An Argument Against Free Will

[Nakosis]

Well, I consider the 'supernatural' as part of the 'natural' not understood by current science,

That's ok, it is just some of those terms carry baggage that I'm not completely comfortable in handling.

 

[stvdv]

But lately I have gained interest in it, and am strongly inclined to reject the existence of "free will."

First, let's define "free will." I define "free will" in a person to be the characteristic that the person has control over the choices she/he makes.

Free Will is an interesting subject:

So, "No Free Will" is the reason that a "serial killer" keeps on killing.
If he has no control over the choices he makes, can we blame him for killing?
We obviously can't blame his parents, who created him, as they had no control either.

 

[Nakosis]

So are you thinking of something like a hidden awareness of all of your decisions made in your lifetime -- all at once?

Nothing quite that esoteric.

I simply believe that mentally I am omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent. Each individual is the creator of a multitude of realities. These realities can be as abstract or as logical as we will them to be. And, we can make decisions based on a reality which only exists in our head, so to speak.

 

[Nakosis]

Free Will is an interesting subject:

So, "No Free Will" is the reason that a "serial killer" keeps on killing.
If he has no control over the choices he makes, can we blame him for killing?
We obviously can't blame his parents, who created him, as they had no control either.

So, IMO, a serial killer probably doesn't have much conscious choice in their actions. They are driven by unconscious desires. They can learn to control those desires. However it is not automatic. It is something that IMO one has to mentally train for. One can learn to control their emotions and desires. One can learn to not be a slave to their desires but it is not easy. It takes discipline. So an undisciplined mind, let's call it, may not be able to be in control of their own actions. A disciplined mind would, and therefore would be responsible for the choices they made, the actions they took.

So a serial killer may at some point choose to no longer kill, but at the time, they may not have the discipline to make that choice.

 

[shunyadragon]

There is an excellent argument against what is called 'Libertarian Free Will,' but when you try to eliminate the possibility to no 'Free Will,' this gets more difficult.

I believe in the limited potential of 'Free Will.' and my argument goes from here.

 

[Jane Boswell]

You can pontificate and muse over the role of free will and its manifolds, but under the surface is your solid conviction that ego is evil and mind is servile to some external god. I call it external because we created it, so will you enslave yourself to a puppet?

 

[stvdv]

So, IMO, a serial killer probably doesn't have much conscious choice in their actions. They are driven by unconscious desires. However they can learn to control those desires. However it is not automatic. It is something that IMO one has to mentally train for. One can learn to control their emotions and desires. One can learn to not be a slave to their desires but it is not easy. It takes discipline. So an undisciplined mind, let's call it, may not be able to be in control of their own actions. A disciplined mind would, and therefore would be responsible for the choices they made, the actions they took.

So a serial killer may at some point choose to no longer kill, but at the time, they may not have the discipline to make that choice.

I see killing as extreme violence, which can only be done if there is extreme anger inside (more anger than love). In Holland we have a saying "blinded by anger", that might explain why he kills, like you said "not much conscious choice in their actions". I read "anger build up below age 4 or 7 is very hard to overcome".

Family life triggers lots of emotions. There is so much domestic irritation and violence. I think it would be good, to have a kind of "family coaching or education" at school. Even at young age, before kids get too damaged. Not just sex education.

Now with corona, I think lots of family dramas will flare up.

 

[wellwisher]

Free will is a developed skill. It is not innate in all humans at birth and active all the time. The word "free" means without cost or benefit. Free will is the ability to make choices, but without any emotional and psychological cost or benefit. The choice is free of rewards and liabilities.. Determinism will often be based that which innately attract or repel us, and thereby impacts the cost of our choices.

For example, say you were given the choice between an apple or an orange. If you prefer the apple or the orange, this choice is not free. Either, your choice will give you a benefit or it will make you feel you were short changed. Free will would require that you like both, the same amount, so either choice, will feel the same; free. This is not normal but takes practice.

