What do you mean by "free will?"

[Koldo]

I guess that would vary from person to person.

At first, one would decide according to one's conscious. For others, it would depend on their faith. Perhaps there are other factors.

And what is it that forms one's conscious ?

 

[Koldo]

well good and evil are before you, and everybody, I can't speak for every heart. everyone has their own nature to consider, and their own way of going about that choice. Somewhere along the line you yourself might have made that choice.

Do you mean that people choose according to their nature ?

 

[Koldo]

The intellect. I use my intellect and temper my desires to be in accordance with morality and reason. It's admittedly not prefect, as temptation is an inescapable fact of this life.

Regardless, if you are a determinist, then my answer is meaningless. Since all our thoughts are determined, no one can be said to really "think" yet alone have an "intellect". It is all just gears in a machine.

So, your desires are in accordance with your morality.
How do you choose your morality ?

 

[Koldo]

How does what I said mean what you said?

I'm not trying to be a jerk... I just want you to elaborate.

Let's consider your example:

"Having the freedom to choose to act on your inclination doesn't guarantee results.

When I go bowling, my free will allows me to roll the ball down the lane in the manner of my choosing. And it may be my intention to knock down all the pins. Failure to do so doesn't mean I don't have free will, it just means I suck at bowling."

Now, let's suppose that rather than merely failing to knock down all the pins, someone got in the way and halted your ball. In this case, do you still have free will ?

If so, then that means that interference in your actions doesn't nullify your free will.
And as such, if God always interfered whenever someone was going to perform an evil action then people would still have free will. Since interference is not sufficient to destroy free will, then free will can't be used as an excuse as to why God doesn't prevent evil from happening ( the excuse being that God interfering with evil actions would destroy free will and since free will is very much valuable this is why he doesn't ).

 

[soulsurvivor]

So, if a person is born with enough compassion and altruism that will stop them.
Then why aren't we born with enough compassion and altruism to always stop us ?

As I said before we are part of the evolution. Your first incarnation, you will be pretty much like an animal (animal do care about their family and their pack). After that it is up to you (by your thoughts and deeds) how much compassion and altruism you develop over many lifetimes. Again your question is why did the Gods not make perfect humans to stat with.

One might not believe those teachers.
What if they didn't choose not to care ? What if they just don't care ?
What would make them care ?

There is not a question of 'what if'. Of course, lots of people don't believe (like you for instance) and lots of people don't care. Actually, it is not necessary to believe any teacher or even believe in God. But if you don't care about your fellow beings and indulge in evil acts, you will suffer the karmic consequences and maybe someday regret it. When you suffer as a result, you may also feel empathy for others who suffer - maybe they will start caring.

Not even that. You have said that,in a sense, at the very start we are perfect ( for instance, we only eat when we are hungry ), but that we tend to lose this perfection as time goes by. Why not make it so we don't lose this perfection as time goes by ?

Eating only when hungry is not perfection. Perfection is when you become knowledgable, wise, altruistic, selfless, 'self actualized', 'self realized', 'enlightened' etc etc. Evolved from an animal form, you should not expect to be all these things in your first incarnation. If is only after many lifetimes of struggle that you can achieve these things.

Would you prefer to watch a movie with real people suffering ?

Not really, but it is interesting to watch people fight against adversity and eventually win against seemingly unsumountable odds. Anyway, if people suffer in real life, it is always due to their own past karma. But overcoming that suffering, actually helps them grow as a human being and as I said before eventually liberates them from life of earth.

BTW, you should read some modern physics/cosmology etc. They will tell you that time is an illusion. This endless suffering you see, is from another perspective, quite momentary. The body itself is temporary too, once the cycle of birth-death is over, their is no pain, no hunger, no want. Even between lifetimes, most of us get plenty of rest to recover from the previous incarnation.

