User loginNavigationRRS WebsitesThis site is part of the Rational Response Squad network of sites. Your username/password will work at these sites: Other sites... |
Free Will
Posted on: Wed, 2006-09-13 03:31
 Offline
Free Will
Quick thread before i go away to school.. Well whenever i find myself arguing with a theist about the existance of God they usually comment about how God does not want to interfere with free will.. What is anyones view on free will? Rational Squad Alerts |
Who's onlineThere are currently 0 users and 56 guests online.
|
| Freethinking Teens is hosted by The Rational Response Squad as a free service to the children of our future. |
I prefer the compatibilistic view that David Hume proposed and Daniel Dennett expanded.
Pasting from wikipedia:
"Free will should not be understood as an absolute ability to have chosen differently under exactly the same inner and outer circumstances. Rather, it is a hypothetical ability to have chosen differently if one had been differently psychologically disposed by some different beliefs or desires. That is, when one says that one could either continue to read this page or to delete it, one doesn't really mean that both choices are compatible with the complete state of the world right now, but rather that if one had desired to delete it one would have, even though as a matter of fact one actually desires to continue reading it, and therefore that is what will actually happen."
Ultimately we're all subjected to causality, but compatibilists argue that it doesn't really matter.
You should make theists that question "When God kickstarted the universe hasn't he actually pretedermined everything?" After all he did put the initial values of the "system" and he did know the outcome.
I agree. Well, I don't really believe free will exists in terms of the absolute sense. Most of our choices, if not all are made by everything happening before thing which affected our predisposition, in my opinion, so the question is mostly meaningless to me. But I'd agree w/ that definition of free will. I likes it :) It's preeecioussss
[quote=Derevirn]I prefer the compatibilistic view that David Hume proposed and Daniel Dennett expanded.
Pasting from wikipedia:
"Free will should not be understood as an absolute ability to have chosen differently under exactly the same inner and outer circumstances. Rather, it is a hypothetical ability to have chosen differently if one had been differently psychologically disposed by some different beliefs or desires. That is, when one says that one could either continue to read this page or to delete it, one doesn't really mean that both choices are compatible with the complete state of the world right now, but rather that if one had desired to delete it one would have, even though as a matter of fact one actually desires to continue reading it, and therefore that is what will actually happen."
Ultimately we're all subjected to causality, but compatibilists argue that it doesn't really matter.
You should make theists that question "When God kickstarted the universe hasn't he actually pretedermined everything?" After all he did put the initial values of the "system" and he did know the outcome.[/quote]
Thats a very good defintion IMO.
Hm. Can anyone tell me the verse about free will. I threw my bible away 3 years ago.
http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/contra/free.html
that gives two verses, but they seem to basically say, "You can pick this or that, but here is the right answer"....
http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/says_about/free_will.html
that gives a few more verses aginst it...
I'm pretty sure freewill was an idea that was just kinda formed over time and not really written down, maybe that is what you were trying to say without saying it...
[quote=Voiderest]http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/contra/free.html
that gives two verses, but they seem to basically say, "You can pick this or that, but here is the right answer"....
http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/says_about/free_will.html
that gives a few more verses aginst it...
I'm pretty sure freewill was an idea that was just kinda formed over time and not really written down, maybe that is what you were trying to say without saying it...[/quote]
Thanks. I think free will was to explain why non-believers werent smited by Gods Wraith.
Why would you throw a bible away? they great peices of literature. but i forget who said so, but "freedom exists in a cage" .
Me and some friends got really fucked up and was about to throw mine in the fire.
Glad we ended up ditching the fire because I plan on reading it.
it is a great read
i recommend taking notes also though
Instead of taking notes i think i'm going to just read this book I got when I was in confirmation. It's called Chosen: The Story Of God And His People. It pretty much just goes through both testaments and picks it all apart and just goes "this that and this happend and HE SAID THIS!!"
