Do Atheists believe in free-will?

[jarofthoughts]

Nope. This is a Sum1sGruj original

And I would love to see you show that I am misrepresenting physics.
Physics is my main science, you better be prepared lol.

Alright.

Imagine the universe as a row a dominoes.
One tips over and so they all fall. How did that first domino fall?
Will. Fundamentally, there is no effect without cause, and no cause without will.

Absolutely unsubstantiated.
Also, Newtonian laws do not apply to Quantum states.
In addition, look up Zero Point Energy or Vacuum Energy.

The universe deliberately chose to 'become'. Therefore, the universe has will. Since we are literally part of the universe, we to have will.

Also absolutely unsubstantiated.

The universe 'became' as a 'zero point' singularity and expanded immediately, complete with all the laws and knowledge of the universe and ourselves as everything was crammed into one.

Actually it was quite a bit more complicated than that, but meh... No matter.

Since the singularity expanded and matter is no longer crammed in the 'zero point', it is now only sentient beings that can act on will.

Really? And what is this 'will' that you speak of?
Care to define it, and thus, how to detect it?

Cause and will is a duality. If you think about it, we are literally the ones that created the universe, if not a divine being.

And where is your backing for this statement then?

 

[waitasec]

Why doesn't somebody try me and find out? It saves a whole lot of trouble.

Seriously, I just gave a very good philosophy on free will, and the only thing in return is this. I was fully correct in the ideas of physics, that is how I already know I am superior to certain others about it.
It's amazing how hypocritical some people are. Some of you speak of theists being in denial, and you can't even discuss a topic without trying to insult someones intelligence and refusal to venture upon an idea.
It leaves me in the position in saying I have come up with something a whole helluva lot better contrary to your idea, and now you and others can tell me how I am a 'legend in my own mind'.

Whatever. I'm done here.

is this
intended?

 

[Sum1sGruj]

Let me explain:

'Cause and effect' and 'randomness' cannot co-exist universally. Sure, the quantum world seems random, but that is because we have yet to figure out the seemingly spontaneous atomic world.
If everything is random, then free will certainly exists because otherwise we would be so sporadic that nothing would be purposeful.
But this is not the case because we see cause and effect all the time. It exists everywhere.
So we can rule out random.

Cause and effect. If we go back 13 billion years ago, there was a cause. This is the effect.
Everything that happens through time is part of that original 'cause'. We are in a singularity, meaning all movement and matter are the same manifestations of the 'beginning'.

If the universe was caused by it's own accord, then it has free will, and since we are literally the universe, we have it as well.
If the universe was created by an omnipotent being, then free will cannot be proven or disproven.

If there is no movement or force (cause), there is nothing. But if there is, then it was of the universe creating itself of it's own accord. And therefore, we have free will because we are part of the universe.

The universe intended to form. Otherwise, how did it if there was no cause?

That's an anomaly in your belief, actually.

You have to be very careful when going about philosophy.
For example, there is much philosophy on agnostic theism- But when it comes down to it, all that philosophy becomes obsolete.
An agnostic theist is synonymous with a general gnostic.
See, the same thing occurs with free will. All this philosophy about how we don't have it- but when it comes down to it, free will is synonymous with will itself. The things affecting your judgement is you. Your idea separates self from self. Think about it. Your brain is you, not a separate system dictating you.

But everything is the same material (atoms, energy), a system according to the idea of no free will. That's why I am bringing up physics, because 'cause an effect' and 'random' cannot co-exist. So whatever started the universe is proof that free will is not only of sentient beings, but a law of all physical reality- because there cannot be 'cause' when there is nothing.
Sentient beings are just able to act on it.

Imagine the universe as a row a dominoes.
One tips over and so they all fall. How did that first domino fall?
Will. Fundamentally, there is no effect without cause, and no cause without will.

The universe deliberately chose to 'become'. Therefore, the universe has will. Since we are literally part of the universe, we to have will.
The universe 'became' as a 'zero point' singularity and expanded immediately, complete with all the laws and knowledge of the universe and ourselves as everything was crammed into one.
Since the singularity expanded and matter is no longer crammed in the 'zero point', it is now only sentient beings that can act on will.

Cause and will is a duality. If you think about it, we are literally the ones that created the universe, if not a divine being.

 

[Skwim]

Why doesn't somebody try me and find out? It saves a whole lot of trouble.

