• 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!

A challenge to show me wrong

Skwim

Veteran Member
Kathryn said:
This is amazing. But so convenient! "We can't help anything that we do." "We are a product of our environment."
We are a product of all the cause/effect events that have impinged on us up to the present moment.

How does this work in "real life?"
Just as I explained in the OP.
Haven't you ever been angry at anyone? If so, why? Isn't that hypocritical?
I have. Because they have upset me. I had no choice in the matter.


If people can't help being rude to you, why be angry at them? Oh wait - is it because you simply can't help being angry?
See, you knew the answer all along. ;)

A few years ago I lost fifty pounds. I did this by going against every sort of automatic desire I had. It took great self control and small but difficult choices every single day for a year. Was this inevitable? Are you saying I really had no choice in this?
Yes.

People aren't evil? Charles Manson isn't evil? The man who abducted Elizabeth Smart isn't evil?
Like all judgment words, evil has arisen because we needed a word to express our perception of something, ill founded as it may be in light of our deterministic world.

Are you saying they didn't make choices? Are you saying they couldn't help themselves?
Bingo!

Mestemia said:
Seems to me you present a false dichotomy.
I await your case.

However, one needs for you to further clarify by what you mean by "choice".
Recall that I said
"Free will is an illusion. But before going into why, we first need to get rid of the term "choice" because it assumes to be true the condition under consideration, freedom to do what we want. So no use of "choice," "choosing,"chosen," or any other form of the word."
Seems to me that one almost always has a choice and that you are merely excusing the choice by declaring that certain past experiences dictate certain choices.
Perhaps I am missing something?
The notion of choice and choosing is rooted in perception that we are "equally able," which would be an exercise of free will, to select one or the other(s). The truth is when we do select a particular "option" and not the other it's because . . . . There was a reason (cause) that led to our action and not the other. To have selected the other the cause/effect chain would have had to be different, but it wasn't so we ended up selecting what we did.

UltraViolet said:
Well then, things are exactly as they must be.
Exactly!


bobhikes said:
Decisions are all made by current conscience thought.

Can you prove conscience is deterministic.
First of all, I haven't responded to your previous statements because LuisDantas has been doing a pretty good job of that. As for your comment here; as I pointed out in my OP I see "two ways actions take place; completely randomly, or caused." Actions includes all acts, even thoughts and those that are unconscious. So when one's conscious arrives at a decision regarding anything, just how did it do so? Was it a mere random act; it could just as easily decided something altogether different? Or was their a reason that your conscience arrived where it did? I say the latter is true. And the reason your conscious decided on (A) rather than (B), (C), (D), or (E) happens to be the cause of it. Your conscience was caused to end up with the decision it did because all the cause/effect events leading up to it prevented it from reaching another decision. It had to do what it did.
 

Koldo

Outstanding Member
My thoughts make me decide and there always another option like neither or asking for both.

Yes, your thoughts make you decide.
But based on what parameters?

With thoughts you can verify possible choices, but how do you decide between them if not with will? And can you will what you will?

With free will I make a decision but there maybe no specific reason. Its a reason of the moment.

But there is a reason, don't you agree?
Because if there is no reason then it is based solely on chance ( which isn't free will).

For example I decided to take a break from Religious forums until the fall. I have been checking in periodically to see what goes on. May 21 I checked in but have decided not to comment on anything as I wanted a break.

Why did you decide to take a break from Religious forums until fall?
Because you wanted to.

Today I decided to check in and clicked on this thread because of who wrote it. The title was not very inspiring. Once I read it I decided I must respond even though I still had resevations about not commenting until the fall.

Why did you click on this thread? Because you wanted to.
Why did you decide to respond? Because you wanted to.


If you talked to me yesterday or even this morning there would be no way of knowing that I would comment on this thread. In fact you would have no reason to believe I would even go to Religious Forums today but I did and there is a path to how I got here but it was not determined and nothing could have determined it.

Nothing could have been determined because this is a very very complex system. We would have to take into consideration an absurd ammount of data that we have yet to have access to. From the micro to the macro scale we would have to know everything there is to know in the present to make predictions, and this is simply beyond our scope. Not to mention the role of chance ( actual chance ) which could possibly lead us to a huge number of possible futures ( with free will playing no role ).
 
Last edited:

Willamena

Just me
Premium Member
As in "we do not"? Because really, I don't see how we can know either way... except that this world is simply not very amicable to choice.
That's the reason why philosophy takes the approach of treating its theories and models as of "possible worlds." Ideally, our conclusions should take the form of, "In a world where this and this condition happen, this and that is possible."
 