Every time I read, Bible of what have you, i have a highlighter and bookmarks at hand. Every version of the Bible i own hase tones of bookmarks and highlighted scriptures in it.
[quote=Greg]it is a great read
i recommend taking notes also though[/quote]
I threw it away, cause I couldnt believe 4 years ago, I use to actually believe what it said.
I agree with adaypastdead above. I have my bibles highlighted to hell and back, simply because it is much more useful in that aspect.
[quote=Greg]Why would you throw a bible away? they great peices of literature. but i forget who said so, but "freedom exists in a cage" .[/quote]
If by great you mean boring as hell, I'll agree to that. Reading page upon page of Levitican Law just didn't interest me.
[quote=Lucretius][quote=Greg]Why would you throw a bible away? they great peices of literature. but i forget who said so, but "freedom exists in a cage" .[/quote]
If by great you mean boring as hell, I'll agree to that. Reading page upon page of Levitican Law just didn't interest me.[/quote]
well, saying it is boring is a one-sided, ignorant thought that has no support. If you actually read it for what it is supposed to mean than it is very interesting. some of that stuff will tell you why christians act how they do
[quote=Greg][quote=Lucretius][quote=Greg]Why would you throw a bible away? they great peices of literature. but i forget who said so, but "freedom exists in a cage" .[/quote]
If by great you mean boring as hell, I'll agree to that. Reading page upon page of Levitican Law just didn't interest me.[/quote]
well, saying it is boring is a one-sided, ignorant thought that has no support. If you actually read it for what it is supposed to mean than it is very interesting. some of that stuff will tell you why christians act how they do[/quote]
I've read enough of the Bible to know that it is boring, contradictory, and draw-out. Then again, realize that not everyone is going to find what you find to be interesting. I enjoy reading books on cosmology, evolution, philosophy, and 20th century history. The Bible hardly fits in those categories (when referring to philosophy, I'm talking Nietzsche, Hume, Plato, etc.)
Saying it is boring DOES have support. My opinion. Same as you saying it is your opinion that it is interesting. It all depends on your interest in the text. I have none. It appears that you do. Neither of us is more right than the other…
None of my family are religious so i dont actually own a bible, i'll have to give it a read some time..
My real name is actually Will. So, if you just accept me into your heart....naahhhh. jk I think we really do have free will but that doesn't mean we should go around killing rapping etc. With great freedom comes great responsability.
So, might I ask, What do you guys actually highlight as you go through and read it?
And we have 2 of the same bibles at my house that I got from Church, and a Precious Moments bible that I got when i was born.
i assume you mean raping? II would hope you don't see rapping as a sin :)
[quote=AgnosticAtheist1]i assume you mean raping? II would hope you don't see rapping as a sin :)[/quote]
Haha i decided not to comment on the "rapping" lol
[quote=KoRnYAtheist]My real name is actually Will. So, if you just accept me into your heart....naahhhh. jk I think we really do have free will but that doesn't mean we should go around killing rapping etc. With great freedom comes great responsability.[/quote]
Poor poor Tupac... Lol.
it has much on evolution, it is the main opposing force of evolution! and philosophy, well most of it opposes christianity. so they do fit in a few of those. i understand where you are coming from though when you say that it is purely an opinion. I was a tad angered at the time and i apologize for the remark
you would highlight stuff such as contradictions, possible things that christians ignore that they wouldnt like, things that they do wrong, totally irrational crap. or just funny stuff. even things that have some historical ties. whatever you find appealing to you
hehe interesting. talk about highlighting. my mother used to drag me to mass when i was younger, so i would sit in the back of the congregation with my (blackout) highlighter, and start in genesis and make a constant line through every verse, steadily through the sermon. after several weeks when i finished in revelations, i handed the bible to the priest, which incidentally was when i was told i was satan's spawn, and the next time i entered a church the place would burst into flames. i was then forbidden to return and literally carried towards the door. XD fun times
No harm done my friend.