A lot of people already have, and I believe we've all got a pretty good idea.

Seriously, I just gave a very good philosophy on free will, and the only thing in return is this. I was fully correct in the ideas of physics, that is how I already know I am superior to certain others about it.

Hey, as long as you know, then that's all that's important. Right?

It's amazing how hypocritical some people are. Some of you speak of theists being in denial, and you can't even discuss a topic without trying to insult someones intelligence and refusal to venture upon an idea.

And posting things like "I was fully correct in the ideas of physics," might not be an insult to the intelligence of others? And consider: perhaps there's a good reason for not wanting to "venture upon an idea." Most likely, no one cares. Can't fault people for their likes and dislikes can you? Or can you?

It leaves me in the position in saying I have come up with something a whole helluva lot better contrary to your idea,

Then at least one person is satisfied.

Whatever. I'm done here.

Auf wiedersehen

 

[Sum1sGruj]

And posting things like "I was fully correct in the ideas of physics," might not be an insult to the intelligence of others? And consider: perhaps there's a good reason for not wanting to "venture upon an idea." Most likely, no one cares. Can't fault people for their likes and dislikes can you? Or can you?

Life is balance.
Don't try to masquerade my statements as false when they are not.
There is no reason to not venture upon an idea unless you are biased or know for sure that your own idea is true. And if no one cares, then why fight it?

 

[Skwim]

Life is balance.

In many senses it is.
BTW, Welcome back. What was it, a potty break?

Don't try to masquerade my statements as false when they are not.

I didn't. I simply said that your ideas on physics might be an insult to the intelligence of others. And they very well might be.

There is no reason to not venture upon an idea unless you are biased or know for sure that your own idea is true. And if no one cares, then why fight it?

According to your observation people are refusing to venture upon an idea, so they aren't fighting it, are they. Ignoring you isn't the same as fighting you. It's simply ignoring you.

 

[Sum1sGruj]

Ignoring me? You three are out of a several who seem to acknowledge every single thing I say lol. Including this thread. I find your statements unfounded.

And the topic mysteriously went from free will to physics. Wonder why somebody would want to change the subject?
Discussing with certain people is quite vain, obviously. It's like playing dodgeball with truths and opinions.
I mean seriously, I don't think some understand what straw man arguments are.

 

[waitasec]

And the topic mysteriously went from free will to physics. Wonder why somebody would want to change the subject?
Discussing with certain people is quite vain, obviously. It's like playing dodgeball with truths and opinions.
I mean seriously, I don't think some understand what straw man arguments are.

**sigh**

To say we don't have free will is to go against physics and/or say that a supreme deity created the universe and made it so.
The notion is double-edged.

 

[Skwim]

Ignoring me? You three are out of a several who seem to acknowledge every single thing I say lol. Including this thread. I find your statements unfounded.

Then what are you going on about with "someones . . . refusal to venture upon an idea" ?

And the topic mysteriously went from free will to physics. Wonder why somebody would want to change the subject?

You know very well how discussion often go off the original topic. Your disingenuous pose here is transparent.

Discussing with certain people is quite vain, obviously. It's like playing dodgeball with truths and opinions.

Yup. It's something I think we've all experienced.

I mean seriously, I don't think some understand what straw man arguments are.

Or know-it-all posturing.

 

[Sum1sGruj]

**sigh**

Let me repg\hrase: The topic went from free will to telling me how I know nothing about physics without any backing as to why they think so.
Except for this:

Absolutely unsubstantiated.
Also, Newtonian laws do not apply to Quantum states.
In addition, look up Zero Point Energy or Vacuum Energy.

And the person doesn't realize or pretends not to realize that Newtononian/quantum states are completely irrelevant and that zero point/vacuum energy was actually two indirect things I was speaking of. There was no energy. It's called nothingness, not even so much as a dimensional plane.

 

[waitasec]

There was no energy. It's called nothingness.
The smartest people in the world cannot breach the concept. And I'm saying literally. Stephen Hawking types.

how do you presume to KNOW this?

if anything science says we know more about what we don't know...
so i'm quite skeptical of your knowledge...of the unknown...

you never answered my question...
do you claim the universe is sentient?

cause does not mean intent...
for example:
is it the will of the color blue and the color yellow to turn into the color green when mixed?
blue is a cause just as yellow is...without intent to make the color green

 

[Sum1sGruj]

how do you presume to KNOW this?