Willamena

Just me
Premium Member
My thoughts make me decide and there always another option like neither or asking for both.

With free will I make a decision but there maybe no specific reason. Its a reason of the moment.

For example I decided to take a break from Religious forums until the fall. I have been checking in periodically to see what goes on. May 21 I checked in but have decided not to comment on anything as I wanted a break.

Today I decided to check in and clicked on this thread because of who wrote it. The title was not very inspiring. Once I read it I decided I must respond even though I still had resevations about not commenting until the fall.

If you talked to me yesterday or even this morning there would be no way of knowing that I would comment on this thread. In fact you would have no reason to believe I would even go to Religious Forums today but I did and there is a path to how I got here but it was not determined and nothing could have determined it.
:) The power of "whim".
 

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
Who know's your thoughts, your love's, your pain. Can you convey the exact feeling to anybody. Do they change based on enviroment alone or can you change them yourself. Can you reflect in a dark room and come out different then when you went in.

As to the biology and similarity of twins, there is nothing to indicate similarity of conscience at all wheter life is deteministic or free will.

If life is based on deterministic actions twins would have different conscience's as they can never be in the same spot in the same moment so experience life from different perceptions. They also have to deal with the other and that will shape there conscience as well.

Not sure what conscience would be, but agreed so far.


My point for free will is that all humans have a different conscience (even twins) whether you have a deterministic view or not. All conscience's are actively changing even without enviromental influence. In dealing with another person that has a conscience you are creating an action that effects the real world without being directly tied to the real world. Effectively creating change.

I'm not sure what you mean here either. Far as I can tell there is no practical way of removing environmental influence, and dealing with other persons certainly qualifies as environmental influence anyway.


If all animals and humans had the exact same emotions and could not override these emotions by thought alone or all thoughts had a direct line from the real world and you can not create them without influence of the real world then and only then could you consider a deterministic view.

Sorry, but I just don't see why. It sure would help a lot in demonstrating that view, of course.


As I said before you just need to prove that conscience is deterministic as it influences the real world greatly.

What is conscience, and why would it be needed for a deterministic view?
 

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
That's the reason why philosophy takes the approach of treating its theories and models as of "possible worlds." Ideally, our conclusions should take the form of, "In a world where this and this condition happen, this and that is possible."

But does that apply to the idea of free will? Seems to me that whatever possible worlds allow for free will are rather unlike this one we live in.
 

bobhikes

Nondetermined
Premium Member
What is conscience, and why would it be needed for a deterministic view?

What I have come to understand from all the replies is that it is not a choice of if you have free will but a choice if you want to use it.

Many do not want the ability to decide there own fate.
 

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
What I have come to understand from all the replies is that it is not a choice of if you have free will but a choice if you want to use it.

That is true, but only for those who are convinced that free will exists and who have convinced themselves that it is compatible with the real world.

Which, far as I know, is a couple of rather arbitrary beliefs.


Many do not want the ability to decide there own fate.

That much is true, but it says nothing about the meaning or existence of free will.
 

bobhikes

Nondetermined
Premium Member
That is true, but only for those who are convinced that free will exists and who have convinced themselves that it is compatible with the real world.

Which, far as I know, is a couple of rather arbitrary beliefs.
.


As always with the deterministic view, neither of us has a choice in our views it was all determined before it even began. So all this is debating is just useless dribble.


Debate only has real value if free will exists.:p
 

bobhikes

Nondetermined
Premium Member
I look at some of the other Free will threads.

deterministic requires us to be the sum of nature and experiences(stored in the mind). Recalling all your experiences to make a decision would take some time.

I ask how do you choose which experiences to use and what time period do you stop recalling those experiences.

I also ask do you on some level recall all your lives experiences or are some forgotten.

Does each action require a different program to select the experiences. For example an emergency situation you take the 3 most current to decide.

That's one radical program.
 

Skwim

Veteran Member
I look at some of the other Free will threads.

deterministic requires us to be the sum of nature and experiences(stored in the mind). Recalling all your experiences to make a decision would take some time.
Yes it would.

I ask how do you choose which experiences to use and what time period do you stop recalling those experiences.
You don't choose them. You don't choose anything. The chain of cause/effect events determine what do. Simple as that.
 

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
As always with the deterministic view, neither of us has a choice in our views it was all determined before it even began. So all this is debating is just useless dribble.

Unless it is determined that it isn't...

Debate only has real value if free will exists.:p

Or if it fulfills a purpose, even if it is a predetermined one.
 

