Syphor

If I programmed a robot to choose between two seperate options does the robot then have freewill? At what point does the robot aquire freewill? And what does a robot with freewill have that a robot without freewill lacks?

DRFseven

I don't know what you're talking about. I asked you how I have the choice to believe something is true or false. To believe it or not is not up to me; I don't get to choose. I simply feed ideas into my mental processor and receive an answer, just as you do and just as everyone does.

[ June 10, 2002: Message edited by: DRFseven ]</p>

unworthyone

I'm sorry DRF I misunderstood you.

Perception of data has a bit of subjectiveness to it but generally its not really a choice what your brain will store.

It just does it.

I don't think this truly relates to free-will.

Free-will is knowingly selecting an option from a choice of many.

unworthyone

A robot generally has no conception of truth. Free-will gives us the opportunity to learn by our own decisions (while predestined) and by making these decisions it brings us closer to realization of self.

[ June 10, 2002: Message edited by: unworthyone ]</p>

ax

What I cannot figure out is God saying after A + E eating the fruit-"NOW they are like us, knowing good and evil". They had the choice before hand didn't they?
Eat= bad.
Not eat=good.
Does this mean that when Adam and Eve chose to condemn all humanity(not directly) they did not not know that what they were doing was bad? That means they( and us) were punished for a choice that was not made with complete free will!!So we have free will, now because of our forefather's sin we are all destined to hell-so did we have a choice in the matter?-no. <img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" />

unworthyone

I don't think Adam and Eve knew it was wrong just like a child doesn't know its wrong to take his diaper off and smear it all over a wall.

Once a child is brought to accountability for that actions, only then do they realize the free-will that was involved (right vs wrong) in it.

[ June 10, 2002: Message edited by: unworthyone ]</p>

DRFseven

You have no choice over what's in your brain, yet you don't think this truly relates to free will?

Yes, that's the soft free will concept; we are responsive to motivation. I choose my profession, my clothes, etc.; no one else does it for me or puts a gun to my head. However, I don't have the option of believing that any choice other than that which I make is the appropriate choice at any given time. This is Christian Free Will's big problem. The Christian doctrine of Free Will says that we have hard free will; that we can believe what we wish to believe. We can't. Other things can happen that cause our beliefs to change, but we are powerless to induce those changes, ourselves.

Syphor

What is truth - Right and Wrong
Who determines Right and Wrong - Society
Why adhere to Right and Wrong - Self Preservation

Program 100 robots with ten distinct personality parameters (such as desire to mate, desire to kill, desire to follow rules etc) and about 100 variables each as well as two main goals, self preservation and mating. Also program the robots to react to every other possible robot trait (1000 in total). Furthermore, give the robots the ability to determine positive and negative actions of other robots and store this information. Finally, create an isolated environment with two specific rules, no killing and no mating by force (moral name for no robot raping ).

Because each robot is different, they'll react differently to other robots and their interpretation of the rules will be different. One robots desire to mate may be so great that in disregard for the rules it may try to force mate with another robot. Other robots may kill this robot to prevent the rules from being broken again, or the robot that was attacked may kill in order to maintain self preservation. Because other robots know that forced robot mating is ultimately a negative action they may decide not to do it. The forced mating traits of some robots may be so great however, that influence from other robots may make little difference or they may pick a more defenceless robot to attack.

This is a pretty complex society, but it is still very simple compared to human society. Nonetheless, elements of right and wrong are beginning to emerge just like human society. Each robot acts and reacts differently, and each robot knows the difference between positive and negative effects for itself and for other robots. You could even take it one step further and introduce actions to please, or anger robots, therefore creating simple emotions such as happiness (which robots will endeavour to achieve as much as possible) or vengeance (to get revenge against an attacker). Obviously multiplying the variables by a 1000 times significantly increases the complexity of this robot society.

Philosoft

Alright. When did he know it? Did he not know until immediately before you made the choice? This seems to be the implication of what you're saying. It is not possible for God to know the outcome of an event without having predetermined that outcome, luvluv's mind-numbing atemporality assertions notwithstanding.

<strong> Gah. Seems like God has you convinced that contradictory statements aren't really contradictory.

<strong> How profound.

Gurdur

Incorrect; there are other ways of defining "soft" free will.
Which would not explain why people in love with an inappropriate person make choices which they "know" to be wrong, yet go ahead anyway.

This, like the bootstrapping post above, is an exaggeration of the actual positions held; there are many different Christian doctrines - often directly contradictory - on free will, ranging the whole gamut from full 5-pointer Calvinism, to Armenianism, to Thomism etc.

This is contradicted by your own words elsewhere; we're at liberty (assuming a degree of physical freedom) to change our enviroments, thus changing our sensory inputs, thus in the long-term our behaviour and our "beliefs".

Furthermore, many people protect a shakey belief by willfully and consciously refusing to consider alternatives or contrary evidence - a decision that can be reversed.

A hard-core belief can be difficult to change, but often it is still possible - for example, by challenging that belief (each and every time it results in an emotional reaction and behaviour) by building a contradicting mental perspective around the belief and its consequent mental state, till the emotive power of that underlying belief is rendered nil over time.