 

[Koldo]

As I said before we are part of the evolution. Your first incarnation, you will be pretty much like an animal (animal do care about their family and their pack). After that it is up to you (by your thoughts and deeds) how much compassion and altruism you develop over many lifetimes. Again your question is why did the Gods not make perfect humans to stat with.

There is not a question of 'what if'. Of course, lots of people don't believe (like you for instance) and lots of people don't care. Actually, it is not necessary to believe any teacher or even believe in God. But if you don't care about your fellow beings and indulge in evil acts, you will suffer the karmic consequences and maybe someday regret it. When you suffer as a result, you may also feel empathy for others who suffer - maybe they will start caring.

How do you get from 'you are an animal that cares about your family' to 'you no longer care about your family' ?
How do you choose not to care ?

Eating only when hungry is not perfection. Perfection is when you become knowledgable, wise, altruistic, selfless, 'self actualized', 'self realized', 'enlightened' etc etc. Evolved from an animal form, you should not expect to be all these things in your first incarnation. If is only after many lifetimes of struggle that you can achieve these things.

It is. In the sense you can't commit gluttony.

Not really, but it is interesting to watch people fight against adversity and eventually win against seemingly unsumountable odds. Anyway, if people suffer in real life, it is always due to their own past karma. But overcoming that suffering, actually helps them grow as a human being and as I said before eventually liberates them from life of earth.

BTW, you should read some modern physics/cosmology etc. They will tell you that time is an illusion. This endless suffering you see, is from another perspective, quite momentary. The body itself is temporary too, once the cycle of birth-death is over, their is no pain, no hunger, no want. Even between lifetimes, most of us get plenty of rest to recover from the previous incarnation.

Nevertheless, you are still saying that you would prefer to watch real people suffer if you get to watch them fight adversity and win.

 

[soulsurvivor]

How do you get from 'you are an animal that cares about your family' to 'you no longer care about your family' ?
How do you choose not to care ?

I think we already went over how evil tendencies are formed over many lifetimes - you need read one of my previous posts (selfishness, acquisitiveness, materialism getting worse every incarnation).

It is. In the sense you can't commit gluttony.

Whatever!

Nevertheless, you are still saying that you would prefer to watch real people suffer if you get to watch them fight adversity and win.

I don't prefer it. But I do know that it is temporary. You talk like 'fighting adversity' is some violent activity - it is just a struggle to overcome difficulties. It is not there for you and me to watch - it is for the growth of those who are struggling. As a human being, your job is to help them, not watch them.

 

[Daisies4me]

Because God already knows the karma of the person who will be affected by evil action. By interfering all he is doing postpone the effect of bad karma to a future date or future lifetime. In fact, if the intended victim has only good karma, God will interfere in some unobtrusive way to mitigate the ill effects. Unfortunately ALL of us after living hundreds of lives, always have some bad karma to pay off.

Humans interfering on the other hand, are actually doing their duty and in so doing are actually earning good karma.

(quote)
Hi
are you speaking of the elaborate belief system around a cycle of rebirths based on the law of cause and effect, or Karma?

imho, there is no reincarnation, or immortal human soul. Isn't that needed for those who believe in Karma?

If not, please help me to understand your definition of karma.

thanks

(quote)

 

[osgart]

Do you mean that people choose according to their nature ?

they choose their very nature. Love is the act of choice, hate is, and so forth. a fall of love is a choice. what you choose is who you are.

 

[soulsurvivor]

(quote)
Hi
are you speaking of the elaborate belief system around a cycle of rebirths based on the law of cause and effect, or Karma?

imho, there is no reincarnation, or immortal human soul. Isn't that needed for those who believe in Karma?

If not, please help me to understand your definition of karma.

thanks

(quote)

Yes.

 

[Koldo]

I think we already went over how evil tendencies are formed over many lifetimes - you need read one of my previous posts (selfishness, acquisitiveness, materialism getting worse every incarnation).

