Free Will as Nonsense.

[The Emperor of Mankind]

Don they have free will to determine what they believe ?

Not if an omnimax god knows what they will believe. If that's the case then the Universe is determinist and everything is fixed.

 

[Stevicus]

Free will cannot exercise itself over natural processes. I certainly did not will that I get old, but I did, against my will

So, then, humans are merely products of nature, operating on instinct? That would make sense to me. We may have a certain level of sophistication about it, along with the ability to intellectualize and justify our choices after the fact. But the "choices" themselves are merely instinct and stimulus response, correct?

 

[shmogie]

So, then, humans are merely products of nature, operating on instinct? That would make sense to me. We may have a certain level of sophistication about it, along with the ability to intellectualize and justify our choices after the fact. But the "choices" themselves are merely instinct and stimulus response, correct?

Wow, you extrapolate much from me saying I didn´t will myself to get old. For a bacteria maybe, but humans have knowledge, reason, and can recall experience. These lead to choices

 

[BilliardsBall]

Christians are fond of the idea of Freewill. I'm suspecting that idea is a fantasy.

Did you choose to suspect free will as a fantasy, or were you predetermined to believe this?

Note carefully: We imprison criminals for exercising free will choices, but exempt from prison people who had no choice. "No choice", legally, requires insanity, prolonged abuse, being a child, etc.

 

[Nakosis]

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.

Yeah, I don't see folks being as robotic as that. Your point is your point, I don't happen to agree with it.

 

[viole]

Christians are fond of the idea of Freewill. I'm suspecting that idea is a fantasy.

Free will is like time. A persistent illusion.

But we can work with both of them, even if they do not objectively exist.

Ciao

- viole

 

[Nakosis]

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."

You deal with those things and even pain to a degree.

Not that I'm an intelligent design guy but this is a view I've read from Islam, The sort of believe in the same God...

So Allah allows man to make decisions form themselves, but Allah determines the outcome of those decisions. Like you can make a decision to gamble, Allah determine whether you win.

We make a lot of decisions in life. While we may imagine the results of a decision we make, things happen. It doesn't always turn out according to what we imagined.

Making a decision doesn't necessarily determine our fate. These are really separate things.

I had a relative, he was a health nut. He ate healthy, exercised, took vitamins, everything we thought would help him live a long happy life. He died, well younger than I am now of an aneurysm. So he made a decision to live a healthy life but his decisions did not determine his fate.

 

[Twilight Hue]

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?

From a religious perspective if it's not a decision that is made by force or circumstances, is it free will in terms of ones preferred choice to choose between Heaven and Hell?
Assuming hypothetically such places exist for sake of the question.

I think it's just a silly religious term anyways that's really quite vague, for which nobody really knows what it implies. I suppose it's ones free will to define it. ;0)

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Correct, it is a theological concept called the open view of God, or open theology. A plethora of verses in the Bible show that God does not know all before it occurs. If he is completely omniscient, then free will is an illusion, it is not.

Can you be partially omniscient?

Isn't god, god because he knows what humans do not know? He knows all?

 

[Stevicus]

Wow, you extrapolate much from me saying I didn´t will myself to get old. For a bacteria maybe, but humans have knowledge, reason, and can recall experience. These lead to choices

I was just asking questions. But I thought it was a fair statement to make. There are a lot of things that individuals can't will for themselves - their parents, where they're born, siblings, the influences which shape their upbringing and perspective on the outside world - which often do affect choices later in life.

It's true that humans do have knowledge, reason, and can recall experience, but these faculties are limited. Knowledge can often be faulty or incomplete. Some people have poor reasoning powers. Many people have poor memories and may not remember events accurately. The mechanisms and processes by which humans choose A, B, or C are questionable, in and of themselves. Either we were designed to be faulty by some unknown Creator (in which case all bets are off), or we're a product of nature operating on instinct.

Haven't you seen anyone make a choice and then later regret it, saying "Oh, why did I do that!?!" Why, indeed?

 

[viole]

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

This is something I hear often. If free wiil does not exist, then accountability does not exist either, ergo free will exists. As if, “true accountability does not exist” were a logical absurdity. It is not.

If X is true implies that accountability is nonsense, does not necessarily imply that X is false. Because it can very well be that accountability is also an illusion. Maybe a useful illusion.

It could very well be that accountability is a sociological/biological construct that we evolved to guarantee societal stability and, therefore, a better chance of our genes to prosper. And, like morality, has no absolute meaning at all, when stripped from a certain biological context. In this case, great apes and, more specifically, homo sapiens.

Ciao

- viole

 

[Stevicus]

You deal with those things and even pain to a degree.

Not that I'm an intelligent design guy but this is a view I've read from Islam, The sort of believe in the same God...

So Allah allows man to make decisions form themselves, but Allah determines the outcome of those decisions. Like you can make a decision to gamble, Allah determine whether you win.

We make a lot of decisions in life. While we may imagine the results of a decision we make, things happen. It doesn't always turn out according to what we imagined.

Making a decision doesn't necessarily determine our fate. These are really separate things.

