• 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!

What is your stance on free will?

Contemplative Cat

energy formation
How would you define freewill? Is free will a reality or an illusion of false power fostered by an awareness of self and the choices we think we make consciously? I'm in the con freewill camp. What about you and why do you believe as you do?

Were jst slaves to causality. You see a quarter, you pick up the quarter, no free will involved just causality.
The choice to pick up something is not freewill just causality, if I never saw the quarter I woulnt have chosen to pick anything up.
 

Thief

Rogue Theologian
Were jst slaves to causality. You see a quarter, you pick up the quarter, no free will involved just causality.
The choice to pick up something is not freewill just causality, if I never saw the quarter I woulnt have chosen to pick anything up.

Causality?...or random events?
Not the same thing!

Responding to what you see is not reflex.
You could have 'chosen' to leave the coin.

Nowadays I leave the pennies lay where they are.
I have chosen to do so.
 

Contemplative Cat

energy formation
Causality is cause and effect.
Every cause followed by an effect.

Free will implies the ability to have an effect without a cause,
which is physically impossible. Someone doesn't make descisions out of thin air, he is given experience to base a choice on(like a computer), and something to make a choice about, without these no choices are made. Other wise no choice is made. Without the Choice to make a choice or not make a choice, can it still be called "free" will, or is it just Nature's will.
That goes against experience, every effect starts with a cause.
a person doesn't make choices until given a reason to choose.

even that choice is based on that particular mind which was taught how to behave based on what experiences carved out his mental state.
We are quite unoriginal
 

Thief

Rogue Theologian
Causality is cause and effect.
Every cause followed by an effect.

Free will implies the ability to have an effect without a cause,
which is physically impossible. Someone doesn't make descisions out of thin air, he is given experience to base a choice on(like a computer), and something to make a choice about, without these no choices are made. Other wise no choice is made. Without the Choice to make a choice or not make a choice, can it still be called "free" will, or is it just Nature's will.
That goes against experience, every effect starts with a cause.
a person doesn't make choices until given a reason to choose.

even that choice is based on that particular mind which was taught how to behave based on what experiences carved out his mental state.
We are quite unoriginal

Nay altogether.
The body in it's form will insure a unique spirit on each occasion.
No two people see anything in the same way.

If we were so given to our conditions no variance would ever happen.
There would never be denial.

I say ....'nay'...
(and I say it because I can and will say it)
 

Contemplative Cat

energy formation
Nay altogether.
The body in it's form will insure a unique spirit on each occasion.
No two people see anything in the same way.

If we were so given to our conditions no variance would ever happen.
There would never be denial.

I say ....'nay'...
(and I say it because I can and will say it)

Of course, I think you misunderstood
Each mind responds differently based on his conditions during the period of mental deveooment. There are infinite variations of people and types of situation.

The mind however is literally built
by genetics and experiences(positive & negative perceptions),
these together instigate the attitude And thoughts of beings.
This would mean we are all products of circumstance(or divine will) and not original unique beings. all actions, even denial etc, have their root in an earlier idea created by experienceing a similar situation.

some traditions believe in souls(as some sort of mind-body dualism) but many traditions do not belve in a unique soul as their is simply no experiential reason to.
whichis why Buddhists say we have no souls, Advaitins say our soul is one and the same with an infinite God. And new age People often coin the term "Oversoul" describeing a singular animistic soul of nature.
 

Thief

Rogue Theologian
A unique body does not equate a unique soul unless our soul is our body(in which case yeah)

For the cause you stated in your previous post....genetics and experience.
No one else is like you....physically....or by experience.
No two people are the same.

Perhaps you are confusing will...with ability.
I have lots of ability.
I can do just anything I focus upon.
But my body has physical limits.
I shall never lift a heavy weight over my head.
No matter the willfulness.

Stress might get more out me than not.
People are said to find their true strengths when tested.

But that would be pointless when the most serious of test arrives.
Will you survive your last breath?
 
Last edited:

Contemplative Cat

energy formation
Everyone does not have to be the same. A thought pops in based on earlier observations then follows that thought. If that prior observation had never occurred that descision would not have been made.
But this cetainly allows for any possible personality type.
A choice is not free will when you are forced to choose.
 

Contemplative Cat

energy formation
Will is simply the force put behind descisions which are based on the environmental factors and genetic predisposition.
Genetics give you a base to start from.
experience give the brain a personality to
base descisions on. That said pretty much anything can happen.
 

Thief

Rogue Theologian
Everyone does not have to be the same. A thought pops in based on earlier observations then follows that thought. If that prior observation had never occurred that descision would not have been made.
But this cetainly allows for any possible personality type.
A choice is not free will when you are forced to choose.

This post of yours negates...creativity.

No original thinkers?.....
 

Contemplative Cat

energy formation
No, not really. Those people who are said to be great thnkers of new ideas often obviously just combined the views of several other thinkers that person has come into contact with. If you look through out history people tend to have the same ideas over and over again.

Even everything i have said on this website has been said by hundreds of others.

For example Spinoza is the first pantheist philosopher, but adi shankara did that two a 1000 years earlier.
And in turn Adi Shankara is often considered the non-dualist philosopher, but 800 years earlier Nagarjuna had interpreted the Buddhas philosophy as "nondual".
All these men are considered geniuses who wrote high philosophy. But nothing they wrote could be considered "original" to their thought process.
 

Thief

Rogue Theologian
No, not really. Those people who are said to be great thnkers of new ideas often obviously just combined the views of several other thinkers that person has come into contact with. If you look through out history people tend to have the same ideas over and over again.

Even everything i have said on this website has been said by hundreds of others.

For example Spinoza is the first pantheist philosopher, but adi shankara did that two a 1000 years earlier.
And in turn Adi Shankara is often considered the non-dualist philosopher, but 800 years earlier Nagarjuna had interpreted the Buddhas philosophy as "nondual".
All these men are considered geniuses who wrote high philosophy. But nothing they wrote could be considered "original" to their thought process.

yeah....heard this before.....some teacher back in high school....

Like...do unto others as you would have them do unto you.
Not the handiwork of the Carpenter as it turns out.
It was carved in stone at least a thousand years before He walked.

Maybe that's what he meant when He said..."I have been with you always."

But the increase you mention was not one idea built upon another.
Nay!
The better things followed DENIAL!

Someone thinking on his own realized the errors of others.
And pronouncement was followed in harsh terms.
Many suffered for the corrections they knew were needful.

If today's thought had no willful denial to stand firm....
we would be living as our ancestors.

Starlight is nothing but candles held steadfast by the angels.
 

Thief

Rogue Theologian
for Sunstone
Do you imply the topic has an obvious notation?
as in, yes there is freewill and the discussion is shallow.
 

Sunstone

De Diablo Del Fora
Premium Member
for Sunstone
Do you imply the topic has an obvious notation?
as in, yes there is freewill and the discussion is shallow.

Nope. The discussion is certainly shallow, but not because there's freewill. The hypothesis that we have freewill is unnecessary. There's nothing we know that requires us to posit the existence of a free will.
 

Skwim

Veteran Member
Nope. The discussion is certainly shallow, but not because there's freewill. The hypothesis that we have freewill is unnecessary. There's nothing we know that requires us to posit the existence of a free will.
Well, Christian salvation certainly requires it.
 

Sees

Dragonslayer
Well, Christian salvation certainly requires it.

Let alone a penal system...

Maybe in a few years insanity and mental incompetence will be replaced with "absolute determinism...not guilty your honor"
 
Top