Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
When you said, "True but at the point one can calculate to predict," I assumed this "point" you refer to here is when one "just calculatean alternative."
:cover: In any case, you choose whatever because . . . . . . . . . .Yes but a calculated prediction might look good on paper but it hasn't been determined until 'now' occurs. Just the ability to use an event that hasn't happened as a cause is a paradox which leaves us choice.
:cover: In any case, you choose whatever because . . . . . . . . . .
Second law of thermo guarantees that one cannot predict the future perfectly.Bruce DeMesquita has developed an algorithm for predicting the future.
He believes he can do it.
Second law of thermo guarantees that one cannot predict the future perfectly.
You in isolation are predictable, but the universe as a whole isn't. (Because you will never know enough.)Okay....
So freewill is probable?....predictable?....
Can you guess my next post?...am I predictable?
You in isolation are predictable, but the universe as a whole isn't. (Because you will never know enough.)
I love how spirit and god are somehow exempt from rules for no logical reason just preference.Substance has rules....and no freewill.
I love how spirit and god are somehow exempt from rules for no logical reason just preference.
So do I.
A persistent illusion.
Actually, we can detect the "will" to act a few seconds before the person is consciously aware of their "will".lol. Illusion? What does that mean? Can you make a formula to predict the next action of a person? and anyway, What makes organism and non organism different? Free will to do anything, Organism can move by itself with no force acting on it which still falls to free will.
Actually, we can detect the "will" to act a few seconds before the person is consciously aware of their "will".
There are no "laws" of causality.If not, then you have those pesky laws of physics and causality to consult.
That was supposed to be "laws of physics" and "causality"...probably could have worded that better. Woops.There are no "laws" of causality.
Then you wouldn't call it free will, would you? If the will precedes the conscious knowledge of that will, you wouldn't claim to have willed it, would you? It would be like throwing a coin, looking at the result, and then claiming that's what you guessed.Gjallerhorn, question.
What if there's a will that exists just before the detection of it, which is then conscious-ified?
Do we know whether the sub-conscious or main consciousness makes the decisions? Of course our action or reaction comes after the deliberation. The process being linear doesn't explain where volition comes from.Then you wouldn't call it free will, would you? If the will precedes the conscious knowledge of that will, you wouldn't claim to have willed it, would you? It would be like throwing a coin, looking at the result, and then claiming that's what you guessed.
Seems to come from the subconscious. Reaction typically precedes conscious awareness and emotion.Do we know whether the sub-conscious or main consciousness makes the decisions? Of course our action or reaction comes after the deliberation. The process being linear doesn't explain where volition comes from.
Its still your will. And do you need an outside force to make yourself move? lol no.Actually, we can detect the "will" to act a few seconds before the person is consciously aware of their "will".
You can't choose otherwise.
What counts as the ability to "move by itself"? Are you positing an external, random energy source? If not, then you have those pesky laws of physics and causality to consult.