I had a relative, he was a health nut. He ate healthy, exercised, took vitamins, everything we thought would help him live a long happy life. He died, well younger than I am now of an aneurysm. So he made a decision to live a healthy life but his decisions did not determine his fate.

I get what you're saying, although my sense is that when "free will" is brought up in a religious context, the implication is that since an individual is born with "free will," it is considered just that they are duly punished for whatever sins they may have committed in life. That's really what it's all about, not so much about freedom of choice. It's more a matter of giving people a list of rules to follow and then challenging them with the idea that, if they break one of those rules (which they didn't choose themselves), it's all a reflection of "free will" and therefore subjects them to punishment for the transgression.

Apart from that, I find the human brain to be a fascinating organ. It's a complicated organ, to be sure. I'm not sure what bioelectrical chemical processes my brain goes through when it yields such thoughts as "I like chocolate ice cream." I just do. It's not something I consciously chose, at least nothing I can remember. If I really like chocolate ice cream and have had two bowls already and thinking about having a third - then I might be guilty of the sin of gluttony, one of the seven deadly sins.

From the "free will" point of view, I would be a "sinner" because I could have chosen differently. We all know that there are physical and natural consequences to our choices, regardless of how we make them. But the general concept of "free will" deals primarily with the spiritual consequences and some implied "punishment for our sins."

 

[dianaiad]

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."

All duress does is change the consequences of a choice. It does not eliminate the choice, unless 'duress' involves something that physically prevents a specific choice. Chains that attach one to a wall makes it impossible to get to the cell door, for instance. Doesn't make it impossible to TRY to get there, though.

Is your definition of 'free will': "the ability to do whatever you want without consequences?"

I ran into one person who decided that if humans can't teleport themselves instantly anywhere they want to be, and then commit any act they want (up to and including murder) and be absolutely free of any harmful consequences, then they don't have free will.

My definition is a bit more narrow, I suppose: free will is the ability to choose between options available...and that includes the consequences of any action chosen.

 

[dianaiad]

I get what you're saying, although my sense is that when "free will" is brought up in a religious context, the implication is that since an individual is born with "free will," it is considered just that they are duly punished for whatever sins they may have committed in life. That's really what it's all about, not so much about freedom of choice. It's more a matter of giving people a list of rules to follow and then challenging them with the idea that, if they break one of those rules (which they didn't choose themselves), it's all a reflection of "free will" and therefore subjects them to punishment for the transgression.

Apart from that, I find the human brain to be a fascinating organ. It's a complicated organ, to be sure. I'm not sure what bioelectrical chemical processes my brain goes through when it yields such thoughts as "I like chocolate ice cream." I just do. It's not something I consciously chose, at least nothing I can remember. If I really like chocolate ice cream and have had two bowls already and thinking about having a third - then I might be guilty of the sin of gluttony, one of the seven deadly sins.

From the "free will" point of view, I would be a "sinner" because I could have chosen differently. We all know that there are physical and natural consequences to our choices, regardless of how we make them. But the general concept of "free will" deals primarily with the spiritual consequences and some implied "punishment for our sins."

I disagree. Free will...is not dependent upon religious rules. It is simply the ability to choose between available options, and has absolutely nothing to do with whether one believes in a deity...or what deity (and the rules that go with the religion) one believes in.

 

[shmogie]

Can you be partially omniscient?

Isn't god, god because he knows what humans do not know? He knows all?

He knows all that can be known. We like to define God, we cannot, in many cases we make human assumptions based upon what we want or think. God is a one way street, from Him to us as he chooses to make known. Except for that, we know nothing about Him.

Regarding omniscience, if it is defined as absolute knowledge of everything that has, is, or will ever happen, then God is not omniscient.

However, He is omnipotent, he has absolute power over everything. Further, He has absolute knowledge of everything that is possible to know.

He has the power to bring about what he wills, when he wills it.

He has the knowledge to know perfectly every possibility for anything that might occur, and has the power to prepare for it, and implement the preparation if required and he chooses to do so.

Let me give you a crude example. If God chooses to preserve your life regardless of all the forces that exist, it might look like this.

You go mountain climbing and you fall and have a very serious break in your leg. God didn´t know this would occur, but he knew every possibility of what might occur, and was prepared to respond.

So, at the base of the mountain that day, a rescue helicopter that rotated bases around the mountain, happened to be closest to where you are, and a world renowned orthopedic surgeon happened to be friends of the pilot and was visiting, and you are rescued.

The concept isn´t primarily about physical events, it is about the preservation of free will, the ability for God to create beings who can freely choose, and are not bound by foreknowledge that cannot be wrong. A person then is just following a script, and cannot do except what the script commands.

 

[shmogie]

I was just asking questions. But I thought it was a fair statement to make. There are a lot of things that individuals can't will for themselves - their parents, where they're born, siblings, the influences which shape their upbringing and perspective on the outside world - which often do affect choices later in life.