We are all born with certain predispositions, such as good at math or good at language skills. Practicing for free will would require we develop our weaknesses, until there is no emotional or psychological cost. This is not easy, since most people prefer to rest on their deterministic laurels, since strengths are more likely to bring social benefits

Creativity is based on free will. No computer can create a new hit song that has never been written before. That would require another type of theoretical computer called intelligent computers.Also one cannot just randomly create a new number one song, by tossing notes and scales in the air. It is not deterministic, or random, if it did not previously exist apart from will and choice.

Like with all creativity, one will need to put themselves on the line, in terms of creative acceptance and rejection. Which means you need to develop thick skin so there is no emotional cost, for trying and practicing. This is also a developed skill, since we are not born with thick skin.

In a neurosis, one is compelled to a certain behavior or reaction. This is deterministic, often due to something in one's past. Therapy can be used to understand and lower the compulsion or reaction, into something with less cost. This hard work allows one to approach free will.

 

[Nakosis]

I see killing as extreme violence, which can only be done if there is extreme anger inside (more anger than love). In Holland we have a saying "blinded by anger", that might explain why he kills, like you said "not much conscious choice in their actions". I read "anger build up below age 4 or 7 is very hard to overcome".

Family life triggers lots of emotions. There is so much domestic irritation and violence. I think it would be good, to have a kind of "family coaching or education" at school. Even at young age, before kids get too damaged. Not just sex education.

Now with corona, I think lots of family dramas will flare up.

My son and his girlfriend, both stuck at home had a flare-up. Where she ended up physically choking him. Lots of anger is possible in loving relationships. Both now angry, hurt, victims of their emotions.

I tell them that being a victim sucks. Take control of your emotions, take control of your life. Why let anger and unwanted drama prevent your happiness. Choose otherwise.

Maybe before they don't think there was an option, now maybe they think not being angry with each other is a choice they can make whenever they want.

 

[Jane Boswell]

Family dramas will flare up where there is no real cohesion to begin with, or simply because of not enough space. Like when a family member has a problem and everyone unites to help, or not in too many cases.

Children while learning early on are super susceptible to images and ideologies of even the slightest warfare among their host planet. Children in the usa are summarily (if male) circumcised and indoctrinated with the daily Pledge of Allegiance, and pressure to wave a flag. They are likely, by now, "immune" to nukes.

 

[Curious George]

There are two options:

(1) My next choice is determined by prior causes in my genetics and environment.
(2) My next choice is not determined by prior causes, in which case it is random.

Are these the only two options or have you offered a false dichotomy?

Please also address why inductive reasoning is sufficient to assume cause and effect but not free will.

 

[Jane Boswell]

See how easily NUKES are dismissed? The blind deserve the slaughter.
Dissecting someone here shouldn't be so thrilling about something so mundane.
Hate not the messenger.

 

[stvdv]

My son and his girlfriend, both stuck at home had a flare-up. Where she ended up physically choking him. Lots of anger is possible in loving relationships. Both now angry, hurt, victims of their emotions.

I tell them that being a victim sucks. Take control of your emotions, take control of your life. Why let anger and unwanted drama prevent your happiness. Choose otherwise.

Maybe before they don't think there was an option, now maybe they think not being angry with each other is a choice they can make whenever they want.

We all have to learn this type of lessons. Took me a long time, to realize that I just need to communicate if someone hurts me. If I wait too long, small things explode big time (the proverbial drop). For me it all comes down to "respect the other and don't impose on others and don't cross borders". But even now I know, I still keep getting situations and challenges. Seems like "love keeps on deepening". Good your son/girlfriend learned this young.

 

[Skwim]

.

As a hard determinist I reject free will, the ability to have done differently, and unqualifiedly so. There is no choosing, choice, or any other supposed elected form of action. All our actions, which included our thoughts, are completely determined by previously existing causes. We do X because we can do no differently. I also reject the possibility of utterly random acts---those completely without cause---despite those who believe such events happen at the subatomic level And even IF utterly random acts did occur and sat side by side with our determined actions, they still wouldn't lend credibility to free will. Our actions would be either utterly determined and/or utterly random, still leaving free will without a leg to stand on.

Randomness no more saves free will than does a peanut butter and jelly sandwich.

.