Copernicus

Industrial Strength Linguist
There is no incompatibility between determinism and free will. What people seem to get hung up on the most in these discussions are cases where a person has conflicting desires or incompatible goals. For example, Kathryn cited a case where it took great willpower and strength of character for her to stay on a diet. She freely chose not to eat food when it was available to her and she craved it. That was an exercise of free will, in her mind, but eating the food would also have been an exercise of free will. What was not under her control was whether her desire to stay on the diet would trump her desire to eat. She did not make a choice that her character would be strong in this matter. It just was. A different person would have made a different choice, because that person might not have had a desire to diet that was so strong it would overcome her desire to eat.

One can say that free will is something of an illusion, since we cannot choose to have strength of will in one direction or another. That is something that happens to us as our character develops. If our choices had no causes, they would be completely random and we would lack predictable characters. It is the fact that human behavior has causes that allows us to make judgments about the character of people. Determinism allows us to develop expectations about how others will choose to behave.
 

bobhikes

Nondetermined
Premium Member
There is no incompatibility between determinism and free will.

I see a big difference. With determinism I am not responsible for my actions it was determined by everything that lead to this point. With free will you and only you are responsible for your actions.


(Solely my thoughts below.)
I would bet that most people that follow determinism do so because they are not fully happy with there end result or do not want to be responsible.

Those that support free will have found an inner peace or believe intensely in responsibility.
 

Copernicus

Industrial Strength Linguist
I see a big difference. With determinism I am not responsible for my actions it was determined by everything that lead to this point. With free will you and only you are responsible for your actions.
Why would you not be held accountable? If you are judged incompetent or unwilling to behave in a manner that others find dependable, you are dealt with accordingly--usually incarceration, restraint, compulsory medication, standing in the corner, no allowance, etc. Some people behave "correctly" or "normally" in order to gain the approval of others and/or avoid punishment. If you do not monitor your own behavior in a responsible way, then you are held accountable by your peers or by authorities.

(Solely my thoughts below.)
I would bet that most people that follow determinism do so because they are not fully happy with there end result or do not want to be responsible.
I do not understand what you mean by the expression "follow determinism", but I'm guessing that you mean people use the philosophical doctrine of "determinism" to excuse their bad behavior. I honestly do not know anyone who actually does that. People who believe in determinism are merely taking a philosophical position. In my case, the position is known as compatibilism. In other words, I do believe in "free will". I just see no conflict between it and determinism.

Those that support free will have found an inner peace or believe intensely in responsibility.
Nonsense. People who believe in "free will" may or may not have "inner peace"--the same as anyone else. That is a state of mind, and some people who believe in free will actually choose to do bad things. Note that I believe in "free will". As Schopenhauer said: "Man is free to do what he wills, but he cannot will what he wills".

Yes, and no.
We would need a huge ammount of data to actually understand how an individual will behave in the future.
We simply need enough experience to understand human motives. Based on how we observe people to behave, we form expectations about how they will behave in the future. Suppose someone is undercharged for a restaurant bill. If we observe that person to refuse to pay the incorrect amount, then we can usually conclude that that person is guided by a sense of moral correctness, which will continue to govern behavior in the future. If we observe that person to pay the incorrect amount and "stiff" the restaurant, then we can usually conclude that that person feels less constrained by such a principle. We draw conclusions about how people will behave, because we assume that their behavior is determined--not uncaused or random.
 

Koldo

Outstanding Member
We simply need enough experience to understand human motives. Based on how we observe people to behave, we form expectations about how they will behave in the future. Suppose someone is undercharged for a restaurant bill. If we observe that person to refuse to pay the incorrect amount, then we can usually conclude that that person is guided by a sense of moral correctness, which will continue to govern behavior in the future. If we observe that person to pay the incorrect amount and "stiff" the restaurant, then we can usually conclude that that person feels less constrained by such a principle. We draw conclusions about how people will behave, because we assume that their behavior is determined--not uncaused or random.

I understand your point. However, it is important to take into consideration the fact that 'will' also changes over time in a determined way. Past experiences, feelings, and thoughts can change the will. An invididual who is an example of moral correctness may change completely if a given switch is triggered.

Not to mention that subtle things that may alter our behavior. In your example, if the man had gone to the restaurant with a given friend perhaps he would not have acted the same way.

Our will is compromised of a huge web with a complicated hierarchy system that is updated at every moment by our life experiences. And it is impossible to say that chance plays no role in it.

At the present moment, the most we can do is create rough predictions about individual's behaviors based on probabilities. Accurate predictions, if possible, would require an absurd ammount of data.
 
Top