• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

we have no free will - prove me wrong!

A Vestigial Mote

Well-Known Member
I like the idea of having free will so please, prove me wrong :)
To my mind, this ends up being one of those things that does not matter in the slightest.

No matter what, you are forced to deal with reality as it presents itself. To the point that, even if you don't have "free will", and all your decisions are pre-determined, you still must make decisions, you still must act while you are alive and experiencing the reality we share.

And if anyone is worried about that whole, ridiculous argument about how criminals are then not responsible for their actions, because everything in their lives pointed them in the specific direction that caused their transgressions... my answer to that is "so what?" They can and should still be locked up because guess what? This "no free will" thing doesn't just work one way. I am also incapable of doing anything but worry for my safety with them on the streets, based on my history of experiences leading me to this moment. And the authorities don't have any choice but to act in the manner that they act - which is again a series of events and experiences leading them to the moment in which they arrest and detain said criminals.

No one gets a "get out of jail free" card... because any attribute of fundamental significance (like "free will" or "no free will") you ascribe yourself must necessarily be ascribed to all other human agents.
 

syo

Well-Known Member
How we make our decisions regarding our choices (and how we imagine our choices) is determined by past events, so even if free will is defined as having choices I'd still say it's still an illusion
There are rules. The choices we make are within rules. But we still have to choose are actions. Will I choose a chocolate flavored icecream or a vanilla one? The past offers icecream. But will I eat the icecream and which flavour will I pick?
 

ChristineM

"Be strong", I whispered to my coffee.
Premium Member
Maybe, but I have to wonder: was it truly a free choice?

Perhaps if this morning I got out of bed on the other side, or perhaps if I'd had toast for breakfast instead of cereal then I'd never have chosen to make the post due to the day working out differently?

And I'm sure the factors at work in determining what side of bed I got out of and what I had for breakfast are complex and multiple although granted, much of this may have happened in my head so could be attributed to me

...I don't know!

That is not free will. You were of course free in choosing which side of the bed you got out of or what you had for breakfast.

Sure the day may have worked out differently but there was no will involved.

Free will is the ability to act at ones discretion.
 

leroy

Well-Known Member
Been doing some thinking...

“Everything we do and everything that happens has a cause” is true

Therefore we can say that all things that happen are determined/caused by things that have happened in the past

Therefore there is no free will as it is impossible to carry out any action that does not have a cause – all actions have and must have a cause

Free will would require being able to act without a cause, which I think would be impossible. No matter how complex the human mind is, its workings are still governed by cause and effect, by things both external and internal to it

Free will is therefore an illusion, as things that come about by “free will” are truly caused by the past

I still believe we have wills, just not free wills!

I like the idea of having free will so please, prove me wrong :)
What is the difference between will and free will?


But you have a point, matter is deterministic (or random according to some interpretations of QM) matter doesn’t have free will, it is arbitrary to make an exception with the human brain.

Thanks God this argument only applies if you are a materialist.
 

leroy

Well-Known Member
Maybe, but I have to wonder: was it truly a free choice?

Perhaps if this morning I got out of bed on the other side, or perhaps if I'd had toast for breakfast instead of cereal then I'd never have chosen to make the post due to the day working out differently?

And I'm sure the factors at work in determining what side of bed I got out of and what I had for breakfast are complex and multiple although granted, much of this may have happened in my head so could be attributed to me

...I don't know!
Things are simple

1 your senses and experiences tell you that you have free will, it really seems as if you are making a choice.

2 you don’t have good reasons to deny your senses and experiences

Therefore to me it sounds reasonable to grant free will, unless proven otherwise. (assuming that you grant 1 and 2)

How do you know that you are not living in the Matrix? I guess you would use a similar type of reasoning, it seems as if you live in a “real world” and there are no good reasons to assume that we live in the Matrix, therefore the default answer should be that we live in the real world until proven otherwise.
 

Polymath257

Think & Care
Staff member
Premium Member
Things are simple

1 your senses and experiences tell you that you have free will, it really seems as if you are making a choice.

2 you don’t have good reasons to deny your senses and experiences

Therefore to me it sounds reasonable to grant free will, unless proven otherwise. (assuming that you grant 1 and 2)

How do you know that you are not living in the Matrix? I guess you would use a similar type of reasoning, it seems as if you live in a “real world” and there are no good reasons to assume that we live in the Matrix, therefore the default answer should be that we live in the real world until proven otherwise.

Well, that's part of the point. Given the degree to which we know the laws of physics, there *are* good reasons to question whether we have 'free will'. And, in general, there are plenty of known illusions regarding perception and memory that can incline us to at least wonder if our perception of free will is accurate.
 

Eddi

Agnostic
Premium Member
What is the difference between will and free will?

