Smoking Gun, Oh Atheists?

[BilliardsBall]

So you think free will is a magical attribute where human beings are somehow completely free of cause and effect? Apparently you prefer magical thinking over logic and reason. I (as well as others in this thread) have clearly articulated how free will in a cause and effect universe is an illusion. The ability to think and make choices is COMPLETELY DEPENDENT on countless variables we have absolutely no control over. Adding a god only adds more variables to the mix making your version of "free will" even LESS likely. Since you are dedicated to purposely not understanding our completely logical and evidenced arguments, further discussion about this topic with you is pointless. Have a nice day.

Where did I write that humans are free of cause and effect?

Why are you predetermined to end our conversation? It seems like you chose to end it of your free will.

Why are you predetermined to do some pointless things (like commit sin) but not do others (like continue a pointless conversation with a fellow sinner)?

 

[BilliardsBall]

This strongly indicates you haven't been reading or paying attention, because I've given arguments against free will, and that was not one of them, but something many have acknowledged and that is even without free will, there still must be punishments for theft, rape, and murder. The way our current system is, because so many people believe firmly in free will and cling to it tightly, our legal system is set up around the idea of free will and cannot function without it, because then there is really no one but fate to hold accountable.

You are certainly correct. If we all say there is no free will, then no legal system can punish any crime. Are you comfortable with this fruit of the predetermination tree? Do you see any dangers or challenges there?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

If the law takes it that God does not exist, then you would acknowledge also that the law takes it that free will does exist?

The law assumes that we're responsible for our choices, as long as they aren't coerced or unduly influenced by other people. I'm not sure that's the same thing as free will.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

You are certainly correct. If we all say there is no free will, then no legal system can punish any crime.

If there's no free will, then we had no choice but to create the justice system we ended up with.

 

[BilliardsBall]

The law assumes that we're responsible for our choices, as long as they aren't coerced or unduly influenced by other people. I'm not sure that's the same thing as free will.

Rephrased as "I have choices unless I'm forced out of choosing". That's not free will? The ability to make choices freely unless under duress?

Or is it predetermined that we have the illusion that we make freer choices under duress than not?

Why split these hairs? Why argue again and again and again and again that free will is an illusion--which means you can SEE IT but are insisting that what we both SEE is an illusion? "Gosh, BB, I know most people see free will as self-evident and God as evident, but both are deceptive illusions..."

Perhaps your insistence on free will is because you recognize the hand of God in changing circumstances that are out of your free will control.

 

[BilliardsBall]

If there's no free will, then we had no choice but to create the justice system we ended up with.

And the oceans are not made of salt water but salt taffy. We have the ILLUSION of salt water oceans. We had no choice but to believe in the illusion of salt water oceans.

In the same vein, almost everyone except atheists believes free will is in operation and is self-evident. You can SEE free will but it must be an illusion.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Rephrased as "I have choices unless I'm forced out of choosing". That's not free will? The ability to make choices freely unless under duress?

Or is it predetermined that we have the illusion that we make freer choices under duress than not?

Why split these hairs? Why argue again and again and again and again that free will is an illusion--which means you can SEE IT but are insisting that what we both SEE is an illusion? "Gosh, BB, I know most people see free will as self-evident and God as evident, but both are deceptive illusions..."

Perhaps your insistence on free will is because you recognize the hand of God in changing circumstances that are out of your free will control.

We don't "see" free will. Free will and determinism are both about things that don't happen:

- free will: I made my choice, but it would have been possible for me to choose options that I didn't actually choose.

- determinism: I made my choice, and it would not have been possible for me to choose options that I didn't actually choose.

If you have a way to tell the difference between "didn't happen, but could have happened" and "didn't happen, and couldn't have happened," I'd love to hear it, because THAT is the only distinction that matters for the free will vs. determinism debate.

 

[JustWondering]

Free will -- one of the most difficult of all philosophical subjects, especially when we're trying to cope with ideas like "determinism."

Not going to give a long dissertation here -- I've read the material, Dennett and Harris (they disagree with one another), Blackmore and Frankfurt (they do, too). Benjamin Libbett did show that decisions are made before we are conscious of them, and many people take that to mean that we have no free will.

But they forget something incredibly important!!---that once a decision is made and acted upon, it is fed back into the system, and then we get to react to it! And part of that reaction is to adjust the brain that's acted and reacted! We've all been doing that since before we first breathed the air, and have done it every moment of our lives -- waking and sleeping.

