mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
So how do causality and free will work to get? What causes free will?
-
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:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Is Free Will Incompatible with Neuroscience?
- Thread starter Rational Agnostic
- Start date
So how do causality and free will work to get? What causes free will?
What definition of free will do you want to discuss?
My definition for free will is the ability to do what you want to do. Would you like me to answer in with this definition in mind?
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
No, I will use your definition to ask questions and include cause and effect. What causes you to exist? How can you become un-caused and how is free will not caused by the rest of the universe?
Birth
Death
Imagination, I believe imagination plays a key role in our ability to select between different possible futures.
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
Please explain that with evidence in regards to causation? And no, that you believe you should leave to us religious folks.
Not sure what religious folks have to do with this conversation so if you want to elaborate...
For evidence, choose to do something. Preferably random so it has no actual value to you in doing it. Do you find yourself able to do this thing because you choose to do it or not?
If you could, then you were able to freely act from your will to do something.
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
That we use the word choice doesn't mean that it is a choice. Just because I use the word God doesn't mean there is a God.
So know you have proved that God exists. Use the word and it proves that, what the word is about, exists, because you use the word. That is not evidence.
Here is the formal problem:
P1: I choose.
P2: I couldn't choose without free will.
C: I have free will.
P2 assumes what is in question, namely if we choose with free will.
You state to the effect of the following: We choose with free will, therefore we have free will.
So you have to show that we choose with free will and not just assume it.
Further you have explain how birth cause an "I" and what an "i". You also just assume because there is an word for it, it is real. So again you have proven the existence of God, because there is a word "God".
Which is why the importance of defining what we are discussing. So free will the ability to do what you want. So I can only do hypothetical here, unless you'd like to incarcerate yourself to prove a point. So hypothetically lets say you are in prison for some crime we won't get into. And, you decide you want to travel to another country. Would you be free to do so? Your free will to travel has been taken from you right? So without this free will, you are not able to do what you want to do.
As far as God goes, I have no problem with that. Again we are back to definitions. God can be defined into or out of existence. Maybe I want to worship a rock. So here's this rock I pray to. Or to your point, the word God exists, not particularly mind-blowing.
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
Words about processes and things other than words about words does not causes the meaning of the word to come into exist. You are doing magical thinking. You are in effect say that the definition causes the existence. It is the observation and evidence that decides that, if it exists or not.
You haven't given any evidence.
Defining a word causes a word to exist with a definition. Do you believe this to not be true?
So dictionaries are created as a result of magical thinking? Ok, that's an interesting POV.
Did you do the experiment? I could do the experiment myself but I don't think that will help you out much.
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
Here is a definition of the word "Nakosis": anyone by that name doesn't exist. So the meaning of the word "Nakosis" is that anyone by that name doesn't exist, so in effect you don't exist. Is the bold part true?
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
Yeah, and you can only figure that out if you actually observe the free will. The definition doesn't mean that there is free will. That is my point.
Last edited:
What you have defined by your definition of the word Nakosis doesn't exist. This is useful information is we are going to discuss Nakosis per your definition. What people chose to be identified by are arbitrary and wouldn't need to be relevant to the discussion.
Ok, so call what I asked you to do something else. Words relay information. It's important that you both understand the meaning and agree with it for successful communication to take place. Was there something about how I defined free will that you didn't understand?
Last edited:
I don't mind. I'm mostly a practical person. Philosophy doesn't seem very practical. What is interesting to me is that this conversation seems to support that view.
So just your opinion, in a philosophical discussion, it seems really strange to start asking for evidence. Evidence and philosophy seem to be like oil and water. They don't mix well.
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
That just because we can debate free will, doesn't mean that we have it.
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
Again, that just because we can debate free will, doesn't mean that we have it.
Haven't argued otherwise, in fact, in some cases, free will has been defined in such a way to not exist. However, IMO using some of these definitions is pretty impractical in a discussion.
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
Free will can't by the use of a definition be made to exist or not. If you can observe free will, it exists, as in regards to neuroscience. Neuroscience is about something existing as per evidence through observation. Now provide evidence for free will using the same method of evidence or you are doing philosophy a la epistemological rationalism.