...and now for something completely different: Free Will!

[ppp]

I am told by many persons that if their god were to stop someone from acting on their desire to hurt another, that said god would be interfering with the free will of the perpetrator. Protecting the free will of the victim is never presented as a priority. Even in cases of sexual assault.

I am curious. If one person were to restrain another, at what point would they no longer have free will? Please note the poll above.

Libertarian free will means that our choices are free from the determination or constraints of human nature and free from any predetermination by God. All "free will theists" hold that libertarian freedom is essential for moral responsibility, for if our choice is determined or caused by anything, including our own desires, they reason, it cannot properly be called a free choice. Libertarian freedom is, therefore, the freedom to act contrary to one's nature, predisposition and greatest desires. Responsibility, in this view, always means that one could have done otherwise.

https://www.theopedia.com/libertarian-free-will​

 

[Wildswanderer]

The poll doesn't make any sense.
Bob doesn't lose his free will if he gets locked in a vault.

 

[ppp]

The poll doesn't make any sense.
Bob doesn't lose his free will if he gets locked in a vault.

But y'all keep saying that if your god protects a kid from assault that your god is abrogating the free will of the assaulter.

 

[Wildswanderer]

But y'all keep saying that if your god protects a kid from assault that your god is abrogating the free will of the assaulter.

No, only if he controls the assaulters mind in such a way to remove his choices. God often protects people in response to prayer.
God also has free will, but he can't do anything that's not in line with his character.
We are who and where we are as a result of our choices, and others choices and God's choices.
God doesn't choose for us, but that doesn't mean he isn't involved in our lives. So if you think God should control our choices where does that end? Does he only control the bad ones or only a good ones? Or both? Should he just throw away our free will all together?
Free will is a topic that gets progressively more complex the longer you try to understand it.

 

[ppp]

No, only if he controls the assaulters mind in such a way to remove his choices.

If that is the case then even bringing up free will when someone suggests that a an existent god can stop an assault seems dishonest. It's a red herring that is not even a bit relevant to the question.

 

[Wildswanderer]

If that is the case then even bringing up free will when someone suggests that a an existent god can stop an assault seems dishonest. It's a red herring that is not even a bit relevant to the question.

Why would you say that?
Can God stop everything bad from happening while still allowing freedom of the will?

 

[ppp]

Why would you say that?
Can God stop everything bad from happening while still allowing freedom of the will?

Is your purported god omnipotent? If so, yes, he could.

 

[Daemon Sophic]

Actually, no, not really. If we really get into it, there is no free will.

Two possibilities; 1. God exists and is Omni-Everything. Or, 2. There is no such God.

1. It (God) knew everything about everything before It created the universe, and made the universe turn out exactly as God planned, including your decision to read this sentence.
Ergo, every human religion preaching Free will coexisting with Omni-God (including all of the Abrahamic ones)…..are wrong. This is not open for debate (about those 3 religions. If another religion has a different thought on Free Will and the nature of God(s), then perhaps we can discuss it).

or.
2. No Omni-God exists. We are alone in the multiverse. In which case every aspect of your existence and every single thought you have ever generated, was the result purely of chemoelectric neural impulses inside the brain inside your head. If this is true, then your development as to how you will react to any new stimulus, is the result of all the prior stimuli you’ve ever experienced, laid down upon the framework of your genetic patterning (also resulting from your parent’s reacting to stimuli they experienced). All three of you reacting just like Zooplanktons reacting to the rising sun, or a pH change in the water. I.e. - predictably (as long as I have enough information about you ahead of time) and simply, as the direct result of your prior experiences. Even your tendency to “wildly change your mind at the last second” is just another knowable reaction.

IMO - we only have the illusion of Free Will, due to our inability to know all the information that would be necessary to determine the shiftable reactions of another sentient creature.

….so far.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

No, only if he controls the assaulters mind in such a way to remove his choices. God often protects people in response to prayer.
God also has free will, but he can't do anything that's not in line with his character.
We are who and where we are as a result of our choices, and others choices and God's choices.
God doesn't choose for us, but that doesn't mean he isn't involved in our lives. So if you think God should control our choices where does that end? Does he only control the bad ones or only a good ones? Or both? Should he just throw away our free will all together?
Free will is a topic that gets progressively more complex the longer you try to understand it.

Just make guys go flacid if they try and rape children. Seems a low bar for an omnipotent, omniscient and omnibenevolent version of God.

 

[Nakosis]

I am told by many persons that if their god were to stop someone from acting on their desire to hurt another, that said god would be interfering with the free will of the perpetrator. Protecting the free will of the victim is never presented as a priority. Even in cases of sexual assault.

I am curious. If one person were to restrain another, at what point would they no longer have free will? Please note the poll above.

Libertarian free will means that our choices are free from the determination or constraints of human nature and free from any predetermination by God. All "free will theists" hold that libertarian freedom is essential for moral responsibility, for if our choice is determined or caused by anything, including our own desires, they reason, it cannot properly be called a free choice. Libertarian freedom is, therefore, the freedom to act contrary to one's nature, predisposition and greatest desires. Responsibility, in this view, always means that one could have done otherwise.

https://www.theopedia.com/libertarian-free-will​

Can't answer in a religious context, however, I have a strong physical, emotional desire to eat. Instead, I choose to not eat the food. Libertarian free will.

 

[ppp]

Can't answer in a religious context, however, I have a strong physical, emotional desire to eat. Instead, I choose to not eat the food. Libertarian free will.

You don't have a reason for your choice?

 

[Wildswanderer]

Is your purported god omnipotent? If so, yes, he could.

How?

 

[Wildswanderer]

Just make guys go flacid if they try and rape children. Seems a low bar for an omnipotent, omniscient and omnibenevolent version of God.

Doesn't seem like that would eliminate the trauma to the victim.
It's interesting to me that you all focus on one specific sin that you want God to stop. I bet there's lots of things you would not want to see God interfere with too. Should God stop all homosexual acts for example? So it's a strange double standard.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Doesn't seem like that would eliminate the trauma to the victim.

You might not want to take it quite so very literally. My point is simply that there are basically an infinite number of options for an omni-whatever God which reduce certain sorts of suffering by innocents, and yet don't interfere with free will.

It's interesting to me that you all focus on one specific sin that you want God to stop.

It shouldn't be. By their very nature, examples are singular (or small sets at best) which are used to illustrate a point. Not exhaustive lists meant to be taken as complete. It's interesting to me that you'd take it that way. So I guess we're both interested.

I bet there's lots of things you would not want to see God interfere with too. Should God stop all homosexual acts for example? So it's a strange double standard.

You really want to open up that particular can of worms, do you?
Which particular 'homosexual acts' are you suggesting are sins in the first place?
And why would I care about 'sins' in any case? The topic was free will, and my point related to the removal of free will from a victim, and the unwillingness of an omni-whatever God to prevent or minimise suffering of innocents. Largely in response to recently stated views by several here on RF that 'suffering is important because it helps people grow'. Which appears trite and somewhat nonsensical to me.

 

[Guitar's Cry]

Other: Our will is both free and determined.

 

[ppp]

How?

Do you understand the meaning of omnipotent?

 

[Wildswanderer]

Do you understand the meaning of omnipotent?

That's not an answer.

 

[Sheldon]

The poll doesn't make any sense.
Bob doesn't lose his free will if he gets locked in a vault.

To be clear, someone imprisoned has not lost any free will?

 

[Wildswanderer]

To be clear, someone imprisoned has not lost any free will?

Of course not. Your location doesn't determine whether everything in the universe is pre determined.

 

[Nakosis]

You don't have a reason for your choice?

Sure, because I can.