So think about this for a moment -- how we respond to any decision (or, if you wish, how we "exercise free will") is to a great extent dependent upon how we have modified our own behaviourally self-modified brains. In at least one respect, then, there is a measure of free will -- if at a (very) slight remove.

What I failed to make Billardsball understand or admit to understanding is that we live in a deterministic universe. Some people are emotionally incapable of excepting the concept of their actions being predetermined. Either we live in a material cause and effect universe or we don't. All evidence points to a material cause and effect universe.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

All evidence points to a material cause and effect universe.

Kinda sorta. The evidence is consistent with a deterministic universe, but as I pointed out, the distinctions between a "free will" universe and a deterministic universe are all a matter of stuff that didn't happen, so AFAIK, any observation we make will be consistent with both positions.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

What I failed to make Billardsball understand or admit to understanding is that we live in a deterministic universe. Some people are emotionally incapable of excepting the concept of their actions being predetermined. Either we live in a material cause and effect universe or we don't. All evidence points to a material cause and effect universe.

Well, I guess I have to ask first, "do we live in a deterministic universe?" Quantum Theory, and Heisenberg's uncertainty principle in particular, suggest that's not entirely true.

Chaos theory, too, with its insistence on "sensitive dependence on initial conditions," might be another stumbling block to complete determinism. It may be possible, for example, that even if my brain were very largely deterministic (and I think that is probably true), that there would still be ample room for the feedback upon which the brain relies so much (and is so integral to Chaos Theory), would provide ample mechanism for repflection on previous actions taken without entirely "free will."

And I think, you know, that somewhere inside you, you might accept the very strong intuition that we all have that each of us is to some extent morally responsible for our actions, and the more reprehensible (or the more praiseworthy) those actions are, the more likely it is that we are morally responsible. (Perhaps you don't accept that anyone is morally responsible for their own actions. If that's the case, I'd like to hear from you how you work within your social context. I suspect you'll find that your own sublimininal views are in conflict with what you suppose to be your "logical and reasoned" ones.)

After all, consider this -- it is excessively unlikely that pre-determined interactions of elementary particles in a cause and effect universe would lead an entire human to leap into the whirlpool to save an infant, at the risk of his own life. That's an awful lot to ask of deterministic particle interactions. (On that argument, I might well conclude that a 100% cause-and-effect universe at the particle level couldn't possibly even produce something as complex as the most simple true organism.)

Something to consider, anyway.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

What I failed to make Billardsball understand or admit to understanding is that we live in a deterministic universe. Some people are emotionally incapable of excepting the concept of their actions being predetermined. Either we live in a material cause and effect universe or we don't. All evidence points to a material cause and effect universe.

I have to add this question to my post above: will you ever kill a child of yours? Will you ever rape a nun? Will you ever have a homosexual encounter with another species? Would you ever permit somebody to rape your mother?

If you believe what you seem to be saying, the answer to all of those questions must unquestionably be "I don't know." You would have zero idea of the "causes" that will eventually lead to whatever effect might come.

Grapple with that. It will do you some philosophical good.

 

[BilliardsBall]

We don't "see" free will. Free will and determinism are both about things that don't happen:

- free will: I made my choice, but it would have been possible for me to choose options that I didn't actually choose.

- determinism: I made my choice, and it would not have been possible for me to choose options that I didn't actually choose.

If you have a way to tell the difference between "didn't happen, but could have happened" and "didn't happen, and couldn't have happened," I'd love to hear it, because THAT is the only distinction that matters for the free will vs. determinism debate.

What do you mean, "you'd love to hear it"? Do you mean, "You would choose to hear it and ask me to choose to share it?" How can I do so unless there is free will?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

What do you mean, "you'd love to hear it"? Do you mean, "You would choose to hear it and ask me to choose to share it?"

No, I meant what I said. Wasn't it clear enough?

How can I do so unless there is free will?

If there's no free will, then you've managed to do stuff without free will for your entire life. I see no reason to think that this trend can't continue.

Edit: now that all that is out of the way, are you going to actually answer the question?

 

[BilliardsBall]

No, I meant what I said. Wasn't it clear enough?


If there's no free will, then you've managed to do stuff without free will for your entire life. I see no reason to think that this trend can't continue.

Edit: now that all that is out of the way, are you going to actually answer the question?

Please repeat your question. Thanks.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Please repeat your question. Thanks.