But how can such a tendency develop through choice if it is not there in the first place ?
You have mentioned that animals care about their family. That, of course, depends on what you mean by 'care' and what animals you are talking about. But, let's put that aside for a moment. Let's assume that's true for a given animal X. If animal X always care about its own family, then it will never choose to act in a way that is somehow destructive towards its family. If animal X happens to sometimes act in a destructive way towards its family that means it doesn't always care about its own family. Perhaps most of the time, but not always. And if you keep presenting the specific scenarios where it wouldn't be compassionate towards its family , is it any wonder that it becomes less and less compassionate as time goes by ?

I don't prefer it. But I do know that it is temporary. You talk like 'fighting adversity' is some violent activity - it is just a struggle to overcome difficulties. It is not there for you and me to watch - it is for the growth of those who are struggling. As a human being, your job is to help them, not watch them.

I am afraid it is too late to backpedal.
You have said you prefer a world where people struggle ( and suffer ) over a world where everyone is already extremely happy.

 

[Koldo]

they choose their very nature. Love is the act of choice, hate is, and so forth. a fall of love is a choice. what you choose is who you are.

Ok, but we have gone back to the very beginning.

You have said that people choose their nature. I have asked how. You have said "We become what we truly love in our hearts". I have asked how we choose what we love. You have said "everyone has their own nature to consider", which would entail that people choose their nature according to their nature. But you seem to disagree with this.

So, how do you choose your nature ? You still haven't given me a proper answer.
Let's try to simplify this: Tell me one specific moment where you have chosen your nature and why you have made the choice you did.

 

[Kenny]

And what is it that forms one's conscious ?

IMO, It's starts off with a clean slate. After that, it is what you do and what is done with your soul. You can sear it with not listening to God's Spirit to where it is calloused or you can clean it up and keep it tender.

 

[Koldo]

IMO, It's starts off with a clean slate. After that, it is what you do and what is done with your soul. You can sear it with not listening to God's Spirit to where it is calloused or you can clean it up and keep it tender.

How do you make a choice with a conscious that is a clean slate ?

 

[soulsurvivor]

But how can such a tendency develop through choice if it is not there in the first place ?
You have mentioned that animals care about their family. That, of course, depends on what you mean by 'care' and what animals you are talking about. But, let's put that aside for a moment. Let's assume that's true for a given animal X. If animal X always care about its own family, then it will never choose to act in a way that is somehow destructive towards its family. If animal X happens to sometimes act in a destructive way towards its family that means it doesn't always care about its own family. Perhaps most of the time, but not always. And if you keep presenting the specific scenarios where it wouldn't be compassionate towards its family , is it any wonder that it becomes less and less compassionate as time goes by ?

Looks like you don't know much about animals. Here is a link 6 animals with strong family bonds. You can search for more. You are merely making excuses for a evil tendencies. Nobody is forced to nurture their own selfishness or turn the self preservation instinct into attacking others.

I am afraid it is too late to backpedal.
You have said you prefer a world where people struggle ( and suffer ) over a world where everyone is already extremely happy.

I never said I prefer a world with suffering. A struggle is not suffering. Climbing a mountain is a struggle - it is not suffering. It is not a question of preference. A struggle is the only way to grow. Just happiness will not make you wiser or self-realized. Of course some people may prefer to remain simpletons.

 

[Koldo]

Looks like you don't know much about animals. Here is a link 6 animals with strong family bonds. You can search for more. You are merely making excuses for a evil tendencies. Nobody is forced to nurture their own selfishness or turn the self preservation instinct into attacking others.

You have missed the entire point of what I was talking about.
Yes, there are animals that band together and form family groups. What I have called into question is to what extent they can be said to 'care'. Both because it is hard to measure compassion in animals and because of facts like this: Infanticide (zoology) - Wikipedia

But I have put all that aside. I have suggested an hypothetical animal X, which might or might not exist, that actually cares about its own family. What I am saying is that if this animal always cares about its family, then it will never choose to act in a way that its destructive towards its family. Therefore, it can't develop a tendency towards evil actions. To develop a tendency towards this evil, animal X must already have a tendency towards this evil in the first place. Entailing that animal X doesn't always care about its family.

