A challenge to show me wrong

[Mudcat]

If your argument against reason is personal perception I wouldn't lay any more than lunch money on it.

Actually I was arguing that people in general perceive making choices. Not just me.. more of a cumulative case, I think.

edit add- you say it's an argument against reason, given determinism.. reason is meaningless isn't it?... I mean "reason" seems to imply choice between reasonable vs. less reasonable but determinism doesn't make such concession. Does it?

I wasn't appreciative of your "lunch money" comment, but it's not like you actually chose to write it.. did you?

additional edit add - no intent to give you a scattergun of questions. I think the one against your use the term "reason" is valid and the following is also.
Do you disagree that you perceive making choices? You would be an anomaly if you did, I would think.

 

[tom-2011]

Freewill depends on God.

If God does not exist, freewill exists.

If God exists but is not omnipotent or has not planned every aspect of existence, freewill probably exists.

If God is omnipotent and has planned everything, freewill does not exist.

I believe God is omnipotent, I can't tell if I have freewill or not.

I am what I am, my choices seem to be decided by that.

Maybe God will tell us eventually.

 

[Willamena]

If your argument against reason is personal perception I wouldn't lay any more than lunch money on it.

Determinism is as much personal perception as free will, and as much reason.

 

[atanu]

Sorry but I don't understand what you're saying. Care to rephrase?

What do you believe? Do you believe that the root of the 'because-----' chain can be reached or not? If one knows the root of the 'because ----' chain, then whether that person still be ruled by determinism?

 

[Skwim]

What do you believe? Do you believe that the root of the 'because-----' chain can be reached or not?

Knowing or not knowing any cause does not affect the effect or the process. So, whether or not one reaches the "root of the because. . . . . chain " is immaterial. That said, I don't believe the "root of the because. . . . . chain" is knowable.

If one knows the root of the 'because ----' chain, then whether that person still be ruled by determinism?

Your sentence isn't computing. If you're asking if the 'because ----' chain, is known would this free one of determinism, then no, it would not. If your question is something different then please rephrase.

 

[idav]

Freewill depends on God.

If God does not exist, freewill exists.

If God exists but is not omnipotent or has not planned every aspect of existence, freewill probably exists.

If God is omnipotent and has planned everything, freewill does not exist.

I believe God is omnipotent, I can't tell if I have freewill or not.

I am what I am, my choices seem to be decided by that.

Maybe God will tell us eventually.

I don't think omnipotence necessarily determines a person as a slave. In theory omnipotence should allow the powerful being to allow free will for it's creations. In turn the omnipotent being could easily do a kill switch so the free will would be limited only when necessary.

 

[Skwim]

Actually I was arguing that people in general perceive making choices. Not just me.. more of a cumulative case, I think.

That they do, even myself.

edit add- you say it's an argument against reason, given determinism.. reason is meaningless isn't it?... I mean "reason" seems to imply choice between reasonable vs. less reasonable but determinism doesn't make such concession. Does it?

No less so than good reasoning can be equated to a mathematical equation that produces the correct answer. Poor reasoning is like a faulty formula and good reasoning like a good formula. If the chain of cause/effect in reasoning produces the appropriate then it's answer is little different than A² = B² + C²

I wasn't appreciative of your "lunch money" comment, but it's not like you actually chose to write it.. did you?

And you didn't appreciate it because I felt your argument wasn't a good one? Then I suggest you toughen up a bit.

additional edit add - no intent to give you a scattergun of questions. I think the one against your use the term "reason" is valid and the following is also. Do you disagree that you perceive making choices? You would be an anomaly if you did, I would think.

And I would agree. I constantly perceive myself as making choices. I can't help it. It's the way my thinking has been determined.

Determinism is as much personal perception as free will, and as much reason.

Not at all. Determinism will still be operating long after the last person on Earth has left.

 

[atanu]

------That said, I don't believe the "root of the because. . . . . chain" is knowable.

Why?

Knowing or not knowing any cause does not affect the effect or the process

That seems to me to be an assumption or belief. Without knowing the root how can this be said?

If you're asking if the 'because ----' chain, is known would this free one of determinism, then no, it would not.

How do you know?

 

[Skwim]

Why?

It would entail knowing the exact nature of the past.

How do you know?

There's no reason it should. But if you can come up with one I'd be delighted to hear it. If you found all the reasons leading up to something you did would this prevent it from having happened? If you knew all the reasons leading up to something you do would this prevent you from doing it?

 

[atanu]

It would entail knowing the exact nature of the past.


