Is 'Free Will' subject to what we believe?

[rojse]

Explain please.

The perception of free will is not the same as having free will. If free will did not exist, all of our future actions would be based on our beliefs at the time we make our decisions, including our beliefs on the subject of free will.

 

[Willamena]

If free will did not exist, all of our future actions would be based on our beliefs at the time we make our decisions . . .

Or on our perceptions.

 

[rojse]

Or on our perceptions.

Exactly.

 

[Erebus]

I would argue that everybody has a degree of free will regardless of whether or not they believe in a god.
It's not belief or disbelief in a god that affects free will, rather it is free will itself (or a lack thereof) that results in belief/disbelief. Now if a human was raised as a blank slate and capable of looking at the world through a purely objective manner, they would be entirely free to decide whether they do or do not believe in a particular deity. However, as free will can be easily influenced and moulded by people and environments it is highly likely that a person believes or disbelieves in a deity more as a result of their upbringing and social life than as a result of their free will.
In addition to upbringing and environment, it is possible to influence a person's free will via certain psychological procedures. For example, a particularly ruthless psychologist should be able to re-write a person's entire personality over a period of months or years if given the appropriate conditions and equipment (I won't go into detail on how to do this as it is highly illegal). Inevitably a part of the new personality could include belief systems if the psychologist so wished.
To summarise; a person's free will is not affected by their beliefs (beliefs merely form a "guideline" which can be ignored if the person wishes), instead beliefs are formed by the person sometimes due to, but more often through a lack of free will.

 

[Willamena]

Exactly.

So if all our decisions are based on our perceptions at the time, and "free will is not the perception of free will", how do we decide that "free will is not the perception of free will"?

In other words, the perception that "the perception of free will is not free will" guides that decision.

 

[rojse]

So if all our decisions are based on our perceptions at the time, and "free will is not the perception of free will", how do we decide that "free will is not the perception of free will"?

In other words, the perception that "the perception of free will is not free will" guides that decision.

Honestly, I am not too sure whether we have free will or not. It's a question that is beyond my intellectual capacities and information to answer right now.

However, to answer your question, we would obtain evidences or have experiences that would slowly allow us to determine our opinions on predetermination. For me, it was reading Kurt Vonnegut.

I don't know anything about the idea of predetermination that says that we would not learn that our lives are predetermined - is your question based on this premise at all?

 

[Willamena]

Edit: nevermind.

 

[rojse]

Edit: nevermind.

Okay, what have I done?

 

[Willamena]

Okay, what have I done?

Nothing you've done. Just 'stranger than fiction' stuff.

 

[rojse]

Nothing you've done. Just 'stranger than fiction' stuff.

You can't make a post, change it to say "never mind" and expect me not to be inquisitive. What are your opinions about predetermination, then, that it seems I have not considered?

 

[Willamena]

I don't know anything about the idea of predetermination that says that we would not learn that our lives are predetermined - is your question based on this premise at all?

What are your opinions about predetermination

No, my question had nothing to do with predetermination. As far as I know, it's about influencing future events. Is that what you're talking about?

Edit: "It" being "predetermination".

 

[rojse]

No, my question had nothing to do with predetermination. As far as I know, it's about influencing future events. Is that what you're talking about?

I had supposed that predetermination was the opposite of free will.

 

[Humanistheart]

Is 'Free Will' subject to what we believe? If we don't believe in 'God' are we robbed of free will? Similarly, if we choose to believe in 'God' are we exercising free will, or is it something we couldn't help but believe in?

I soppose it would depend on what the reality of the human condition and the universe is. As one poster said if an omisceint god created us then I don't see free will even being possible. If 'fate' or 'destiny' exists I'd say same the same thing.

I don't see how belief would affect this. It would certainly affect people's actions and thoughts, but that's not exactly the same as stripping a person of free will. As for the exercise of free will in relation to 'god' I'm not sure. I don't think belief is a choice. I think some people simply are not capable of belief. Perhaps some people can convince themselves of something if they want it badly enough, I don't know.

 

[Zindagee Rahmaan]

To me, will is part and parcel of the illusion of ownership. We own our bodies, own our thoughts, own our intentions, and own our actions --the freedom of will is the idea that "I" guide and control the things "I" own. "Use of that freedom" comes closest to it.

We aren’t own freewill and fate limits it. We are limited owning our body, thoughts, intentions and actions. We have no choice for our body in death and life or illness and health, limited choice in thoughts for our brain can storm through limited ideas, limited intentions and actions according to surroundings. These limitations for freewill make us for not we own it; we are blessed with freewill that is blessed by God Almighty because fate is usually referred to Him. So it would not be incorrect to say, “Yes, our freewill is robbed if we do not believe in God, when we believe in God we know we are limited in freewill by fate settled by God Almighty.”

Freewill -> fate -> God

 

[d3vaLL]

Free Will does not exist. Every choice is determined by preset variables which were out of your control (or ownership). From morals to the feeling in your bladder telling to urinate.

 

[idea]

Is 'Free Will' subject to what we believe? If we don't believe in 'God' are we robbed of free will? Similarly, if we choose to believe in 'God' are we exercising free will, or is it something we couldn't help but believe in?

I think free will is subject to will power. If you have no will power, and just let your environment dictate your actions, then no, you are not using your free will.

Knowing God exists and believing Him are two different things. I know my mother exists, but do I always believe what she says? No. Belief/understanding comes through actions/experience - actions/experience needed to understand God requires we use our will. (love, be humble, pray, be selfless, etc. etc. - these things take will power, and you will not believe in or know God unless you do these things.)

 

[Willamena]

I had supposed that predetermination was the opposite of free will.

Ah, that's determinism. Determinism is something we could never know the truth of any more than free will, unless it is understood that we are the ones who determine the order or sequence of things. We experience here and now; we do not experience the past and the future. Here and now, happenings are both causes of future events and the effects of past events; but their effect on the future is only determined by probability, and their cause is assigned, by us, in the same manner. Cause and effect is a 'string' of probability that we assemble, thread by thread, and weave in consciousness (in "knowing").

> So if all our decisions are based on our perceptions at the time, and "free will is not the perception of free will", how do we decide that "free will is not the perception of free will"? <

Our perceptions happen here and now. Our free will happens here and now. If, here and now, we perceive a reality to the freedom of "I own this body," or "I own this thought," "they are mine and I take responsibility for the things done with them," then that is the aspect of free will I was looking at. It does peripherally involve a determined world, yes (hence, while "opposites", they cannot be mutually exclusive).

 

[idea]

Free Will does not exist. Every choice is determined by preset variables which were out of your control (or ownership). From morals to the feeling in your bladder telling to urinate.

Free will does not exist for those who have no will power, for those who allow their environment to dictate their actions.

"He made me mad" - no, no one makes you mad. You allow them to control you, or you control yourself. Free will is only available for those who are able to control themselves.

 

[idea]

Ah, that's determinism.

Free will has to do with "who" sets the future in stone, not if it is set in stone. If you set your own future in stone, then it is your choice, your will.

Determinism/foreordination does not take away free will.

 

[Willamena]

Free will has to do with "who" sets the future in stone, not if it is set in stone. If you set your own future in stone, then it is your choice, your will.

Determinism/foreordination does not take away free will.

Ah, I took his answer as a "no"; my bad. Then if it is God's predetermination of events that is meant, that is about influencing future events. Then I don't understand post #26.

I agree (as indicated above) that determinism does not take away free will. Foreordination is another matter (I'll have to look that one up).