Soul Invictus

I'd appreciate all feedback, however I especially will be interested in that of the theists.

This issue is by no means cut and dry. It is my experience that predominantly, there are two themes in reference to how time unfolds...predestionation (fate) or freewill. (This may be a bad description, however I'm not sure what the proper term would be)

Fate, or predestination pretty much says that whatever happens will happen anyway, regardless of your actions. Movies like Minority Report and The Matrix series touch on this theme a bit. For the theists, the sentiment would be that of "Everything happens according to God's plan"

Free will, is more of the inclination that the future is directly correlated to the actions of the present. I haven't quite found a religous claim that could account for free will definitively. I've heard allusions to it, such as choosing salvation, however I feel those examples are misleading if you feel God has a divine plan.

Of which thought are you? Do you think that your actions now will determine your future, so in essence you are at liberty to control your life, or are you of the idea that your future is already determined (again for the theist, God has a divine plan) and that you will conduct actions to get there, however since they are part of a plan, you don't have choice or control, over the consequences you conduct, because they are part of a bigger design?

This may not be articulated well, and may not do the concepts total justice. I'll do my best with the feedback I get!

Thanks

PS - I really hope to not get a lot of the "it's a bit of both" style answers...it pretty much defeats the point of the thread if there's no definitive stance on the issue, if you can sit on the fench.

kctan

How about random & chaotic with a touch of cause & effect ?

SimplyAtheistic

If you believe in the laws of physics, you cannot believe in free will. Humans have an illusion of free will, and we make DO make choices, but the choices we make are the only possible ones. Let me simplify it. If external stimuli cause one neuron to release neurotransmitters, you would agree that it is simply physics correct? Well, in humans it is the same thing except for the fact that there are billions of neurons being triggered. This causes thought and consciousness, and allows us to make decisions. The fact remains though that these decisions are simply the laws of physics at work. It is like a computer program, you could write one that is enormously complex and reacts to the enviornment, but if you run it in the same environment in the exact same way, it will always make the SAME decision. It has made a decision, but it is the only possible one.
Jake

Nowhere357

I believe in the laws of physics, and I believe in free will.

As I understand the words, if we DO make choices, then this is not illusion. We use will to make choices.

Then they are not choices. I think a "choice" must be made from a selection of possibilities - a range.

Yes. Do you hold the belief that we fully understand physics?

More than neurons are involved, but yes.

Yes. This happens because the living brain generates a mind, which has will.

The computer has no mind, afaik. So yes the "choices" made by the computer are forced. However, people have minds. People have subjective mental awareness.

Are you aware of quantum indeterminancy? The exact same environment/conditions do not of necessity produce the exact same results. You can call will "illusion" if you like, but it is no illusion that I make can decisions any more than it is illusion that I can feel pain.

And there is plenty of room in natural physics for the existence of minds with awareness and will. There would pretty much have to be, since the things exist. I know you will want to tell me that they only seem to exist, but then we must tell people who are suffering to quit whining - it's just illusion. And that doesn't make sense, because suffering is real.

Will is no more mysterious then awareness, and awareness definitely exists. Will is no illusion. We really do make decisions that affect ourselves and the world. We really are responsible for our actions.

Now I wonder: will you decide to argue that you don't really make decisions?

Nowhere357

Sure. And it's interesting that order nonetheless exists.

Anyway, how about the cause is the living brain, and the effect is the emergence of mind. The cause is the existence of mind and the effect is awareness and will. The cause is application of will and the effect is conscious selection from available choices.

kctan

Order exists or do we 'find order' out of chaos ?

Matter of perspective I suppose.

Yggdrasill

My thoughts on free will and fate change as you change the definition of free will. (But I don't think there is any outside force.) Using this definition:

free will: in philosophy, the doctrine that an individual, regardless of forces external to him, can and does choose at least some of his actions. (dictionary)

Yes, you have free will, even though, in two identical situations where a choice is made, the outcome will always be the same.

An analogy would be in order:

Just because 1+1 equals 2 in every circumstance, doesn't mean that the ability to calculate doesn't exist. It merely means that the result was there to be found before the ability to calculate was applied.

I will attempt to translate that analogy into a relevant argument:

Just because the choices made in two identical situations will always be the same, doesn't mean that you don't have free will. It merely means that the choice was there to be chosen before the ability to choose was applied.

That's about the best I can do. English is really inadequate for discussing advanced concepts.

emotional

Both. And there is no contradiction between the two.

SimplyAtheistic

This is a contradictory statement.

Yes we do make choices, but as I stated earlier they are the only possible choices to be made. Making a choice does not strictly imply free will. I can write a program like this:
if(name == "jake") { cout<<"hi"; } else { cout<< "bye"; } , now the program can make a choice, but given the enviornemnt (our world in this case) it is pre-determined to make one choice only.

It is still a choice, albeit a pre-determined one.

We understand enough to comprehend this issue.

Yep.

Yes, but it is not a free will. The will is pre-determined.

A computer can be made to have a mind just as people do. It is just so complex that we have not been able to duplicate it as of yet.

I don't see how this affects the choices. We can test neurons in an environment and they will fire consistently given a controlled enviornment. Free will is still an illusion.

Just because suffering is real does not mean free will exists. There is no room in physics for free will. Are you telling me that if we had a computer powerful enough to compltely duplicate the laws of physics, that we could not simulate our universe. Because you would have to think this given your stance on the issue.

Yes we do make decisions. Again, these decisions are pre-determined.

I argue that the decisions I make are the only posssible ones. This might indidcate that they really aren't decisions, but I argue that they are, but they are decisions that we have to make.

Jake

Nowhere357

Maybe by your definitions. How do you define the words?

And as I said, we are not digital computers. The fact that computer "choices" are predetermined does not strictly deny free will.

I understand your point. Computer programs aren't really a good example for your position, though, because a computer program requires a programmer, and so the will of the programmer is involved. That's who predetermined the choices made by the computer. Theists can use this to argue for the existence of God, so try to think of a better example.

Yes. Do you hold the belief that we fully comprehend the physics involved with the emergence of mind?

I consider "free will" and "will" to mean the same thing. So your statement seems to contradict itself. You say the will is predetermined, and then imply it doesn't exist. Maybe you should give your definitions.

One day, perhaps. And that is the day a computer has sentience. How would we recoginize this? Because it overrides it's programming, maybe? Exhibits will? If not that, then what?

You are confusing the map for the terrain. For example, consider pain. We can associate the subjective feeling of pain with the firing of neurons. Now, when the neurons fire, is pain an illusion? Do you really think that your awareness does not exist?

True. But it does indicate that the mind is more than neurons firing. It indicates that mind arises from the living brain. So given that the mind exists, we can look at it's properties and qualities.

Why are you claiming this, when you ignore the question about quantum physics? There is plenty of room in physics for the existence of mind, awareness and will. They are part of natural reality.

"Completely duplicate" and "simulate" are not the same thing. You know, we already have access to something that completely duplicates the laws of physics - the universe!

Not if will is applied to make the decision. Do you think classical physics provides a full description of reality?

I disagree. Please define "decision", "predetermine", "will", "free will" and "the laws of physics". And answer this question:

Are you aware of quantum indeterminancy?