For the same reason people KNOW that free will doesn't exist
But with a better grasp of reality.

Really, I just completed the argument that throws up the idea that we have no free will, and it turned out that we do have free will:

If reality resulted from nothing, then it did something of it's own accord. Since we are literally of that reality, we to are able to do things of our own accord.
In fact, it could be safe to say that we literally invoked the universe ourselves since we are reality.
Therefore, cause and effect can co-exist with free will. In fact, they are a duality.

It's either that or God, really.

 

[waitasec]

For the same reason people KNOW that free will doesn't exist
But with a better grasp of reality.

who said that?
reality says no one claims to KNOW anything...this is entirely speculative...it can only be speculative until evidence is presented.
please understand it's that some arguments make more sense than others...
until then we, our individual selves, will follow where there is more logic based on the principle of reason...

the only way a person grows or learns anything is when they know their limitations, which is a humbling place to be. otherwise, they keep going in circles...

 

[waitasec]

If reality resulted from nothing, then it did something of it's own accord.

but how do you know reality resulted from nothing....?

 

[Sum1sGruj]

but how do you know reality resulted from nothing....?

What else did it result from?

You can't really throw up that it can't be observed, and so cannot be proven. One cannot observe 'nothingness'.
We could say that our universe spawned from M-theory conceptions of dimensional strings and branes colliding, but where did they come from? We could think of a tenth dimensional singularity (that we theoretically are inside of).. where did it come from?

At the bottom of it all, there is nothing. Which holds up my claims very well.

Besides the fact that God created it

 

[jarofthoughts]

And the person doesn't realize or pretends not to realize that Newtononian/quantum states are completely irrelevant and that zero point/vacuum energy was actually two indirect things I was speaking of. There was no energy. It's called nothingness, not even so much as a dimensional plane.

You used the old misconception of the 'first cause' based in Newtonian physics, which, as I explained, is irrelevant when dealing with Quantum states.
And the Universe, at least according to many Physicists and Cosmologists, began as exactly that.
In other words: The 'first cause' argument is invalid.

 

[Sum1sGruj]

You used the old misconception of the 'first cause' based in Newtonian physics, which, as I explained, is irrelevant when dealing with Quantum states.
And the Universe, at least according to many Physicists and Cosmologists, began as exactly that.
In other words: The 'first cause' argument is invalid.

There is even cause at the quantum level. At the beginning, there was the quantum (which is the 10th dimensional singularity to any believe was a quantum). It had to have existed of it's own accord.
I understand it is a hard pill to swallow. In fact, if one dwells on it long enough, it could crack their sanity.
Is it the ultimate paradox, or was it simply God?

 

[waitasec]

What else did it result from?

this is where i say, i don't know...no one knows and if anyone claims to know, doesn't... edit:without providing evidence
would you consider this question comes from faith?

You can't really throw up that it can't be observed, and so cannot be proven. One cannot observe 'nothingness'.
We could say that our universe spawned from M-theory conceptions of dimensional strings and branes colliding, but where did they come from? We could think of a tenth dimensional singularity (that we theoretically are inside of).. where did it come from?

have you ever considered that we are born without the senses required to fully observe?
for instance;
an ant isn't aware of our presence unless it senses vibration

At the bottom of it all, there is nothing. Which holds up my claims very well.

Besides the fact that God created it

that is a faith based claim...which ultimately doesn't contribute to the exploration...so if you are happy with that, then so be it.

 

[Sum1sGruj]

that is a faith based claim...which ultimately doesn't contribute to the exploration...so if you are happy with that, then so be it.

Well that's the irony of it all isn't it? In my opinion, 'nothing' can be observed simply by acknowledging that it is 'nothing'. There are no properties in it that warrant anything.

So for me, it's not so much faith as it is reality, and faith is only in my God being the divine maker instead of another.
Many don't acknowledge it because it isn't science. But that doesn't mean precisely anything. In fact, it proves divinity in my opinion. Science cannot venture on divinity, and it just so happens that science will never find out where reality came from. Sits pretty well in my book.

 

[waitasec]

Well that's the irony of it all isn't it? In my opinion, 'nothing' can be observed simply by acknowledging that it is 'nothing'. There are no properties in it that warrant anything.

So for me, it's not so much faith as it is reality, and faith is only in my God being the divine maker instead of another.

so why do you object exploration?