we have no free will - prove me wrong!

[Skwim]

​

and you chose every word you posted.....

no one twisted your arm....

But why was one word "chosen" and not the other? There has to be something that, in effect, compelled you "choose" word 1 rather than word 2, or else the "choosing" would be an utterly random event, and I'm sure you wouldn't say your reasoning is comprised entirely of a series of random events. You were "chose" 1, because____________________________. And the "cause" in "because" is quite telling. It indicates a compelling factor that eliminated 2 as a possibility and demanded that you "chose" 1. And such a compelling factor at work means that you could not have "chosen" otherwise. To do so would have to mean that the causal events leading up to the moment of "choosing" were different. But they weren't, so 1 was inevitable, which in turn means there was no true choosing. Your so-called choosing is an illusion.

What is the difference between will and free will?

Will is the capacity to act decisively on one's desires.

Free will is to do so undirected by controlling influences.
​

And, the controlling influence is the end result of all the causal events in your life that led up to the moment of acting. One does A rather than B because the cause/effect events were what they were and not something else. If one takes a certain route, A, to get home from work it's because of some governing reason (cause). To take some other route home, B, the governing reason (cause) would have to be different, but there was no different governing reasoning, so you had to take route A.

.

.

 

[chinu]

Been doing some thinking...

“Everything we do and everything that happens has a cause” is true

Therefore we can say that all things that happen are determined/caused by things that have happened in the past

Therefore there is no free will as it is impossible to carry out any action that does not have a cause – all actions have and must have a cause

Free will would require being able to act without a cause, which I think would be impossible. No matter how complex the human mind is, its workings are still governed by cause and effect, by things both external and internal to it

Free will is therefore an illusion, as things that come about by “free will” are truly caused by the past

I still believe we have wills, just not free wills!

I like the idea of having free will so please, prove me wrong

I would like to explain you with a story, think upon, and be careful !

Once a thief entered into the garden full of mangoes trees. He robbed some mangoes and eated.

Meanwhile, a watchman came there and catches him with the robbery, thief was brought In front of the owner of that garden for punishment.

BUT,
Thief justified; He is NOT entitled to any kind punishment because.. there is no free will as it is impossible to carry out any action that does not have a cause – all actions have and must have a cause.

AND,
Owner justified; Actually I DO NOT want to give you any kind of punishment, But, still you will be tightly tied facing towards that mango tree and your hips will be hitted very hard because there is no free will as it is impossible to carry out any action that does not have a cause – all actions have and must have a cause ! Hah..

Hope you understand my point.

~Jasdir.

 

[leroy]

On the other hand, as I have been attempting to describe, I think there are concepts that are quite close to 'free will' that are consistent with materialism. The decisions I make are made within my head and are primarily determined by my brain state, i.e, me. That seems to be a useful definition that is still quite consistent with materialism.

But assuming that the circumstance where identical, you could not choose differently right? What you describe seems to be an “illusion of free will” rather than “real free will”

Sure both the “illusion of free will” and “real free will” scenarios are empirically equivalent.

 

[osgart]

Perhaps there are underlying conditions that have to be met in order for a person to have free will. Out of any choice you make you can only choose one response. The potential for other choices is there, and the reason you chose what you chose is solely based on your full volition. The will makes its choice, even when the will is not in play to make the decision; sometimes you have to do things that you have no will to do, but is necessary.

What a person wills could be governed by only the heart of being. I love, i affirm, i deny, i hate, i become indifferent solely on the basis of who i choose to be. The material world comes and goes, and you only do what you decide to do, regardless of the material world. You are free to will whatever it is you will. No one loves, hates, affirms, denies, or becomes indifferent because of the material world, or that someone or something decides for them which response to make. Those capacities are all your own.

Perhaps many are slave to their choices, but that slavery is all their own doing. The essence of a persons choices be it just or unjust is who they are, solely their own doing. If the heart is fair to what deserves, then it is freer, then a heart that is not fair to what is deserving.

Our circumstances do not govern our wills unless we choose to let it be so. Or perhaps we become limited by the limitations of our thoughts and what we know.

