty of room for choice, creativity and love outside of moral free will, you can choose tea or coffer, pancake or fried eggs, football or baseball, painting or carving, harp or piano. Why would you miss the freedom to kick a cat, burn a hobo's tent, or cheating on one's spouse? Besides your ability to choose is already severely limited, you cannot choose to shoot laser out of your eye, you cannot choose to leap over the sun, how much are these limits harming your quality of life? Next to none I'd imagine.