I never said I prefer a world with suffering. A struggle is not suffering. Climbing a mountain is a struggle - it is not suffering. It is not a question of preference. A struggle is the only way to grow. Just happiness will not make you wiser or self-realized. Of course some people may prefer to remain simpletons.

Then, in your opinion, a world with struggle but no suffering is better than a world with struggles and suffering, right ?

 

[Kenny]

How do you make a choice with a conscious that is a clean slate ?

How do you not make a choice? There is good and there is evil... a choice is made.

 

[MrMrdevincamus]

I can't count how many times I've heard theists brush off the Problem of Evil by just saying "free will!"

... but how would that work, exactly? Those of you who do this: exactly what do you mean by "free will" and how is it relevant?

Considering deliberate evil acts inflicted by one person on another, there's a three-step process:

1. The person has an evil desire.
2. The person chooses to act on their evil desire.
3. The person causes the evil desire to happen.

Any description of free will I've ever heard deals with step 2: the decision to act. It doesn't deal with step 1, since we generally can't choose our desires. For instance, someone who might be predisposed to adultery won't commit adultery if he isn't attracted to the person he might commit adultery with.

It also doesn't deal with step 3, since what we desire isn't necessarily physically possible. For instance, no matter how much I want to kill someone by making their head explode telekinetically, it won't happen. If I want to kill them by lightly misting them with water, I can do this, but they won't die from it.

All three steps are required for a deliberate evil act to happen, but "free will" claims only deal with step 2.

So how could a change in step 1 (e.g. taking away evil desires) or step 3 (e.g. making an evil act physically impossible) deny someone their free will in step 2?

Define evil.

: {>

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Define evil.

: {>

Irrelevant to this discussion. The same process works regardless of which definition of "evil" we're using, as long as we use a consistent definition throughout.

 

[Randy the Atheist]

Allow me to throw a wrench into this discussion. Evil is not a force nor is it objective. It is a subjective opinion of a despised person or action and greatly depends on which side of the coin you stand on.

American guerillas under Francis Marion killed many British soldiers from ambush. We call them freedom fighters. Iraqi defenders killed many American soldiers from ambush. Why are they terrorists? Who is the lesser of the two evils? Who is the greater of the two heros? A terrorist for one country is a freedom fighter for another.

Mother Teresa would often let children die by refusing to give them antibiotics and allowing pain to persist rather than treating it. But when she became ill, she went to the best medical doctors in New York. She wasn't interested in helping people get better. She was only interested in ministering to them. Depending on the side of this story you agree with, it is ultimately our emotions that govern the delineation between goodness and evilness.

If you were born in 1971 Syria and became a member of the ISIS organization, you would completely believe that what you were doing was right and good and that the world will later see the goodness you are killing for. But if you were born in 1971 America, you would completely believe that what ISIS is doing is completely evil and should be stopped with lethal force.

So who determines who is good and who is evil? The answer is simple.

Its whoever wins.

MIGHT MAKES RIGHT for it is only the winner who decides the moral compass of history.

And the bible is one of the greatest examples. It talks about taking women as spoils of war under the command of the lord almighty. If you were those Hebrews, it was as right as rain. If you were the Hittites, the Hebrews were devil's spawn. What makes taking women as spoils an example of good? Some say its because god has moral authority and can justify any action he desires.

But lets say God says its good to be homosexual and to stone misbehaving children to death (which is actually one of the OT laws BTW).... would you have a hard time with that? Would God have to behave according to your perspective of what constitutes good and evil behavior?

Under this premise of a supreme moral authority, it is entirely possible that Peter Paul and Mary are burning in hell right this very minute. Impossible? Why? Think about it.