If you have a way to tell the difference between "didn't happen, but could have happened" and "didn't happen, and couldn't have happened," I'd love to hear it, because THAT is the only distinction that matters for the free will vs. determinism debate.

 

[JustWondering]

Well, I guess I have to ask first, "do we live in a deterministic universe?" Quantum Theory, and Heisenberg's uncertainty principle in particular, suggest that's not entirely true.

Chaos theory, too, with its insistence on "sensitive dependence on initial conditions," might be another stumbling block to complete determinism. It may be possible, for example, that even if my brain were very largely deterministic (and I think that is probably true), that there would still be ample room for the feedback upon which the brain relies so much (and is so integral to Chaos Theory), would provide ample mechanism for repflection on previous actions taken without entirely "free will."

Whenever a new breakthrough is made in science we find that there are natural laws/rules that govern how everything works. All the evidence I've seen shows we live in an ordered universe, not one without rules. It seems chaotic to us because our minds don't know all the rules and couldn't keep up with all the factors involved even if we did.

And I think, you know, that somewhere inside you, you might accept the very strong intuition that we all have that each of us is to some extent morally responsible for our actions, and the more reprehensible (or the more praiseworthy) those actions are, the more likely it is that we are morally responsible. (Perhaps you don't accept that anyone is morally responsible for their own actions. If that's the case, I'd like to hear from you how you work within your social context. I suspect you'll find that your own sublimininal views are in conflict with what you suppose to be your "logical and reasoned" ones.)

After all, consider this -- it is excessively unlikely that pre-determined interactions of elementary particles in a cause and effect universe would lead an entire human to leap into the whirlpool to save an infant, at the risk of his own life. That's an awful lot to ask of deterministic particle interactions. (On that argument, I might well conclude that a 100% cause-and-effect universe at the particle level couldn't possibly even produce something as complex as the most simple true organism.)

Something to consider, anyway.

We evolved over millions of years into social creatures that have empathy and value the lives and well being of others. If we were all sociopaths our species probably would have died out ages ago. So its perfectly logical to have morals and care for others. A chaotic universe were the laws of nature didn't exist or were unpredictably erratic wouldn't produce life let alone intelligent life that could ponder morals and ethics.

If you do not believe in cause and effect then what untethered force/process do you propose is responsible for the decisions we make?

 

[JustWondering]

I have to add this question to my post above: will you ever kill a child of yours? Will you ever rape a nun? Will you ever have a homosexual encounter with another species? Would you ever permit somebody to rape your mother?

If you believe what you seem to be saying, the answer to all of those questions must unquestionably be "I don't know." You would have zero idea of the "causes" that will eventually lead to whatever effect might come.

Grapple with that. It will do you some philosophical good.

In my current state of mind I'd answer no to all those questions. But I, like you, cannot predict the future. I could suffer severe brain damage or be hypnotized by an evil hypnotist or some other extremely unlikely thing could happen to alter my state of mind in the future.

 

[BilliardsBall]

**If you have a way to tell the difference between "didn't happen, but could have happened" and "didn't happen, and couldn't have happened," I'd love to hear it, because THAT is the only distinction that matters for the free will vs. determinism debate.**

Every day I make choices, and I know I could have made X happen but chose Y. Just yesterday, I ate leftovers for dinner instead of cooking supper freshly. I was aware of the choices I had to make and made one.

You will claim science demonstrates that many choices are made at very rapid speed, for example, I pull my hand from a hot stove with nerve impulses moving at 200 m.p.h. before I consciously am aware of the situation as a whole. All you have to do is prove now that while I sat there and looked in the refrigerator and thought about it for 20 seconds, I was predetermined to choose leftovers.

And most people realize what folly that notion is.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Every day I make choices, and I know I could have made X happen but chose Y.

HOW do you know? Just repeating your claim isn't evidence.

Just yesterday, I ate leftovers for dinner instead of cooking supper freshly. I was aware of the choices I had to make and made one.

Determinists say it only feels like you have free will. The fact that you feel like you have free will doesn't refute their position or support yours.

You will claim [...]

To save us all time, don't presume to know what I'm thinking or what I'm planning to do. You aren't very good at it.

 

[BilliardsBall]

HOW do you know? Just repeating your claim isn't evidence.


Determinists say it only feels like you have free will. The fact that you feel like you have free will doesn't refute their position or support yours.


To save us all time, don't presume to know what I'm thinking or what I'm planning to do. You aren't very good at it.

In the context of the OP, I've never seen someone escape a rape charge because they were predetermined to commit rape.