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:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Seyorni said:Consider the question from the point of view of physics/Vedanta:
There is no time, as we experience it. Time is just another dimension, mathematically equivalent to length or breadth. From this perspective the idea of predestination becomes moot, as the concept of pre- is meaningless.
One's life is a filmstrip of sequential, already extant scenes. As we are capable, in ordinary consciousness, of seeing only one frame at a time, we experience the illusion of change and motion, just as we do on the silver screen. All our life experiences, past and present, exist, will exist and always have existed. All are equally real. The only thing really changing is our conscious focus on one or another frame.
Now here's where free will comes in:
Reality is not a linear filmstrip with only two adjacent frames/possibilities, nor is it a sheet of film with four adjacent realities. It's not even a 3-D "block" of film (this is getting hard to picture [ :sorry1: ]) with 6 (?) adjacent frames.
The universe has dimensions we can't even consciously perceive; dimensions that can only be worked out mathematically and explored experimentally. Yet they are as Real as the three we currently experience. Among theoretical physicists, the current hot number is 11.
Here is how free will works:
A consciousness (jivanmukta), zipping along it's filmstrip. may, at any time, choose to turn left, right, up, down &c. Each choice is an "alternative ending;" even though each has always existed and is, therefore, completely determinant. Another consciousness coming along behind the first, living/experiencing the same life, might choose to turn "up" at the point the first jiva turned left. He would then move into a different reality or life experience from the first entity.
In the multidimensional Universe every physically possible alternative is adjacent to each frame of Reality. Consciousnesses dart about freely, choosing their own realities and scripts. This is their free will. The Universe is a timeless, motionless, unchanging amalgamation of everything possible. The only movement or change is the focus of our awareness. Thus, Reality (Brahman) is both determinant and indeterminant.
I found it just confusing.Moni_Gail said:*jawdrop* OMG! Confusing, intriguing, and inspirational all at once. Thanks for that!
Godlike said:Basically, does or can authentic freewill exist in a conditioned causal Universe?
Godlike said:Beliefs in predestination, fate, clockwork universe, the unreality and absence of freewill.
Discuss...
Seyorni said:Here is how free will works:
A consciousness (jivanmukta), zipping along it's filmstrip. may, at any time, choose to turn left, right, up, down &c. Each choice is an "alternative ending;" even though each has always existed and is, therefore, completely determinant. Another consciousness coming along behind the first, living/experiencing the same life, might choose to turn "up" at the point the first jiva turned left. He would then move into a different reality or life experience from the first entity.
In the multidimensional Universe every physically possible alternative is adjacent to each frame of Reality. Consciousnesses dart about freely, choosing their own realities and scripts. This is their free will. The Universe is a timeless, motionless, unchanging amalgamation of everything possible. The only movement or change is the focus of our awareness. Thus, Reality (Brahman) is both determinant and indeterminant.
Godlike said:Okay. the compatibility of Freewill and Determinism: let's assume God made the Universe with a Divine Plan in mind which pre-determined the "chosen" path of his creations (Us). How can we have freewill if our choices are predestined?
Same question as Neo faces in the Matrix movies, but if anyone says "You here to understand why you made the choice" I'll scream.
Basically, does or can authentic freewill exist in a conditioned causal Universe?
We would be incapable of "knowing" anything. Knowledge comes of having a conscious mind, and a conscious mind has free will.Wandered Off said:If we lacked free will, would we know it?
Fluffy said:Either an action (in this case specifically a choice) is caused or uncaused. Neither possibility can be accurately defined "free will".
Determinism might be incompatible with free will but that is largely irrelevant since free will is not a coherent concept and in order to make it coherent, we have to redefine it into something that it is not (see soft determinism).
What do you mean by free will is not a coherent concept?
Consciousness and free will are entirely seperate and it is also completely possible for the conscious mind to lack free will.We would be incapable of "knowing" anything. Knowledge comes of having a conscious mind, and a conscious mind has free will.
Fluffy said:It is self contradictory. In order to choose to affect something else we have to admit a connection between the will and the action. Since the will causes the action, we say that the action does not have the ability to choose its consequences. Yet the will itself must be the result of an action (implication of accepting the first premise) and so we have contradicted ourselves.
Essentially, free will relies on cause and effect (ie determinism) but in requiring that mechanism, it also prevents itself from working. Therefore, it is not a coherent concept.
Consciousness and free will are entirely seperate and it is also completely possible for the conscious mind to lack free will.
Depends on how we define free will, doesn't it? (i.e. determination)Fluffy said:Consciousness and free will are entirely seperate and it is also completely possible for the conscious mind to lack free will.
Free will requires that our choices can display themselves in our actions. This means that free will requires cause and effect in order to operate.I’m not sure if I understood but why in the world do you speak of the action as something alive and part of the person?
We may have differing views of free will. Free will and the human conscious intertwined for us. I’m curious where you got your understanding from?
Depends on how we define free will, doesn't it? (i.e. determination)
Not to me. Free will doesn't require anything. That's the point.Fluffy said:Free will requires that our choices can display themselves in our actions. This means that free will requires cause and effect in order to operate.
Why would it seem weird if it happens in our head?Fluffy said:Now if you want to say that free will is in fact just our ability to analyse and process data that results in a choice then fair enough but that is equivilant to inputting and outputting data and it seems weird to call it a choice when it happens in our heads and a probability when it is displayed in the deal of a hand or a rock falling off a cliff or a bacterium reproducing.
In that sentence, I use free will to mean the idea not the incidence. If the idea of free will does not require anything (such as a definition which is essentially what I meant) then it doesn't mean anything.Not to me. Free will doesn't require anything. That's the point.
I am saying it is weird because what happens in our heads is equivilant to what happens outside of our heads and so to say that our action is the result of free will is like saying that the rolling down the hill was the result of the free will of the rock. I do not find it weird to assert that free will happens in our heads. I find it weird to treat inside and outside as different entities rather than identical yet at seperate locations.Why would it seem weird if it happens in our head?
Where else would you think free will would be excercised?
Free will is expressed at every situation in your life.
Ok, what I meant is that the definition does not require anything. It is bound to nothing.Fluffy said:In that sentence, I use free will to mean the idea not the incidence. If the idea of free will does not require anything (such as a definition which is essentially what I meant) then it doesn't mean anything.
I am saying that we are in control of our actions and that previous input can either influence or not influence.Fluffy said:I am saying it is weird because what happens in our heads is equivilant to what happens outside of our heads and so to say that our action is the result of free will is like saying that the rolling down the hill was the result of the free will of the rock. I do not find it weird to assert that free will happens in our heads. I find it weird to treat inside and outside as different entities rather than identical yet at seperate locations.
What is your definition of free will and is it compatible with our actions being predetermined from the beginning of the universe (hypothetically)? When you say free will are you asserting that we are in some way in control of our actions and that our actions are not the sum of prior inputs?
I am saying that in stating "we are in control of our actions" you are admitting a causal link between ourselves and our actions (in other words cause and effect).I am saying that we are in control of our actions and that previous input can either influence or not influence.