[quote=Greg]it has much on evolution, it is the main opposing force of evolution! and philosophy, well most of it opposes christianity. so they do fit in a few of those. i understand where you are coming from though when you say that it is purely an opinion. I was a tad angered at the time and i apologize for the remark[/quote]
Heh, you had been saving your bursting churches into flames power until later? On the other hand, that general disrespect is where we atheists get our reputation. So I'm torn between the two sides of the issue. There's no point in being extraneously rude, but on the other hand, you get out of going to church :)
Heh, you had been saving your bursting churches into flames power until later? On the other hand, that general disrespect is where we atheists get our reputation. So I'm torn between the two sides of the issue. There's no point in being extraneously rude, but on the other hand, you get out of going to church :)
[quote=Derevirn]I prefer the compatibilistic view that David Hume proposed and Daniel Dennett expanded.
Pasting from wikipedia:
"Free will should not be understood as an absolute ability to have chosen differently under exactly the same inner and outer circumstances. Rather, it is a hypothetical ability to have chosen differently if one had been differently psychologically disposed by some different beliefs or desires. That is, when one says that one could either continue to read this page or to delete it, one doesn't really mean that both choices are compatible with the complete state of the world right now, but rather that if one had desired to delete it one would have, even though as a matter of fact one actually desires to continue reading it, and therefore that is what will actually happen."
Ultimately we're all subjected to causality, but compatibilists argue that it doesn't really matter.
You should make theists that question "When God kickstarted the universe hasn't he actually pretedermined everything?" After all he did put the initial values of the "system" and he did know the outcome.[/quote]
I've had theists vehemently deny that him knowing, and making it shut, takes away free will. They say tha we 'still chose'. Which is ridiculous, because he made is in such a way that we WOULD choose that way.
[quote]I've had theists vehemently deny that him knowing, and making it shut, takes away free will. They say tha we 'still chose'.[/quote]
Doh... this is beyond idiocy!
you know, it's funny, has anyone read the 'left behind series'? quite a few of these posts have made me think of those books. Tim LaHaye if anyone is interested.
Certainly have. Interesting I guess. Didn't like them.
i agree i thought it was all a bunch of bullshit
Have a look at this article I wrote on free will. It explains the three arguments for a lack of free will and gives a critical analysis.
When it comes to free will, I've agreed with this for as long as I can remember -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Determinism
It really depends on what you mean "free will", could you please support your assertions with some arguments? :)
Personally I think everyone has free will to do as they please, well it's either that or the fatalism. ^^ Right now I could hit the screen on this moniter if I got mad enough, and I would provided I was mad enough, but right now I won't because I'm...well...happy & bored ^^ So I personally believe that we either have A. Free will to do as we choose or, B. Have no free will because it is already fated to happen. I tend to lean more towards A than B, though, and that's just because of the way I wish to think of it.
Vamp, thats fine by me but interestingly it is a very simular form of irrationality to that of fideism - believeing in God because it makes you happy. The Rational Response Squad are against that, but if you are not I suggest you post a thread on it in the RRS Activism forum.