"Free will" would be human agency; that which is not determined by previous causes, it is in a sense an independent phenomenon, independent from reality but nonetheless a part of it - basically, it's agency

"Will" is the manner in which various causes determine human actions - it is part of a network of cause and effect - things act upon it and it acts upon other things in a manner that is determined by how it came to be - basically, this is behaviour
 

Polymath257

Think & Care
Staff member
Premium Member
"Free will" would be human agency; that which is not determined by previous causes, it is in a sense an independent phenomenon, independent from reality but nonetheless a part of it - basically, it's agency

"Will" is the manner in which various causes determine human actions - it is part of a network of cause and effect - things act upon it and it acts upon other things in a manner that is determined by how it came to be - basically, this is behaviour

Is 'free will' in this definition even desirable? To not be determined by previous causes means that *I* am not part of the cause. The point is that *I* am a part of reality and NOT independent of it.
 

Epic Beard Man

Bearded Philosopher
Things are simple

1 your senses and experiences tell you that you have free will, it really seems as if you are making a choice.

2 you don’t have good reasons to deny your senses and experiences

Therefore to me it sounds reasonable to grant free will, unless proven otherwise. (assuming that you grant 1 and 2)

How do you know that you are not living in the Matrix? I guess you would use a similar type of reasoning, it seems as if you live in a “real world” and there are no good reasons to assume that we live in the Matrix, therefore the default answer should be that we live in the real world until proven otherwise.

Will requires agency. Free will if I understand correctly is acting on agency without restriction or any determining factors.
 

Eddi

Agnostic
Premium Member
Is 'free will' in this definition even desirable? To not be determined by previous causes means that *I* am not part of the cause. The point is that *I* am a part of reality and NOT independent of it.

I see what you're saying and have some thoughts:

I'd say Free Will would be:

Determined by reality, no

Influenced by reality, yes - necessarily so or else it would be a meaningless island

It would be a part of reality but not dependent on it for what it does, so in that sense independent, rather than independent as in separate from

In any human it would rely on the divine spark of the unmoved mover (God) that all humans have, which makes us able to respond to real life events in an influenced but non-determined manner - this is i believe an ineffable process, to us humans at least!

...or so I think??? :confused:
 

WalterTrull

Godfella
Free will is therefore an illusion, as things that come about by “free will” are truly caused by the past
I still believe we have wills, just not free wills!
I like the idea of having free will so please, prove me wrong

That we can consider the question lends support to the free-willers.
On-the-other-hand, we do operate in conjunction with the rest of the universe.

We can think all kinds of things. How about:
The universe is mental and not objective.
Time is an illusion. There is only now.
If there is only now and the universe is mental, then the past is created now and manipulated according to present wishes. One way to manipulate the past might be some sort of "future" concept.

Thinking is fun.
 

youknowme

Whatever you want me to be.
Been doing some thinking...

“Everything we do and everything that happens has a cause” is true

Therefore we can say that all things that happen are determined/caused by things that have happened in the past

Therefore there is no free will as it is impossible to carry out any action that does not have a cause – all actions have and must have a cause

Free will would require being able to act without a cause, which I think would be impossible. No matter how complex the human mind is, its workings are still governed by cause and effect, by things both external and internal to it

Free will is therefore an illusion, as things that come about by “free will” are truly caused by the past

I still believe we have wills, just not free wills!

I like the idea of having free will so please, prove me wrong :)

I give you a choice: You can either response to my post or not, you are free to choose either one.

Actions speak louder than words.
 

leroy

Well-Known Member
Well, that's part of the point. Given the degree to which we know the laws of physics, there *are* good reasons to question whether we have 'free will'. And, in general, there are plenty of known illusions regarding perception and memory that can incline us to at least wonder if our perception of free will is accurate.
Granted, if materialism where true, there would be good reasons to deny free will, after all, if matter doesn’t have free will, why making an arbitrary exception with humans?
 

viole

Ontological Naturalist
Premium Member
Been doing some thinking...

“Everything we do and everything that happens has a cause” is true

Therefore we can say that all things that happen are determined/caused by things that have happened in the past

Therefore there is no free will as it is impossible to carry out any action that does not have a cause – all actions have and must have a cause

Free will would require being able to act without a cause, which I think would be impossible. No matter how complex the human mind is, its workings are still governed by cause and effect, by things both external and internal to it

Free will is therefore an illusion, as things that come about by “free will” are truly caused by the past

I still believe we have wills, just not free wills!

I like the idea of having free will so please, prove me wrong :)

I think that depends on definitions.

After all, we are happy to call a play of dice being ru led by probability, when there is nothing ultimately random about that. And deploying statistics for studying these things provides excellent results, even though, again, there is nothing fundamentally probabilistic about dice, roulettes, throwing coins, etc.

So, maybe, in the same way, we can make some sense, or using some working “free will” ontology for our minds, even thought it is ultimately not free at all.