There's no reason it should. But if you can come up with one I'd be delighted to hear it. If you found all the reasons leading up to something you did would this prevent it from having happened? If you knew all the reasons leading up to something you do would this prevent you from doing it?

I understand that you hold:

• Knowing the 'root' cannot alter the effect or the process and determinism will still hold
• The root is unknowable

The above two positions seem to me to be opposed and to me both the views are beliefs.

.........................

Yes and Yes to both of your questions in blue. But that would be unnecessary since happenings and the root are detached. This at present is my considered belief based on Hindu scriptural teaching that the Brahman is knowable and that by knowing Brahman everything is known.

 

[patronsaint]

Skwim, my friend you are probably struggling with something not in your control that caused you to create this logical falicy, you yave twisted logic in your brain to the point where it makes sense to you even if it is false.

Look, you said that we cant do anything and that praise and blame dont make a diffrence. With that saying you are just fueling yoyrself with the negative energy that life is meaningless.

Let me tell you the basics of freewill, you see there was a time when we wer all in heaven and god had givin us each something...say i have an apple tree u have a grape tree and so on. But everyone would always want more: i would want your grape tree and you would want my apple tree. So we turned to god to settle our disputes.

And he did by setting up a test for all humans to figure out who is more deserving. That test is our life here, that is why we have free will to choose the best decisions in life to ultimately lead us to success in the after life. I hoped this helped

 

[patronsaint]

Now dont be mad at me but if what you say is true then whats the diffrence between humans and animals? An animal will come and act according to its prefious actions to try to survive the best way it can. So if we do the same then whats the diffrence between us and them? Have we got no soul? It is said that god created animals to be envious of you.

What your doing is fueling the athiests and seperating yourself from god by bringing yourself closer to animals

 

[Skwim]

I understand that you hold:

• Knowing the 'root' cannot alter the effect or the process and determinism will still hold
• The root is unknowable

The above two positions seem to me to be opposed and to me both the views are beliefs.

Actually they are beliefs, but because I have yet to see any evidence or coherent argument that throws any doubt on them they're very firmly held beliefs; however, not the knowledge I implied.
.........................

Yes and Yes to both of your questions in blue. But that would be unnecessary since happenings and the root are detached. This at present is my considered belief based on Hindu scriptural teaching that the Brahman is knowable and that by knowing Brahman everything is known.

Because you haven't presented any argument why this should be so and that your position is grounded in religious scripture there isn't anything I can say. Believe as you need.

 

[Skwim]

Now dont be mad at me but if what you say is true then whats the diffrence between humans and animals?

You mean the other animals? Principally, our more highly developed intellect.

An animal will come and act according to its prefious actions to try to survive the best way it can. So if we do the same then whats the diffrence between us and them? Have we got no soul? It is said that god created animals to be envious of you.

What your doing is fueling the athiests and seperating yourself from god by bringing yourself closer to animals

Okay.

 

[atanu]

Actually they are beliefs, but because I have yet to see any evidence or coherent argument that throws any doubt on them they're very firmly held beliefs; however, not the knowledge I implied.

In any situation, knowledge of the root cause helps to take control. That is experience. This requires no independent proof.

Because you haven't presented any argument why this should be so and that your position is grounded in religious scripture there isn't anything I can say. Believe as you need.

That is true. Yet, there is more to it since it is also experience that whatever you see or know is never separate from your awareness of existence. This requires no independent proof. Whatever is there in consciousness comes out as true. Existence-consciousness is the root. Some will silently agree and some will not intuit it at all, depending on how fixed the mind is in the phenomenon.

 

[blackout]

Determinism is as much personal perception as free will, and as much reason.

I agree with this.

 

[Koldo]

Skwim, my friend you are probably struggling with something not in your control that caused you to create this logical falicy, you yave twisted logic in your brain to the point where it makes sense to you even if it is false.

Logical "falicy"?
Point it out.
Prove it.

 

[Koldo]

In any situation, knowledge of the root cause helps to take control. That is experience. This requires no independent proof.

By what means do you select between A and B?
How does knowledge affect your choice?

 

[atanu]

By what means do you select between A and B?
How does knowledge affect your choice?

I understand that:

At the root of 'because-----' the path is created-taken and not chosen from given choices. At our level we are just automatons -- choice and free will are post-mortem thoughts.

 

[patronsaint]

You guys are getting carried oway with all the logic, the fact that each of you created an account on this website and are posting things is a sign of free will, you chose to do that because it suited you not because some influence from past events or anything like that.

In the end all we have are our choices and if you sit there and say that we dont have that, well then your just saying that we dont exist