Free Will as Nonsense.

[Sunstone]

Agree. Free will is hocus pocus nonsense.

 

[danieldemol]

Agree. Free will is hocus pocus nonsense.

How do you justify punishment if criminals are just people who made inevitable choices they had no control over?

 

[Ellen Brown]

Agree. Free will is hocus pocus nonsense.

Various religious groups, car makers, and so forth redefine words to meet their needs. To some, forgiveness simply means they have an excuse to hook you in the nose and avoid allowing complete forgiveness that Jesus gave.

 

[Nakosis]

The question is why we chose between the two......is that choice completely free or is it influenced by such things as genetics, personal experiences, peer groups, etc. can we make choices that are completely free from all influence? Or are choices guided by other things outside of us?

I think any of these things could be a factor. I don't see a necessity of there being a definitive answer since the reason for making a specific choice can be as numerous as the individuals making them.

However the question of whether a choice is completely free of influence is kind of a nonsensical question. If there is no influence, there is no choice. There's no need to make a choice if nothing is influencing us to make one. Without an influence/cause there is no need of a choice. So all of these things mention can be part of why we make a choice.

I think the question is whether we can be self influencing. Obviously not in a vacuum, as we are constantly experiencing a myriad of influences all the time. Can the self act as an influence?

 

[osgart]

Everything you love, hate, care for or are ambivalent toward is decided by your body dont you know. The body decides and your will goes along for the ride. The body is puppetmaster. Lol.

All hail scientism for this miraculous counter intuitive discovery. Lmho.

The body made me will it.

You wouldnt question the infallibility of science on this matter would you. Heaven forbid.

Poor murderer victims.

Someday you will get the cure for your will and it will be totally changed.

Strong will , only if you take your magic will pill.

Your just like everyone else driven entirely by your genes.

Cmon buy in, there is no free will. You have no decisions and you know it.

No free will, no human rights

Science dictates everything for ya.

I suppose the computer was all deterministically made by people with no will of their own.

Lolol!

Everything you love has nothing to do with ya, its genetic. Lol

 

[Nakosis]

Various religious groups, car makers, and so forth redefine words to meet their needs. To some, forgiveness simply means they have an excuse to hook you in the nose and avoid allowing complete forgiveness that Jesus gave.

I suspect the folks writing the Bible didn't have determinist free will in mind. I doubt you can find anything close to determinist free will in the Bible.

Free in the Bible seems to refer to not being enslaved and will is the power of control over one's actions and emotions. Someone who is a slave obviously has less control over their actions. I wouldn't expect anything more from the Bible than that.

 

[Stevicus]

Got to define what it is. Some concepts are, some are not.

Specifically Christian free will, the ability to choose between doing right and wrong? Our entire legal system is based on free will being a reality. Do you believe you can decide not to do something bad?

Maybe Christianity has a confusing concept of the mechanics of free will in the face of an all powerful, all knowing God , but it comes down to IMO, can you choose between doing good and evil?

Not if you're hungry or fatigued or suffering great pain or under some other form of physical/mental duress. These limitations (put in by design, if one believes in an Intelligent Designer) pretty much kill any notions of "free will."

 

[Sunstone]

How do you justify punishment if criminals are just people who made inevitable choices they had no control over?

Why should punishment be the goal? What about rehabilitation and/or deterrence? Punishment is just glorified vengeance, anyway.

 

[danieldemol]

Why should punishment be the goal? What about rehabilitation and/or deterrence? Punishment is just glorified vengeance, anyway.

Can they be rehabilitated though if their choices were inevitable and outside of their control. Doesn't rehabilitation imply rehabilitating them to make better choices?

 

[Sunstone]

Can they be rehabilitated though if their choices were inevitable and outside of their control. Doesn't rehabilitation imply rehabilitating them to make better choices?

Of course they can be rehabilitated even if they do not have free will. All you would need to do is figure out how to do it. The Norwegian model seems to work well, for instance. Better than the US model. Doesn't that suggest that some techniques are better than others?

I think you might be equivocating on the world "choice".

 

[danieldemol]

Of course they can be rehabilitated even if they do not have free will. All you would need to do is figure out how to do it. The Norwegian model seems to work well, for instance. Better than the US model. Doesn't that suggest that some techniques are better than others?

I think you might be equivocating on the world "choice".

I had to look up equivocating just now. According to google to equivocate is to "use ambiguous language so as to conceal the truth or avoid committing oneself." I'm not sure what you feel is vague about the concept of making choices, or how it relates to free will. Surely if we can make good/better choices, we had the freewill to do so?

What do the Nowegians do that makes their system better?

 

[dianaiad]

Oh, please don't be offended by me.

Oh, I'm not. (grin) Don't worry.

Just took advantage of the opening to do a little educating, is all.
Bet you know more about us than you did before, right? more than you wanted to know?

 

[Twilight Hue]

It's called free will, not freedom from consequence. No choice can be without consequence, or it's not a choice at all.

Then the definition is changed over the years. You simply don't have free will when there is no real choice but to go in one particular direction.

Like the statement, "Do or Die". That's not free will in my opinion because the alternate negates any further freedom to be had.

 

[Cacotopia]

If it is a fantasy, why the illusion to think that you are in control of yourself

 

[ChristineM]

Then the definition is changed over the years. You simply don't have free will when there is no real choice but to go in one particular direction.

Like the statement, "Do or Die". That's not free will in my opinion because the alternate negates any further freedom to be had.

There is always a choice, you may not like one or more of those choices but thats not the point.

 

[Twilight Hue]

There is always a choice, you may not like one or more of those choices but thats not the point.

It's certainly not free will.

 

[ChristineM]

It's certainly not free will.

What is it then? You make the choice, that choice is yours to make freely.

 

[Willamena]

Then the definition is changed over the years. You simply don't have free will when there is no real choice but to go in one particular direction.

Like the statement, "Do or Die". That's not free will in my opinion because the alternate negates any further freedom to be had.

Free will is not represented in a decision that is made by forces or circumstances (influences) outside yourself, rather than yourself. You always have free will: it's not lost by virtue of decisions that are not made with free will.

To which alternative do you refer?

 

[Milton Platt]

I think any of these things could be a factor. I don't see a necessity of there being a definitive answer since the reason for making a specific choice can be as numerous as the individuals making them.

However the question of whether a choice is completely free of influence is kind of a nonsensical question. If there is no influence, there is no choice. There's no need to make a choice if nothing is influencing us to make one. Without an influence/cause there is no need of a choice. So all of these things mention can be part of why we make a choice.

I think the question is whether we can be self influencing. Obviously not in a vacuum, as we are constantly experiencing a myriad of influences all the time. Can the self act as an influence?

That which is an influence is not the same as that which necessitates a decision being made.
When you make a decision to, say, use alternative cancer treatment instead of modern medicine, the cancer is the teason formthe decision.
That decision is then influenced by what you have read (and not read), by your peer groups and family, etc.

My point still stands, though. There is no truly free choice.

 

[Milton Platt]

Free will is not represented in a decision that is made by forces or circumstances (influences) outside yourself, rather than yourself. You always have free will: it's not lost by virtue of decisions that are not made with free will.

To which alternative do you refer?

Yes, but if your choice has been influenced, the choice was never truly free. In what way can you exercise free will if all choices are ultimately influenced by outside factors, including the subconscious and genetics?

I don’t inderstand your differintiation, Willamena......