To say there is no free will is to say i am not responsible for who i am, someone else or something else made me will it. Can you imagine totally loving something that you totally desire not to love. Sounds like a paradox.

You may have no control over what happens to you, but your will is completely yours. Unless of course your will is totally in the hands of other forces. Which to me sounds impossible.

 

[Polymath257]

But assuming that the circumstance where identical, you could not choose differently right? What you describe seems to be an “illusion of free will” rather than “real free will”

Sure both the “illusion of free will” and “real free will” scenarios are empirically equivalent.

if the situations are identical, then my desires in both cases would be the same, so I would decide the same. Put another way, if I desired to choose differently, then the situations would NOT be the same.

i assume that even with free will, my decision is going to be based on my desire, right? Otherwise, why say the choice was mine? In fact, the concept of responsibility *requires* that it be *my* desires that affect the choice, right?

 

[QuestioningMind]

Been doing some thinking...

“Everything we do and everything that happens has a cause” is true

Therefore we can say that all things that happen are determined/caused by things that have happened in the past

Therefore there is no free will as it is impossible to carry out any action that does not have a cause – all actions have and must have a cause

Free will would require being able to act without a cause, which I think would be impossible. No matter how complex the human mind is, its workings are still governed by cause and effect, by things both external and internal to it

Free will is therefore an illusion, as things that come about by “free will” are truly caused by the past

I still believe we have wills, just not free wills!

I like the idea of having free will so please, prove me wrong

Sorry, but I don't see the connection. If I'm driving and the road ends forcing me to decide if I'll turn left or right, the cause of me having to exert my free will and choose either right or left may have been caused by the fact that the road ended; however that cause in no way prevents me from exercising my free will in choosing either left or right. Or for that matter, choosing to drive straight off the road or turning around and going back the way I came. The fact that something caused me to have to choose does not mean that I don't use my free will in making whatever choice I make.

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

I'm going to use my free will and... decline.

 

[Skwim]

Sorry, but I don't see the connection. If I'm driving and the road ends forcing me to decide if I'll turn left or right, the cause of me having to exert my free will and choose either right or left may have been caused by the fact that the road ended; however that cause in no way prevents me from exercising my free will in choosing either left or right. Or for that matter, choosing to drive straight off the road or turning around and going back the way I came. The fact that something caused me to have to choose does not mean that I don't use my free will in making whatever choice I make.

So if you took the right roadway the question is "why?" Unless taking the right roadway was an absolutely random event there must have been a reason that caused you to go right. To do otherwise the reason (the cause) would have to be different, but it wasn't which is why you went right. There was no choosing. You were made to go right by the causal reasons that led up to the turning event.

.

 

[Skwim]

I'm going to use my free will and... decline.

And you could not have done differently.

.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Free will would require being able to act without a cause

This is not the definition of free will. Free will means that you are CHOOSING what you are doing, that you are not being forced into the action by causes outside of your own will.

 

[stvdv]

I still believe we have wills, just not free wills!
I like the idea of having free will so please, prove me wrong

I always say "Humans have free Desires. And the more desires the less will power".
Most people confuse "Free Will" with "Free to do as they like"
To me "Will" relates to Will Power ... being in control of your senses. Not being slave of senses.
For sure it has nothing to do with "Wish Power" (running after ones desires)

I met 1 person who had "Free Will". But only 1.
So I don't prove you wrong. I guess you are right. No free will for humans.

 

[Skwim]

This is not the definition of free will. Free will means that you are CHOOSING what you are doing, that you are not being forced into the action by causes outside of your own will.

So why would you choose A rather than B?

 

[QuestioningMind]

So if you took the right roadway the question is "why?" Unless taking the right roadway was an absolutely random event there must have been a reason that caused you to go right. To do otherwise the reason (the cause) would have to be different, but it wasn't which is why you went right. There was no choosing. You were made to go right by the causal reasons that led up to the turning event.

.

I turned right because I freely chose to turn right. I am out taking a random drive to discover where certain roads go, so choosing to go left or right IS absolutely a random event. To claim that I did not exercise my free will when I chose to turn right suggests that it would have been impossible for me to randomly choose to turn left. That is not the case. I could just as easily have decided on a whim to turn left.

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

And you could not have done differently.