It's true that humans do have knowledge, reason, and can recall experience, but these faculties are limited. Knowledge can often be faulty or incomplete. Some people have poor reasoning powers. Many people have poor memories and may not remember events accurately. The mechanisms and processes by which humans choose A, B, or C are questionable, in and of themselves. Either we were designed to be faulty by some unknown Creator (in which case all bets are off), or we're a product of nature operating on instinct.

Haven't you seen anyone make a choice and then later regret it, saying "Oh, why did I do that!?!" Why, indeed?

We are not as was designed by the creator, free will itself brought this about.

Of course I have made decisions, that I later regretted, consequences are part of free will.

We can only make choices within the framework of our ability to make them. If an evil genius is going to kill me, and I only have three possible choices, try and escape and be captured and be beaten to death over a period of days, do nothing and be fed to a swimming pool of sharks, or give him the secret formula and be allowed to drink a case of beer with bar b que, before I am gently injected and go to sleep forever. I may choose to be playing golf, that choice is irrelevant, in this case, my free will is totally limited by circumstances.

From a theological perspective, we each have the knowledge required to make choices regarding God. If we choose not to avail ourselves of it, or decide that knowledge is hogwash, the consequences are inevitable, regardless of how we great we feel about our choice.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Regarding omniscience, if it is defined as absolute knowledge of everything that has, is, or will ever happen, then God is not omniscient.

I dont see how god can be god when he does not know everything. Knowing all does not rid a person of fredom of choice. If anything, that sounds ego for someone to want freedom of choice rather than god knowing all despite ones choice. Unless one is forced, how does knowledge of all things a problem to free will?

Can you list scripture that god is limited in knowledge?

Humans are limited, but god?

You go mountain climbing and you fall and have a very serious break in your leg. God didn´t know this would occur, but he knew every possibility of what might occur, and was prepared to respond.

I would assume that being god he would know. We can think he doesnt because we dont know or thats our logic of the world, but god doesnt work off our logic, we work off his.

What is illogical for god to know that person would break his leg beforehand?

Are believers afraid that if he knew he should have the responsibility to prevent events like that from happening?

Are they scared that they dont have freedom if god knows everything they do before they do it? Why?

 

[Ellen Brown]

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?

I was a member from January, 2012 for about 5 years. As far as I am concerned Sacrament Service is like the best. The men and their control freak ways, not so much. Perhaps I am just too independent and rebellious. There is some of the Temple stuff that they stupidly needle me about. I was just going to go to Church and leave, but I don't know if they will be good with that. So ... yeah.

 

[shmogie]

I dont see how god can be god when he does not know everything. Knowing all does not rid a person of fredom of choice. If anything, that sounds ego for someone to want freedom of choice rather than god knowing all despite ones choice. Unless one is forced, how does knowledge of all things a problem to free will?

Can you list scripture that god is limited in knowledge?

Humans are limited, but god?



I would assume that being god he would know. We can think he doesnt because we dont know or thats our logic of the world, but god doesnt work off our logic, we work off his.

What is illogical for god to know that person would break his leg beforehand?

Are believers afraid that if he knew he should have the responsibility to prevent events like that from happening?

Are they scared that they dont have freedom if god knows everything they do before they do it? Why?

As I stated, people define the attributes of God, rather than allowing God to do so. If a million years ago God knew I would jump off of a building on 12/1/18, I could not make any other choice, I must jump off of that building on that date. I have no free will, I must do exactly what God knew I would do centuries before. It is the same for my entire life. I cannot choose to do anything but what God knew I would choose to do. Gods foreknowledge is like a program in a computer. I have no free will to choose.

If God knew 10 trillion years before creation that his creation would become evil, then didn´t God knowingly create evil ? Doesn;t that make God responsible for every evil act that has ever occurred ?

 

[Unveiled Artist]

As I stated, people define the attributes of God, rather than allowing God to do so. If a million years ago God knew I would jump off of a building on 12/1/18, I could not make any other choice, I must jump off of that building on that date. I have no free will, I must do exactly what God knew I would do centuries before. It is the same for my entire life. I cannot choose to do anything but what God knew I would choose to do. Gods foreknowledge is like a program in a computer. I have no free will to choose.

If God knew 10 trillion years before creation that his creation would become evil, then didn´t God knowingly create evil ? Doesn;t that make God responsible for every evil act that has ever occurred ?

No. This is what I was asking. It seems like you fear you dont have freedom of choice because god knows (rather than controls) what you would do before you do it. Like you guys want to preserve your ego as human beings and want to hide what you do around god until you do it.

No. It doesnt make god responsible for evil. Unless responsible means you think he lets evil roam around, then yes. However, I dont see that as the case.

If he knew before hand, he probably chose to let evil around so you guys can come to him. But since you guys want free will, you would have more struggle trying to know what god wants because he did not plan it beforehand. However, if he did plan it since he knows everything, he gives knowlege and lets you learn from him rather than he being surprised over you guy's behavior.

It is benefitial to the believert hat god knows things beforehand. It does not take away your freedom of choice. It just makes it comfortable that god knows all.

Why believe in god if his knowledge depends on your behavior?