I would hate to see so much discussion be put into this topic and so little meaning or supporting theory to come with it but, sadly, this is what has happened. No offense towards any of you, but none of you seem to be discussing free will or even it's philosophically opposing viewpoint (determinism). I myself look at this topic on more of a philosophical level than on a level dealing with religion. Free Will does not exist. This is extremely obvious to myself, being so because as soon as we come out of our Mother's woom, we see light. We hear noise. We feel, we taste, we smell (Once the snot has been vacumed out of our nose). Those original impacts upon us affect our brains near instantly (not instantly only because our brains most process the information, and even if it takes 00.01x10 to the negative 20th power, it still takes time to process). Those impacts affect the next behaviors we act out, as do the seconday, tertiary, etc. experiences we undergo. The concept of "Free Will" is one every man or woman would like to indulge themselves in, for if one has free will, they, not their mind, are in control. Free will, or lack there of, largely pretains to the field of psychology. An action occurs, affecting the physiological development of your brain, which pre-determines every action that you will ever execute throughout your life. This may soundfar-fetched, but please consider the possibility that you are just as much a pawn of genetics and the psychological effects of your surroundings as me, and everyone else. I am not freely posting this comment. I am posting this comment because I am interested in such discussion. I am interested in such discussion because they way my brain happens to work. My brain work the way it does (as is with everyone) because of psychological development. Had my past experiences been different, my brain would not have developed to be what it is today, but something possibly far from it. Your past experiences pile upon one another, some counter-acting the effects of others, molding you into who you are today, tomorrow, next year. It is also "set in stone" as to who you will be in a year, when taking into acount all the things that will happen to you, and to the people that impact your (yes, once again...) mental developement. Please do not miss-percieve the meaning of determinism (or being pre-determined), because in a sense, it is not necessarilly pre-determined, but only because there is no one to view what is to come, since there is only the present. It is determined, but not in the way we (being humans) percieve determining things. If you cannot make sense of that last statement, leave a comment asking me to better explain my thoughts, in the meanwhile, I will be trying to think of a better way to clearly express it.
"Things are apprently chosen by the self, but really the self, is chosen by the things." -Myself (haha)
P.S. Greg, I am dissapointed in you.
[quote=Adam Burnfin]"Things are apprently chosen by the self, but really the self, is chosen by the things." -Myself (haha)
P.S. Greg, I am dissapointed in you.[/quote]
Dissappointed in what adam? The fact that I look at the social view of free will? The one that is somewhat possible? Thinking about your definition of free will just kills it man, because put what you think of it and not what it is. Just because others see it differently then you doesnt mean they are wrong. You have no reason to be dissappointed in me, I am in you
[quote=Greg][quote=Adam Burnfin]"Things are apprently chosen by the self, but really the self, is chosen by the things." -Myself (haha)
P.S. Greg, I am dissapointed in you.[/quote]
Dissappointed in what adam? The fact that I look at the social view of free will? The one that is somewhat possible? Thinking about your definition of free will just kills it man, because put what you think of it and not what it is. Just because others see it differently then you doesnt mean they are wrong. You have no reason to be dissappointed in me, I am in you
[/quote]
First, Greg, I would like to state here that we, yes, you and I, are not to play the superiority game as we do everyday in conversation on an online forum, because it will eventually (most likely eventually) lead to the anoyance of others. Also, no where did I claim or state that the other people on this forum whom have posted under this topic were incorrect or, as you said, "wrong". If I did, I am not certain what I was thinking at the time, because you know, Greg, I often preach my little blurb on subjectivity. Hence I would not accuse one's OPPINION (which cannot be incorrect) to be incorrect. Again, I am dissapointed in you. This, time for more than one reasons. Fristly, you assumed, even though knowing me since I was 4, and being once of my most interacted with friend, that I would claim someone oppinion to be incorrect. Secondly,For being overly defensive. It was simply a light-hearted tease, do not try to put yourself above me in a public situation, as you always have, and probably always will (I apologize if I sound pretentious).
You claiming that my oppinion on free will "kills it, man", as you have, kills it. Man. I say this because my oppinion, though maybe more "toxic" (or offensive) towards other's oppinions, are the same as theirs, not wrong. And yes, I posted my thoughts on free will on a forum specificly for discussing free will. I apologize if for the forum in which free will is meant to be discussed, has banned discussion of free will. I don't see why my thoughts on free will "kills it". "Thinking about your definition of free will just kills it man, because put what you think of it and not what it is." I put what I think of it? And not what it is?Please Greg, enlighten me. What is free will? You appear to know. Though in this case, I would like to state something to you I have stated quite often in past discussion. One can know nothing, other than through anlyzation of past and prior experinces. -Hume. You know nothing other than knowledge based on observation on what we percieve to be reality. Free will, being a concept, also being outside of finite reality, cannot be ammassed with other things in reality to proove it's existance, only to support as evidence. Also, it can be backed up by other concepts, but those are only ideals which cannot be further backed by things relatable to 'reality'. Hence, one cannot state that anthers oppinion in only his 'thought', and not what free will 'actually is'. Again Greg, please inform me, what is free will?