I've actually got a lot of arguments for Free Will, but it's a topic that I've debated a lot, and I've better things to do

 

[Skwim]

I turned right because I freely chose to turn right.

But why did you make that particular choice?

I could just as easily have decided on a whim to turn left.

But why didn't that whim kick in and override your choice to turn right? There must have been a reason. Right? Or was going to the right a purely random event, one over which you had no control?

I've actually got a lot of arguments for Free Will, but it's a topic that I've debated a lot, and I've better things to do

So that's the cause that made you decline. You could not have done any differently.

.

 

[Willamena]

Been doing some thinking...

“Everything we do and everything that happens has a cause” is true

Therefore we can say that all things that happen are determined/caused by things that have happened in the past

Therefore there is no free will as it is impossible to carry out any action that does not have a cause – all actions have and must have a cause

Free will would require being able to act without a cause, which I think would be impossible. No matter how complex the human mind is, its workings are still governed by cause and effect, by things both external and internal to it

Free will is therefore an illusion, as things that come about by “free will” are truly caused by the past

I still believe we have wills, just not free wills!

I like the idea of having free will so please, prove me wrong

"Free will" means the cause is you. To say that there is no free will is to say that there is no "you."

A case could be made for that, but I haven't seen it yet, at least not in a long while.

If "everything we do and everything that happens has a cause," then "you" is supported (in the "we") and "free will" is supported (in the "do").

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

So that's the cause that made you decline. You could not have done any differently.

 

[sealchan]

Been doing some thinking...

“Everything we do and everything that happens has a cause” is true

Therefore we can say that all things that happen are determined/caused by things that have happened in the past

Therefore there is no free will as it is impossible to carry out any action that does not have a cause – all actions have and must have a cause

Free will would require being able to act without a cause, which I think would be impossible. No matter how complex the human mind is, its workings are still governed by cause and effect, by things both external and internal to it

Free will is therefore an illusion, as things that come about by “free will” are truly caused by the past

I still believe we have wills, just not free wills!

I like the idea of having free will so please, prove me wrong

Free will is not an illusion if you understand that free will is meaningless if it is, in fact, free of causation. Our sense of meaning in life, of value, is necessarily tied in with what we know has happened and what we expect to happen. We value learning from mistakes so that we can make better choices in the future. None of this is a casual, in fact, without that causal nature there would be no meaning.

Free will is often understood in a way that implies that we want the power to act without meaning or sense. But no one really wants this sort of free will.

 

[EverChanging]

Been doing some thinking...

“Everything we do and everything that happens has a cause” is true

Therefore we can say that all things that happen are determined/caused by things that have happened in the past

Therefore there is no free will as it is impossible to carry out any action that does not have a cause – all actions have and must have a cause

Free will would require being able to act without a cause, which I think would be impossible. No matter how complex the human mind is, its workings are still governed by cause and effect, by things both external and internal to it

Free will is therefore an illusion, as things that come about by “free will” are truly caused by the past

I still believe we have wills, just not free wills!

I like the idea of having free will so please, prove me wrong

There are different senses in which people define free will so this stuff goes in circles.

But the argument I like is that:

Behavior is either accountable or it is not accountable.

If it is accountable then there is no free will in the libertarian sense -- the ability to act free of external constraints. There are always constraints even if those are the laws of physics or what have you.

If behavior is not accountable then it would have no relation to our personalities, desires, motives, or intentions and could not be meaningfully free in any sense. The evidence is that behavior is accountable. Otherwise it would be random.

In my view all behavior flows forth from the interconnectedness of all causes and conditions. That doesn't mean we don't choose between possibilities, but even those choices are accountable in some way.

But there can be a "freedom" in surrendering to those causes and conditions and just letting behavior flow naturally. We don't have to clench our teeth and strive -- just relax, and let it arise naturally.

A book that goes into this topic and describes methods for attaining this state of mind is The Spontaneous Self: Viable Alternatives to Free Will, by Paul Breer. I think we are better off letting go of notions of moral responsibility.

 

[Willamena]

So why would you choose A rather than B?

You make a choice based on all the factors (circumstance, learning, preferences, etc.) that you are constructed of in that moment.