For instance, if free will is defned as the capacity to make choices, then I am free, even if my choice was predermined 1 million years before my birth.

So, even though I agree that LIBERTARIAN free will borders to nonsense, I am not sure we cannot productively use some definition of freedom.

I believe there is a philosophical position that is called compatibilism. Ergo, an attempt to make sense of free will even under a regime of strict determinism (randomness ala QM would not improve things, anyway),

Ciao

- viole
 

Polymath257

Think & Care
Staff member
Premium Member
Granted, if materialism where true, there would be good reasons to deny free will, after all, if matter doesn’t have free will, why making an arbitrary exception with humans?

On the other hand, as I have been attempting to describe, I think there are concepts that are quite close to 'free will' that are consistent with materialism. The decisions I make are made within my head and are primarily determined by my brain state, i.e, me. That seems to be a useful definition that is still quite consistent with materialism.
 

We Never Know

No Slack
Free will is the ability to make choices without psychological or emotional cost. This is why it is called "free" will. For example, if there is an apple and orange on a table and I asked you to choose one or the other, if you like apples, but hate oranges, you cannot freely choose the orange, since it will cost you discomfort. You can force yourself to choose the orange on a dare. You still have willpower and choice, but it is not free choice, since you will pay a price. Although if you gain enough approval from the dare, to offset the cost, it may add to free.

Free will in not something we are born with, but rather it is a developed skill. We are born with the free will to develop free will. Being open minded and moderate in all things gets one used to spreading your choices in all directions, until there is no psychological or emotional cost for any choice. If you are linear, addicted or compulsive in your choices, you lack free will since your choices are already made for you. Your choices are predetermined by unconscious and mass minded causes.

An Atheist does not have free will when it comes to Creation, nor does a Creationists have free will for science. In their mind, it is one or the other since they assume these are mutually exclusive. Neither has figured out a way to resolve the inner and mass mind conflicts, which maintain a lingering cost and prevent free will.

Free will in terms of the symbolism of Genesis was connected to making choices apart from natural human instinct. Instinct makes choices for an animal based on long term patterns that evolve and become engrained on the DNA and brain.

Adam, in paradise, could transcend the limits of human instinct and make additional choices without physical and psychological cost. In paradise, much of the free will was connected to extrapolation of natural instinct into new parallel paths. The omnivore can eat all types of food, even new things in new places. The body will accept this since it is still good taste and nutrition.

The choice to eat of the forbidden fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil was not exactly based on free will, since it had a huge hidden cost. In terms of hidden cost and free will, free will can cause one to be opened minded enough to try anything, but not all things are good for you. Free will, when taken to the limit, can bring us to our physical, psychological and emotional limitations; have a hidden cost. From this interaction with our limits, we develop a deeper understanding of cause and affect from which reason appears.

I have an apple and an orange on the table. You like apples but not oranges. I can keep the apple from you but I can't make you eat the orange. You can choose just to walk away. Is that using your free will?
 

BilliardsBall

Veteran Member
Been doing some thinking...

“Everything we do and everything that happens has a cause” is true

Therefore we can say that all things that happen are determined/caused by things that have happened in the past

Therefore there is no free will as it is impossible to carry out any action that does not have a cause – all actions have and must have a cause

Free will would require being able to act without a cause, which I think would be impossible. No matter how complex the human mind is, its workings are still governed by cause and effect, by things both external and internal to it

Free will is therefore an illusion, as things that come about by “free will” are truly caused by the past

I still believe we have wills, just not free wills!

I like the idea of having free will so please, prove me wrong :)

I can prove you right, but I choose not to do so.
 

Brickjectivity

Turned to Stone. Now I stretch daily.
Staff member
Premium Member
Free will would require being able to act without a cause, which I think would be impossible. No matter how complex the human mind is, its workings are still governed by cause and effect, by things both external and internal to it
That might be, if free will meant the ability to act without a cause rather than the power to decide what is moral. As far as I can tell the entire discussion about free will tends to ignore the really important question of whether we can identify right from wrong. Must we be slaves in need of moral direction, or can we direct ourselves? That is the important kind of free will and not the question of whether our choices are deterministic. Questions about free will originate from observations about the Bible and oft misunderstood terms such as 'Predestined'. For generations protestants wondered if salvation was predestined and how a person could be righteously condemned to hell by the same God who created them. These questions were irrelevant, and the Bible was only interested in a different question: the question of freedom which originates in moral judgment. It begins with Adam deciding its better to die than to live without this power, and from him judgment descends upon us all. Mythically now we all die, and by direct implication we are all like gods knowing good from evil. We pay the price for it. That is the only free will that matters.

Free will is therefore an illusion, as things that come about by “free will” are truly caused by the past
Free will has nothing to do with determinism or non determinism except in seminaries that are so ignorant they teach nothing that can't be learned from the back of a cereal box, and I'd say that is about 99% of them.
 
Top