P.S. No longer am I dissapointed in you, for you have set new standards for yourself among my eyes, haha ;)
I definitly disagree with your point of view Adam.
It just doesn't make any sense. OK, lets put it into this point of view.
Someone pulls a knife on me, what has been programed into me is to run away, instincts. But, instead, i choose to fight. That, is free will.
And where you pointed out to greg about the supieriority thing, you are being a hypocrite.
[quote]I would hate to see so much discussion be put into this topic and so little meaning or supporting theory to come with it but, sadly, this is what has happened.[/quote]
You were specifically attacking the people of this thread, calling what they were discussing had little meaning and supporting theory, there for, you were calling your opinion superior than theirs.
btw, opinion is spelt with 1 p not 2.
And you say that your taking a philisophical view, well...look what i found in the dictionary for free will...nota bene the philosophy
2. Philosophy. the doctrine that the conduct of human beings expresses personal choice and is not simply determined by physical or divine forces.
So we are taking a philosophical view, not just you.
I would not have stated that I rook a philosophical stance had Greg not pointed out to me that I rely too much on philosophy when discussing this topic they day prior. Also, I do sincerely apologize for the insult, I didn't mean for it to be taken in the way it seems to have been taken, and I have poor first impressions of the forum.
You say you deny instincts by choosing to fight? I don't agree, because basic instincts are to flee if you feel you cannot win, or to fight if you are confident enough to win. Now I am not saying there is no free will, thought my oppinion disagrees with it. The determist standpoint at this point in the conversation would be to state that is is very probable that it is not free will, even if denying instincts, because all the past and prior experiences that you undergo shape you into who you are, so had those things never happened to you, and other things happen in their place, you may have made a completely different choice. Also, I think it's kind of funny that you say my view 'just doesn't make any sense', because though you may not agree, it doesn't mean it's not logical, and because I had reason, I believe even if it's wrong it's at least a little bit logical.
-Also please don't turn this into a debate of factions. "We" and "you"
-I don't expect you to find anything philosophical on free will in a dictionary, a dictionary gives the basic explanation of the word. Look in an encyclopedia, and you will most likely find something on free will vs. determinisn. If nothing else, read some Sartre.
-I agree with Derevirns agreeance with Hume.
Ok, i was wrong to say that your opinion didn't make any sense
btw. opinion is with 1 P NOT 2!! :P
And sorry for the "we" and "you", i'll try not to do that again.
Thanks man, I appreciate it. :)
ha wow this topic just went to hell. lol. But I think, it depends on how you are going to define free will. You can get into it as Adam does, and go with psychology or philosophy, or you can look at it in the perspective of limitation. Depending on which we speak of, why not both. I think with the psychology and philosophy thought going, on I would agree with adam. But in the perspectives of limitation. I believe Free will exists. To an extent
[quote=Greg]ha wow this topic just went to hell. lol. But I think, it depends on how you are going to define free will. You can get into it as Adam does, and go with psychology or philosophy, or you can look at it in the perspective of limitation. Depending on which we speak of, why not both. I think with the psychology and philosophy thought going, on I would agree with adam. But in the perspectives of limitation. I believe Free will exists. To an extent[/quote]
But don't psychology and unwritten laws of nature (Sociological/mental development) determine everything/"bar down" the occurances that we percieve to happen in everyday life?
they do, but you also have to look at it from a social view of what free will is and not just the scientific term. Like the catalyst church. scientifically it would make them impatient adventist. but that is not what it really is
If science dictates social aspects (being our concepts), we need to to look at the social ones.